WASHINGTON (AP) — Iraqi troops
abandoned dozens of U.S military vehicles, including tanks, armored
personnel carriers and artillery pieces when they fled Islamic State
fighters in Ramadi on Sunday, the Pentagon said Tuesday.
A Pentagon
spokesman, Col. Steve Warren, estimated that a half dozen tanks were
abandoned, a similar number of artillery pieces, a larger number of
armored personnel carriers and about 100 wheeled vehicles like Humvees.
He said some of the vehicles were in working condition; others were not
because they had not been moved for months.
This
repeats a pattern in which defeated Iraq security forces have, over the
past year, left behind U.S.-supplied military equipment, prompting the
U.S. to destroy them in subsequent airstrikes against Islamic State
forces.
Asked whether the
Iraqis should have destroyed the vehicles before abandoning the city in
order to keep them from enhancing IS's army, Warren said, "Certainly
preferable if they had been destroyed; in this case they were not."
Warren also said that while the U.S. is confident that Ramadi will be retaken by Iraq, "It will be difficult."
The
fall of Ramadi has prompted some to question the viability of the Obama
administration's approach in Iraq, which is a blend of retraining and
rebuilding the Iraqi army, prodding Baghdad to reconcile with the
nation's Sunnis, and bombing Islamic State targets from the air without
committing American ground combat troops.
Security forces defend their headquarters against attacks by Islamic State extremists during sand st …
"The president's plan
isn't working. It's time for him to come up with overarching strategy to
defeat the ongoing terrorist threat," House Speaker John Boehner said.
White
House spokesman Josh Earnest said President Barack Obama has always
been open to suggestions for improving the U.S. approach in Iraq.
"It's something that he's talking about with his national security team just about every day, including today," Earnest said.
Derek
Harvey, a retired Army colonel and former Defense Intelligence Agency
officer who served multiple tours in Iraq, says that while the extremist
group has many problems and weaknesses, it is "not losing" in the face
of ineffective Sunni Arab opposition.
"They
are adaptive and they remain well armed and well resourced," Harvey
said of the militants. "The different lines of operation by the U.S.
coalition remain disjointed, poorly resourced and lack an effective
operational framework, in my view."
Map shows location of fighting across Iraq.;
One alternative for the
Obama administration would be a containment strategy — trying to fence
in the conflict rather than push the Islamic State group out of Iraq.
That might include a combination of airstrikes and U.S. special
operations raids to limit the group's reach. In fact, a Delta Force raid
in Syria on Friday killed an IS leader known as Abu Sayyaf who U.S.
officials said oversaw the group's oil and gas operations, a major
source of funding.
Officials have said containment might become an option but is not under active discussion now.
Gen.
Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issued a written
statement Monday that suggested Ramadi will trigger no change in the
U.S. approach.
"Setbacks are regrettable but not uncommon in warfare," Dempsey said. "Much effort will now be required to reclaim the city."
It
seems highly unlikely that Obama would take the more dramatic route of
sending ground combat forces into Iraq to rescue the situation in Ramadi
or elsewhere. A White House spokesman, Eric Shultz, said Monday the
U.S. will continue its support through airstrikes, advisers and
trainers.
A Syrian opposition group, which has been verified and is consistent with other AP reporting, fighte …
The administration has
said repeatedly that it does not believe Iraq can be stabilized for the
long term unless Iraqis do the ground fighting.
Pentagon officials
insisted Monday the current U.S. approach to combating IS in Iraq is
still viable and that the loss of Ramadi was merely part of the ebb and
flow of war, not a sign that the Islamic State had exposed a fatal
weakness in the Iraqi security forces and the U.S. strategy.
Others are skeptical.
"We
don't really have a strategy at all," former Defense Secretary Robert
Gates said Tuesday on MSNBC. "We're basically playing this day by day."
Gates,
who headed the Pentagon for Obama as well as President George W. Bush's
administration before that, said "right now, it looks like they're
(Iraq) going the way of Yugoslavia," suggesting an eventual breakup of
the state.
The Institute for the Study of War, which closely tracks developments in Iraq, said Ramadi was a key Islamic State victory.
"This
strategic gain constitutes a turning point in ISIS' ability to set the
terms of battle in Anbar as well to project force in eastern Iraq," the
institute said.
___
Associated Press writers Alan Fram and Nedra Pickler contributed to this report.
The Islamic State is no mere collection of
psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs,
among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what
that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.
Where did it come from, and what are its intentions? The simplicity
of these questions can be deceiving, and few Western leaders seem to
know the answers. In December, The New York Times published
confidential comments by Major General Michael K. Nagata, the Special
Operations commander for the United States in the Middle East, admitting
that he had hardly begun figuring out the Islamic State’s appeal. “We
have not defeated the idea,” he said. “We do not even understand the
idea.” In the past year, President Obama has referred to the Islamic
State, variously, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team,”
statements that reflected confusion about the group, and may have
contributed to significant strategic errors.
