Few Americans will have paid much attention to the passing of the one year anniversary of the death of Ayman al-Zawahiri. On July 31, 2022, a U.S. drone strike killed the al Qaeda leader in an upscale neighborhood in Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul. 

Even when it happened, Zawahiri’s name lacked the recognition of his predecessor, Osama bin Laden, and the headlines that splashed across front pages referred to him as Al Qaeda leader, or Bin Laden successor. Fewer, still, will remark on the fact that al Qaeda still hasn’t publicly named its new leader. Does it matter? The short answer is yes and no. 

Yes, it’s remarkable because this is the first time in three decades that al Qaeda has been without a public figure at its helm for a significant period of time. No, it doesn’t matter because al Qaeda’s global network continues its operations under the presumed new leader, but longtime veteran, Saif al-Adel. The long answer is more complicated. 

First, the United States has always put too much emphasis on targeting individuals to weaken an organization. Even the analysis following the extensive manhunt for Osama bin Laden to carry out justice over emphasize the impact of bin Laden’s death on al Qaeda. Al Qaeda was always more than one man and bin Laden had planned for his own death. If U.S. forces had been able to kill or capture him in December 2001, in Tora Bora, bin Laden’s death would have had a greater impact. Almost 10 years later, in 2011, al Qaeda recognized Zawahiri as the new leader, about six weeks after SEAL Team Six killed bin Laden. 

True, Zawahiri was far from universally liked for the position, but even those who disagreed with the decision respected it and worked within the organizational hierarchy. Zawahiri lacked bin Laden’s charisma and instead had a reputation as a dour, long winded leader. He had sold out fellow jihadist under torture in Egypt, for which some have never forgiven him. And it could be argued he mishandled the fallout with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leading to the split between al Qaeda and the Islamic State. 

Second, Zawahiri was, according to analysis by Tricia Bacon and Elizabeth Grimm, a caretaker leader. Losing its founder bin Laden was the biggest leadership transition al Qaeda as an organization will ever experience. Al Qaeda survived under Zawahiri’s stewardship for a decade. Yes, the Islamic State splintered off and eclipsed al Qaeda on the global stage, but also, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria is a shadow of its former self, whereas al Qaeda can point to multiple successes elsewhere, including in Afghanistan. 

Yes, the United States keeps assessing al Qaeda is weaker because it cannot conduct a transnational attack like 9/11. But a close reading of al Qaeda’s own internal correspondence shows that the organization made the decision to focus on the local conflicts in 2011. To seize once in a generation opportunities to advance its cause in places like Yemen, Syria and Mali. It made mistakes but learned and evolved and is doing quite well these days. Perhaps Zawahiri wasn’t the terror boss that bin Laden was, but he did not leave al Qaeda in shambles. 

Finally, we don’t know the reason why al Qaeda has not announced its new leader. The Afghan Taliban have yet to acknowledge that the US strike in Kabul killed Zawahiri, and insist that they are not harboring terrorists. Al Qaeda could be delaying any announcement on Zawahiri — including a eulogy for him — to avoid embarrassing the Taliban or endangering the sanctuary other al Qaeda leaders still have under the Taliban in Afghanistan. Saif al-Adel, the presumed leader, is also believed to be in Iran, which complicates the issue for al Qaeda. It’s hard for the organization to have a leader taking refuge in a Shia country without addressing some very difficult theological and operational questions. 

Additionally, Saif al-Adel is nothing but a survivor. He’s been on the run as a jihadi for decades, described as some within the intel community as a ghost. Even his real identity was not known for a period. Saif al-Adel has rarely been featured in Al Qaeda propaganda, staying active behind the scenes. Perhaps he has opted not to change his MO, which has kept him alive all these years. From an analysis and leadership targeting perspective, it matters that al Qaeda has not named its next leader. But in terms of al Qaeda’s strength, operations and threat to the US, it’s not who sits at the top of the organization that really matters at this point. Rather, it is the leaders and members of regional affiliates who adhere to al Qaeda’s virulent ideology, have adopted its strategic doctrine, and carry on al Qaeda’s work in al Qaeda’s name who matter.