The New Republic shares this naivete with many, many analysts in the West. From “Dangerous naivety” in The Spectator, May 28 (thanks to Mick):
The New Republic has published an article by Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank which claims that al Qaeda is unravelling because former supporters are turning against it, and that as a result Muslim moderates are on the march against the jihadis. While there is undoubtedly some truth in their argument, in that — as we can see in Iraq — the mass killings of Muslims by al Qaeda are clearly turning increasing numbers of Muslims against it, the authors” apparent naivety and ignorance have nevertheless led them to some dangerously wrong conclusions, particularly in their analysis of what is happening in Britain.
They have fallen into the trap of believing that the only extremists are al Qaeda and others who support terrorism in Britain. They thus extol as moderates those who oppose al Qaeda and terrorism in Britain. But this view — which is shared by many in British security circles, alas — presents an entirely false and indeed lethal dichotomy. For there are Islamists who oppose al Qaeda and terrorist action in the UK as a tactical mistake but nevertheless subscribe to the same strategic goal — to restore the medieval Caliphate, overturn British and western society and institute the rule of Islam instead.
Precisely.