The group seized Mosul, Iraq, last June, and already rules an area
larger than the United Kingdom. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has been its leader
since May 2010, but until last summer, his most recent known appearance
on film was a grainy mug shot from a stay in U.S. captivity at Camp
Bucca during the occupation of Iraq. Then, on July 5 of last year, he
stepped into the pulpit of the Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul, to
deliver a Ramadan sermon as the first caliph in generations—upgrading
his resolution from grainy to high-definition, and his position from
hunted guerrilla to commander of all Muslims. The inflow of jihadists
that followed, from around the world, was unprecedented in its pace and
volume, and is continuing.
Our ignorance of the Islamic State is in some ways understandable: It
is a hermit kingdom; few have gone there and returned. Baghdadi has
spoken on camera only once. But his address, and the Islamic State’s
countless other propaganda videos and encyclicals, are online, and the
caliphate’s supporters have toiled mightily to make their project
knowable. We can gather that their state rejects peace as a matter of
principle; that it hungers for genocide; that its religious views make
it constitutionally incapable of certain types of change, even if that
change might ensure its survival; and that it considers itself a
harbinger of—and headline player in—the imminent end of the world.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS),
follows a distinctive variety of Islam whose beliefs about the path to
the Day of Judgment matter to its strategy, and can help the West know
its enemy and predict its behavior. Its rise to power is less like the
triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a group whose leaders the
Islamic State considers apostates) than like the realization of a
dystopian alternate reality in which David Koresh or Jim Jones survived
to wield absolute power over not just a few hundred people, but some 8
million.
We have misunderstood the nature of the Islamic State in at least two
ways. First, we tend to see jihadism as monolithic, and to apply the
logic of al‑Qaeda to an organization that has decisively eclipsed it.
The Islamic State supporters I spoke with still refer to Osama bin Laden
as “Sheikh Osama,” a title of honor. But jihadism has evolved since
al-Qaeda’s heyday, from about 1998 to 2003, and many jihadists disdain
the group’s priorities and current leadership.
Bin Laden viewed his terrorism as a prologue to a caliphate he did
not expect to see in his lifetime. His organization was flexible,
operating as a geographically diffuse network of autonomous cells. The
Islamic State, by contrast, requires territory to remain legitimate, and
a top-down structure to rule it. (Its bureaucracy is divided into civil
and military arms, and its territory into provinces.)
We are misled in a second way, by a well-intentioned but dishonest
campaign to deny the Islamic State’s medieval religious nature. Peter
Bergen, who produced the first interview with bin Laden in 1997, titled
his first book Holy War, Inc. in part to acknowledge bin Laden as
a creature of the modern secular world. Bin Laden corporatized terror
and franchised it out. He requested specific political concessions, such
as the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Saudi Arabia. His foot soldiers
navigated the modern world confidently. On Mohammad Atta’s last full day
of life, he shopped at Walmart and ate dinner at Pizza Hut.
Nearly all the Islamic State’s decisions adhere
to what it calls, on its billboards, license plates, and coins, “the
Prophetic methodology.”
There is a temptation to rehearse this observation—that jihadists are
modern secular people, with modern political concerns, wearing medieval
religious disguise—and make it fit the Islamic State. In fact, much of
what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere,
carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a
seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the
apocalypse.
The most-articulate spokesmen for that position are the Islamic
State’s officials and supporters themselves. They refer derisively to
“moderns.” In conversation, they insist that they will not—cannot—waver
from governing precepts that were embedded in Islam by the Prophet
Muhammad and his earliest followers. They often speak in codes and
allusions that sound odd or old-fashioned to non-Muslims, but refer to
specific traditions and texts of early Islam.
To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the
Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries
such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a
rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.” To
Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments—the stoning and crop
destruction—juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to
vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery
alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an
“uncircumcised geezer.”)
But Adnani was not merely talking trash. His speech was laced with
theological and legal discussion, and his exhortation to attack crops
directly echoed orders from Muhammad to leave well water and crops
alone—unless the armies of Islam were in a defensive position, in which
case Muslims in the lands of kuffar, or infidels, should be unmerciful, and poison away.
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very
Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn
largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe.
But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from
coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic
State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on
its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic
methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of
Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State;
nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious,
millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be
combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and
back foolish schemes to counter it. We’ll need to get acquainted with
the Islamic State’s intellectual genealogy if we are to react in a way
that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its
own excessive zeal. Control
of territory is an essential precondition for the Islamic State’s
authority in the eyes of its supporters. This map, adapted from the work
of the Institute for the Study of War, shows the territory under the
caliphate’s control as of January 15, along with areas it has attacked.
