Hours after a suicide bomber's attempt to assassinate the Saudi Deputy Interior Minister Mohammed bin Nayef, Ayman Zawahiri was addressing a new message to the Pakistanis, urging them to support the “mujahideen” against the US and Pakistani armies. In fact, these two events were not necessary to conclude that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are on the top of the target list specified by Al Qaeda. It can be said that Saudi Arabia was targeted right from the start. The constitution of the team that carried out the Washington and New York invasions was extremely significant. The aim was to create a great crisis between the United States and Saudi Arabia, one that would lead to deep suspicions and put the whole country, rather than some of its citizens, under accusation. Al Qaeda was certainly under no illusion that the September 11 attacks would lead to the collapse of the sole great power. It aimed at activating a demarcation line between the Islamic world and the West, and more specifically between Saudi Arabia and the West. It is no secret that the aim behind the generation of suspicions and confrontations is to attract and mobilize individuals for changing the current situation in fundamental locations in the Arab and Islamic world, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan. Saudi Arabia was targeted right from the start for many reasons: its Islamic weight; its Arab weight; the role it plays as a force of stability in the Arab and Islamic world, drawing on its exceptional financial abilities and influential international relations. Destabilizing Saudi Arabia is a constant item on the agenda of Al Qaeda and the factions that revolve around it. Saudi Arabia's stability and role in supporting regional stability are an unwavering reason for bickering with the groups that depend on blazing spots, booby-trapped cars, suicide bombings, restricting the state's control, the intensification of sectarian strife, hate feelings, and bloody refusal of the other – who is different in his creed or interpretations. Saudi Arabia has succeeded in developing its security apparatus for confronting this new war that is targeting it. It also realized that confrontation should be comprehensive. It focused on an advice policy and foiled the attempt of terrorists to use school and mosques for mobilizing more extremists. It struck terrorism with hard blows, the last of which was the arrest of 44 [suspected militants]. The extremists retaliated with the attempt to assassinate the deputy minister of interior as if they were opening a new and dangerous chapter in the open confrontation. The assassination attempt confirmed that the obligation of terrorist groups to stay put at certain stages does not imply that they changed their agenda or target list. This is evidenced by their attempt to find safe havens next to Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Pakistan is also an exceptionally important item on Al Qaeda's agenda. It is on its land that the fate of the raging war in Afghanistan is determined. Destabilizing this nuclear Islamic state could trigger unprecedented crises and open the door to confrontations with India and the Hindus. It is at the rhythm of these confrontations that the forces of extremism and “takfir” bet to attract new generations. We are in the middle of a long war. Extremists are waging a comprehensive multi-arena and cross-border war. We must also look at Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, and other arenas. Confronting this comprehensive war requires a deeper Arab, Islamic, and international cooperation than the current one. It calls for a deeper confrontation in the battle of ideas in order to face the sources of extremism, its justifications, and its pretexts. The battle is related to security, politics, culture, and takes place in books, the media, and the family. It is a battle that requires full awareness, a strong will, courage, and capacities. They are very mistaken, those who think they are not concerned with this battle and its results, and that they win through holding a truce with extremism, its ideas, and looking for justifications for it sometimes. To pretext the existence of an injustice cannot justify opening the doors of darkness.