Where it holds power, the state collects taxes, regulates prices,
operates courts, and administers services ranging from health care and
education to telecommunications.
I. Devotion
In November, the Islamic State released an infomercial-like video
tracing its origins to bin Laden. It acknowledged Abu Musa’b al Zarqawi,
the brutal head of al‑Qaeda in Iraq from roughly 2003 until his killing
in 2006, as a more immediate progenitor, followed sequentially by two
other guerrilla leaders before Baghdadi, the caliph. Notably
unmentioned: bin Laden’s successor, Ayman al Zawahiri, the owlish
Egyptian eye surgeon who currently heads al‑Qaeda. Zawahiri has not
pledged allegiance to Baghdadi, and he is increasingly hated by his
fellow jihadists. His isolation is not helped by his lack of charisma;
in videos he comes across as squinty and annoyed. But the split between
al-Qaeda and the Islamic State has been long in the making, and begins
to explain, at least in part, the outsize bloodlust of the latter.
Zawahiri’s companion in isolation is a Jordanian cleric named Abu
Muhammad al Maqdisi, 55, who has a fair claim to being al-Qaeda’s
intellectual architect and the most important jihadist unknown to the
average American newspaper reader. On most matters of doctrine, Maqdisi
and the Islamic State agree. Both are closely identified with the
jihadist wing of a branch of Sunnism called Salafism, after the Arabic al salaf al salih,
the “pious forefathers.” These forefathers are the Prophet himself and
his earliest adherents, whom Salafis honor and emulate as the models for
all behavior, including warfare, couture, family life, even dentistry.
The Islamic State awaits the army of “Rome,” whose defeat at Dabiq, Syria, will initiate the countdown to the apocalypse.
Maqdisi taught Zarqawi, who went to war in Iraq with the older man’s
advice in mind. In time, though, Zarqawi surpassed his mentor in
fanaticism, and eventually earned his rebuke. At issue was Zarqawi’s
penchant for bloody spectacle—and, as a matter of doctrine, his hatred
of other Muslims, to the point of excommunicating and killing them. In
Islam, the practice of takfir, or excommunication, is
theologically perilous. “If a man says to his brother, ‘You are an
infidel,’ ” the Prophet said, “then one of them is right.” If the
accuser is wrong, he himself has committed apostasy by making a false
accusation. The punishment for apostasy is death. And yet Zarqawi
heedlessly expanded the range of behavior that could make Muslims
infidels.
Maqdisi wrote to his former pupil that he needed to exercise caution and “not issue sweeping proclamations of takfir”
or “proclaim people to be apostates because of their sins.” The
distinction between apostate and sinner may appear subtle, but it is a
key point of contention between al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.
Denying the holiness of the Koran or the prophecies of Muhammad is
straightforward apostasy. But Zarqawi and the state he spawned take the
position that many other acts can remove a Muslim from Islam. These
include, in certain cases, selling alcohol or drugs, wearing Western
clothes or shaving one’s beard, voting in an election—even for a Muslim
candidate—and being lax about calling other people apostates. Being a
Shiite, as most Iraqi Arabs are, meets the standard as well, because the
Islamic State regards Shiism as innovation, and to innovate on the
Koran is to deny its initial perfection. (The Islamic State claims that
common Shiite practices, such as worship at the graves of imams and
public self-flagellation, have no basis in the Koran or in the example
of the Prophet.) That means roughly 200 million Shia are marked for
death. So too are the heads of state of every Muslim country, who have
elevated man-made law above Sharia by running for office or enforcing
laws not made by God.
Following takfiri doctrine, the Islamic State is committed to
purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people. The lack of
objective reporting from its territory makes the true extent of the
slaughter unknowable, but social-media posts from the region suggest
that individual executions happen more or less continually, and mass
executions every few weeks. Muslim “apostates” are the most common
victims. Exempted from automatic execution, it appears, are Christians
who do not resist their new government. Baghdadi permits them to live,
as long as they pay a special tax, known as the jizya, and acknowledge their subjugation. The Koranic authority for this practice is not in dispute. Musa
Cerantonio, an Australian preacher reported to be one of the Islamic
State’s most influential recruiters, believes it is foretold that the
caliphate will sack Istanbul before it is beaten back by an army led by
the anti-Messiah, whose eventual death— when just a few thousand
jihadists remain—will usher in the apocalypse. (Paul Jeffers/Fairfax
Media)
Centuries have passed since
the wars of religion ceased in Europe, and since men stopped dying in
large numbers because of arcane theological disputes. Hence, perhaps,
the incredulity and denial with which Westerners have greeted news of
the theology and practices of the Islamic State. Many refuse to believe
that this group is as devout as it claims to be, or as backward-looking
or apocalyptic as its actions and statements suggest.
Their skepticism is comprehensible. In the past, Westerners who
accused Muslims of blindly following ancient scriptures came to deserved
grief from academics—notably the late Edward Said—who pointed out that
calling Muslims “ancient” was usually just another way to denigrate
them. Look instead, these scholars urged, to the conditions in which
these ideologies arose—the bad governance, the shifting social mores,
the humiliation of living in lands valued only for their oil.
Without acknowledgment of these factors, no explanation of the rise
of the Islamic State could be complete. But focusing on them to the
exclusion of ideology reflects another kind of Western bias: that if
religious ideology doesn’t matter much in Washington or Berlin, surely
it must be equally irrelevant in Raqqa or Mosul. When a masked
executioner says Allahu akbar while beheading an apostate, sometimes he’s doing so for religious reasons.
Many mainstream Muslim organizations have gone so far as to say the Islamic State is, in fact, un-Islamic.
It is, of course, reassuring to know that the vast majority of Muslims
have zero interest in replacing Hollywood movies with public executions
as evening entertainment. But Muslims who call the Islamic State
un-Islamic are typically, as the Princeton scholar Bernard Haykel, the
leading expert on the group’s theology, told me, “embarrassed and
politically correct, with a cotton-candy view of their own religion”
that neglects “what their religion has historically and legally
required.” Many denials of the Islamic State’s religious nature, he
said, are rooted in an “interfaith-Christian-nonsense tradition.”
Every academic I asked about the Islamic State’s ideology sent me to
Haykel. Of partial Lebanese descent, Haykel grew up in Lebanon and the
United States, and when he talks through his Mephistophelian goatee,
there is a hint of an unplaceable foreign accent.
According to Haykel, the ranks of the Islamic State are deeply
infused with religious vigor. Koranic quotations are ubiquitous. “Even
the foot soldiers spout this stuff constantly,” Haykel said. “They mug
for their cameras and repeat their basic doctrines in formulaic fashion,
and they do it all the time.” He regards the claim that the
Islamic State has distorted the texts of Islam as preposterous,
sustainable only through willful ignorance. “People want to absolve
Islam,” he said. “It’s this ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ mantra. As if
there is such a thing as ‘Islam’! It’s what Muslims do, and how they
interpret their texts.” Those texts are shared by all Sunni Muslims, not
just the Islamic State. “And these guys have just as much legitimacy as
anyone else.”
All Muslims acknowledge that Muhammad’s earliest conquests were not
tidy affairs, and that the laws of war passed down in the Koran and in
the narrations of the Prophet’s rule were calibrated to fit a turbulent
and violent time. In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic
State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully
reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of
practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as
integral to their sacred texts. “Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings
are not something that freakish [jihadists] are cherry-picking from the
medieval tradition,” Haykel said. Islamic State fighters “are smack in
the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into
the present day.”
The
Koran specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted
for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in
the Surah Al-Tawba, the Koran’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims
to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya with
willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The Prophet, whom all
Muslims consider exemplary, imposed these rules and owned slaves.
Leaders of the Islamic State have taken emulation of Muhammad as
strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for
hundreds of years. “What’s striking about them is not just the
literalism, but also the seriousness with which they read these texts,”
Haykel said. “There is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims
don’t normally have.”
Before the rise of the Islamic State, no group in the past few
centuries had attempted more-radical fidelity to the Prophetic model
than the Wahhabis of 18th‑century Arabia. They conquered most of what is
now Saudi Arabia, and their strict practices survive in a diluted
version of Sharia there. Haykel sees an important distinction between
the groups, though: “The Wahhabis were not wanton in their violence.”
They were surrounded by Muslims, and they conquered lands that were
already Islamic; this stayed their hand. “ISIS,
by contrast, is really reliving the early period.” Early Muslims were
surrounded by non-Muslims, and the Islamic State, because of its takfiri tendencies, considers itself to be in the same situation.
If al-Qaeda wanted to revive slavery, it never said so. And why would
it? Silence on slavery probably reflected strategic thinking, with
public sympathies in mind: when the Islamic State began enslaving
people, even some of its supporters balked. Nonetheless, the caliphate
has continued to embrace slavery and crucifixion without apology. “We
will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women,”
Adnani, the spokesman, promised in one of his periodic valentines to the
West. “If we do not reach that time, then our children and
grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at
the slave market.”
In October, Dabiq, the magazine of the Islamic State,
published “The Revival of Slavery Before the Hour,” an article that took
up the question of whether Yazidis (the members of an ancient Kurdish
sect that borrows elements of Islam, and had come under attack from
Islamic State forces in northern Iraq) are lapsed Muslims, and therefore
marked for death, or merely pagans and therefore fair game for
enslavement. A study group of Islamic State scholars had convened, on
government orders, to resolve this issue. If they are pagans, the
article’s anonymous author wrote,
Yazidi women and children [are to be] divided according to
the Shariah amongst the fighters of the Islamic State who participated
in the Sinjar operations [in northern Iraq] … Enslaving the families of
the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a
firmly established aspect of the Shariah that if one were to deny or
mock, he would be denying or mocking the verses of the Koran and the
narrations of the Prophet … and thereby apostatizing from Islam.
II. Territory
Tens of thousands of foreign Muslims are thought to have immigrated
to the Islamic State. Recruits hail from France, the United Kingdom,
Belgium, Germany, Holland, Australia, Indonesia, the United States, and
many other places. Many have come to fight, and many intend to die.
Peter R. Neumann, a professor at King’s College London, told me that
online voices have been essential to spreading propaganda and ensuring
that newcomers know what to believe. Online recruitment has also widened
the demographics of the jihadist community, by allowing conservative
Muslim women—physically isolated in their homes—to reach out to
recruiters, radicalize, and arrange passage to Syria. Through its
appeals to both genders, the Islamic State hopes to build a complete
society.
In November, I traveled to Australia to meet Musa Cerantonio, a
30-year-old man whom Neumann and other researchers had identified as one
of the two most important “new spiritual authorities” guiding
foreigners to join the Islamic State. For three years he was a
televangelist on Iqraa TV in Cairo, but he left after the station
objected to his frequent calls to establish a caliphate. Now he preaches
on Facebook and Twitter.
Cerantonio—a big, friendly man with a bookish demeanor—told me he
blanches at beheading videos. He hates seeing the violence, even though
supporters of the Islamic State are required to endorse it. (He speaks
out, controversially among jihadists, against suicide bombing, on the
grounds that God forbids suicide; he differs from the Islamic State on a
few other points as well.) He has the kind of unkempt facial hair one
sees on certain overgrown fans of The Lord of the Rings, and his
obsession with Islamic apocalypticism felt familiar. He seemed to be
living out a drama that looks, from an outsider’s perspective, like a
medieval fantasy novel, only with real blood.
Last June, Cerantonio and his wife tried to emigrate—he wouldn’t say
to where (“It’s illegal to go to Syria,” he said cagily)—but they were
caught en route, in the Philippines, and he was deported back to
Australia for overstaying his visa. Australia has criminalized attempts
to join or travel to the Islamic State, and has confiscated Cerantonio’s
passport. He is stuck in Melbourne, where he is well known to the local
constabulary. If Cerantonio were caught facilitating the movement of
individuals to the Islamic State, he would be imprisoned. So far,
though, he is free—a technically unaffiliated ideologue who nonetheless
speaks with what other jihadists have taken to be a reliable voice on
matters of the Islamic State’s doctrine.
We met for lunch in Footscray, a dense, multicultural Melbourne
suburb that’s home to Lonely Planet, the travel-guide publisher.
Cerantonio grew up there in a half-Irish, half-Calabrian family. On a
typical street one can find African restaurants, Vietnamese shops, and
young Arabs walking around in the Salafi uniform of scraggly beard, long
shirt, and trousers ending halfway down the calves.
Cerantonio explained the joy he felt when Baghdadi was declared the
caliph on June 29—and the sudden, magnetic attraction that Mesopotamia
began to exert on him and his friends. “I was in a hotel [in the
Philippines], and I saw the declaration on television,” he told me. “And
I was just amazed, and I’m like, Why am I stuck here in this bloody room?”
The last caliphate was the Ottoman empire, which reached its peak in
the 16th century and then experienced a long decline, until the founder
of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, euthanized it in 1924.
But Cerantonio, like many supporters of the Islamic State, doesn’t
acknowledge that caliphate as legitimate, because it didn’t fully
enforce Islamic law, which requires stonings and slavery and
amputations, and because its caliphs were not descended from the tribe
of the Prophet, the Quraysh.
Baghdadi spoke at length of the importance of the caliphate in his
Mosul sermon. He said that to revive the institution of the
caliphate—which had not functioned except in name for about 1,000
years—was a communal obligation. He and his loyalists had “hastened to
declare the caliphate and place an imam” at its head, he said. “This is a
duty upon the Muslims—a duty that has been lost for centuries … The
Muslims sin by losing it, and they must always seek to establish it.”
Like bin Laden before him, Baghdadi spoke floridly, with frequent
scriptural allusion and command of classical rhetoric. Unlike bin Laden,
and unlike those false caliphs of the Ottoman empire, he is Qurayshi.
The caliphate, Cerantonio told me, is not just a political entity but
also a vehicle for salvation. Islamic State propaganda regularly
reports the pledges of baya’a (allegiance) rolling in from
jihadist groups across the Muslim world. Cerantonio quoted a Prophetic
saying, that to die without pledging allegiance is to die jahil (ignorant)
and therefore die a “death of disbelief.” Consider how Muslims (or, for
that matter, Christians) imagine God deals with the souls of people who
die without learning about the one true religion. They are neither
obviously saved nor definitively condemned. Similarly, Cerantonio said,
the Muslim who acknowledges one omnipotent god and prays, but who dies
without pledging himself to a valid caliph and incurring the obligations
of that oath, has failed to live a fully Islamic life. I pointed out
that this means the vast majority of Muslims in history, and all who
passed away between 1924 and 2014, died a death of disbelief. Cerantonio
nodded gravely. “I would go so far as to say that Islam has been
reestablished” by the caliphate.
I asked him about his own baya’a, and he quickly corrected me: “I didn’t say that I’d pledged allegiance.” Under Australian law, he reminded me, giving baya’a
to the Islamic State was illegal. “But I agree that [Baghdadi] fulfills
the requirements,” he continued. “I’m just going to wink at you, and
you take that to mean whatever you want.”
To be the caliph, one must meet conditions outlined in Sunni
law—being a Muslim adult man of Quraysh descent; exhibiting moral
probity and physical and mental integrity; and having ’amr, or
authority. This last criterion, Cerantonio said, is the hardest to
fulfill, and requires that the caliph have territory in which he can
enforce Islamic law. Baghdadi’s Islamic State achieved that long before
June 29, Cerantonio said, and as soon as it did, a Western convert
within the group’s ranks—Cerantonio described him as “something of a
leader”—began murmuring about the religious obligation to declare a
caliphate. He and others spoke quietly to those in power and told them
that further delay would be sinful.
Cerantonio
said a faction arose that was prepared to make war on Baghdadi’s group
if it delayed any further. They prepared a letter to various powerful
members of ISIS, airing their displeasure
at the failure to appoint a caliph, but were pacified by Adnani, the
spokesman, who let them in on a secret—that a caliphate had already been
declared, long before the public announcement. They had their
legitimate caliph, and at that point there was only one option. “If he’s
legitimate,” Cerantonio said, “you must give him the baya’a.”
After Baghdadi’s July sermon, a stream of jihadists began flowing
daily into Syria with renewed motivation. Jürgen Todenhöfer, a German
author and former politician who visited the Islamic State in December,
reported the arrival of 100 fighters at one Turkish-border recruitment
station in just two days. His report, among others, suggests a
still-steady inflow of foreigners, ready to give up everything at home
for a shot at paradise in the worst place on Earth. Bernard
Haykel, the foremost secular authority on the Islamic State’s ideology,
believes the group is trying to re-create the earliest days of Islam
and is faithfully reproducing its norms of war. “There is an assiduous,
obsessive seriousness” about the group’s dedication to the text of the
Koran, he says. (Peter Murphy)
In London, aweek
before my meal with Cerantonio, I met with three ex-members of a banned
Islamist group called Al Muhajiroun (The Emigrants): Anjem Choudary,
Abu Baraa, and Abdul Muhid. They all expressed desire to emigrate to the
Islamic State, as many of their colleagues already had, but the
authorities had confiscated their passports. Like Cerantonio, they
regarded the caliphate as the only righteous government on Earth, though
none would confess having pledged allegiance. Their principal goal in
meeting me was to explain what the Islamic State stands for, and how its
policies reflect God’s law.
Choudary, 48, is the group’s former leader. He frequently appears on
cable news, as one of the few people producers can book who will defend
the Islamic State vociferously, until his mike is cut. He has a
reputation in the United Kingdom as a loathsome blowhard, but he and his
disciples sincerely believe in the Islamic State and, on matters of
doctrine, speak in its voice. Choudary and the others feature
prominently in the Twitter feeds of Islamic State residents, and Abu
Baraa maintains a YouTube channel to answer questions about Sharia.
Since September, authorities have been investigating the three men on
suspicion of supporting terrorism. Because of this investigation, they
had to meet me separately: communication among them would have violated
the terms of their bail. But speaking with them felt like speaking with
the same person wearing different masks. Choudary met me in a candy shop
in the East London suburb of Ilford. He was dressed smartly, in a crisp
blue tunic reaching nearly to his ankles, and sipped a Red Bull while
we talked. Before the caliphate, “maybe 85
percent of the Sharia was absent from our lives,” Choudary told me.
“These laws are in abeyance until we have khilafa”—a
caliphate—“and now we have one.” Without a caliphate, for example,
individual vigilantes are not obliged to amputate the hands of thieves
they catch in the act. But create a caliphate, and this law, along with a
huge body of other jurisprudence, suddenly awakens. In theory, all
Muslims are obliged to immigrate to the territory where the caliph is
applying these laws. One of Choudary’s prize students, a convert from
Hinduism named Abu Rumaysah, evaded police to bring his family of five
from London to Syria in November. On the day I met Choudary, Abu
Rumaysah tweeted out a picture of himself with a Kalashnikov in one arm
and his newborn son in the other. Hashtag: #GenerationKhilafah. The caliph is required to implement
Sharia. Any deviation will compel those who have pledged allegiance to
inform the caliph in private of his error and, in extreme cases, to
excommunicate and replace him if he persists. (“I have been plagued with
this great matter, plagued with this responsibility, and it is a heavy
responsibility,” Baghdadi said in his sermon.) In return, the caliph
commands obedience—and those who persist in supporting non-Muslim
governments, after being duly warned and educated about their sin, are
considered apostates.
Choudary said Sharia has been misunderstood because of its incomplete
application by regimes such as Saudi Arabia, which does behead
murderers and cut off thieves’ hands. “The problem,” he explained, “is
that when places like Saudi Arabia just implement the penal code, and
don’t provide the social and economic justice of the Sharia—the whole
package—they simply engender hatred toward the Sharia.” That whole
package, he said, would include free housing, food, and clothing for
all, though of course anyone who wished to enrich himself with work
could do so.
Abdul Muhid, 32, continued along these lines. He was dressed in
mujahideen chic when I met him at a local restaurant: scruffy beard,
Afghan cap, and a wallet outside of his clothes, attached with what
looked like a shoulder holster. When we sat down, he was eager to
discuss welfare. The Islamic State may have medieval-style punishments
for moral crimes (lashes for boozing or fornication, stoning for
adultery), but its social-welfare program is, at least in some aspects,
progressive to a degree that would please an MSNBC pundit. Health care,
he said, is free. (“Isn’t it free in Britain, too?,” I asked. “Not
really,” he said. “Some procedures aren’t covered, such as vision.”)
This provision of social welfare was not, he said, a policy choice of
the Islamic State, but a policy obligation inherent in God’s law. Anjem
Choudary, London’s most notorious defender of the Islamic State, says
crucifixion and beheading are sacred requirements. (Tal Cohen/Reuters)
III. The Apocalypse
All Muslims acknowledge that God is the only one who knows the
future. But they also agree that he has offered us a peek at it, in the
Koran and in narrations of the Prophet. The Islamic State differs from
nearly every other current jihadist movement in believing that it is
written into God’s script as a central character. It is in this casting
that the Islamic State is most boldly distinctive from its predecessors,
and clearest in the religious nature of its mission.
In broad strokes, al-Qaeda acts like an underground political
movement, with worldly goals in sight at all times—the expulsion of
non-Muslims from the Arabian peninsula, the abolishment of the state of
Israel, the end of support for dictatorships in Muslim lands. The
Islamic State has its share of worldly concerns (including, in the
places it controls, collecting garbage and keeping the water running),
but the End of Days is a leitmotif of its propaganda. Bin Laden rarely
mentioned the apocalypse, and when he did, he seemed to presume that he
would be long dead when the glorious moment of divine comeuppance
finally arrived. “Bin Laden and Zawahiri are from elite Sunni families
who look down on this kind of speculation and think it’s something the
masses engage in,” says Will McCants of the Brookings Institution, who
is writing a book about the Islamic State’s apocalyptic thought.
During the last years of the U.S. occupation of Iraq, the Islamic
State’s immediate founding fathers, by contrast, saw signs of the end
times everywhere. They were anticipating, within a year, the arrival of
the Mahdi—a messianic figure destined to lead the Muslims to victory
before the end of the world. McCants says a prominent Islamist in Iraq
approached bin Laden in 2008 to warn him that the group was being led by
millenarians who were “talking all the time about the Mahdi and making
strategic decisions” based on when they thought the Mahdi was going to
arrive. “Al-Qaeda had to write to [these leaders] to say ‘Cut it out.’ ”
For certain true believers—the kind who long for epic
good-versus-evil battles—visions of apocalyptic bloodbaths fulfill a
deep psychological need. Of the Islamic State supporters I met, Musa
Cerantonio, the Australian, expressed the deepest interest in the
apocalypse and how the remaining days of the Islamic State—and the
world—might look. Parts of that prediction are original to him, and do
not yet have the status of doctrine. But other parts are based on
mainstream Sunni sources and appear all over the Islamic State’s
propaganda. These include the belief that there will be only 12
legitimate caliphs, and Baghdadi is the eighth; that the armies of Rome
will mass to meet the armies of Islam in northern Syria; and that
Islam’s final showdown with an anti-Messiah will occur in Jerusalem
after a period of renewed Islamic conquest.
The Islamic State has attached great importance to the Syrian city of
Dabiq, near Aleppo. It named its propaganda magazine after the town,
and celebrated madly when (at great cost) it conquered Dabiq’s
strategically unimportant plains. It is here, the Prophet reportedly
said, that the armies of Rome will set up their camp. The armies of
Islam will meet them, and Dabiq will be Rome’s Waterloo or its Antietam.
“Dabiq is basically all farmland,” one Islamic State supporter
recently tweeted. “You could imagine large battles taking place there.”
The Islamic State’s propagandists drool with anticipation of this event,
and constantly imply that it will come soon. The state’s magazine
quotes Zarqawi as saying, “The spark has been lit here in Iraq, and its
heat will continue to intensify … until it burns the crusader armies in
Dabiq.” A recent propaganda video shows clips from Hollywood war movies
set in medieval times—perhaps because many of the prophecies specify
that the armies will be on horseback or carrying ancient weapons.
Now that it has taken Dabiq, the Islamic State awaits the arrival of
an enemy army there, whose defeat will initiate the countdown to the
apocalypse. Western media frequently miss references to Dabiq in the
Islamic State’s videos, and focus instead on lurid scenes of beheading.
“Here we are, burying the first American crusader in Dabiq, eagerly
waiting for the remainder of your armies to arrive,” said a masked
executioner in a November video, showing the severed head of Peter
(Abdul Rahman) Kassig, the aid worker who’d been held captive for more
than a year. During fighting in Iraq in December, after mujahideen
(perhaps inaccurately) reported having seen American soldiers in battle,
Islamic State Twitter accounts erupted in spasms of pleasure, like
overenthusiastic hosts or hostesses upon the arrival of the first guests
at a party.
The Prophetic narration that foretells the Dabiq battle refers to the
enemy as Rome. Who “Rome” is, now that the pope has no army, remains a
matter of debate. But Cerantonio makes a case that Rome meant the
Eastern Roman empire, which had its capital in what is now Istanbul. We
should think of Rome as the Republic of Turkey—the same republic that
ended the last self-identified caliphate, 90 years ago. Other Islamic
State sources suggest that Rome might mean any infidel army, and the
Americans will do nicely.
After its
battle in Dabiq, Cerantonio said, the caliphate will expand and sack
Istanbul. Some believe it will then cover the entire Earth, but
Cerantonio suggested its tide may never reach beyond the Bosporus. An
anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will
come from the Khorasan region of eastern Iran and kill a vast number of
the caliphate’s fighters, until just 5,000 remain, cornered in
Jerusalem. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the
second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to Earth, spear Dajjal,
and lead the Muslims to victory.
“Only God knows” whether the Islamic State’s armies are the ones
foretold, Cerantonio said. But he is hopeful. “The Prophet said that one
sign of the imminent arrival of the End of Days is that people will for
a long while stop talking about the End of Days,” he said. “If you go
to the mosques now, you’ll find the preachers are silent about this
subject.” On this theory, even setbacks dealt to the Islamic State mean
nothing, since God has preordained the near-destruction of his people
anyway. The Islamic State has its best and worst days ahead of it. Abu
Bakr al-Baghdadi was declared caliph by his followers last summer. The
establishment of a caliphate awakened large sections of Koranic law that
had lain dormant, and required those Muslims who recognized the
caliphate to immigrate. (Associated Press)
IV. The Fight
The ideological purity of the Islamic State has one compensating
virtue: it allows us to predict some of the group’s actions. Osama bin
Laden was seldom predictable. He ended his first television interview
cryptically. CNN’s Peter Arnett asked him, “What are your future plans?”
Bin Laden replied, “You’ll see them and hear about them in the media,
God willing.” By contrast, the Islamic State boasts openly about its
plans—not all of them, but enough so that by listening carefully, we can
deduce how it intends to govern and expand.
In London, Choudary and his students provided detailed descriptions
of how the Islamic State must conduct its foreign policy, now that it is
a caliphate. It has already taken up what Islamic law refers to as
“offensive jihad,” the forcible expansion into countries that are ruled
by non-Muslims. “Hitherto, we were just defending ourselves,” Choudary
said; without a caliphate, offensive jihad is an inapplicable concept.
But the waging of war to expand the caliphate is an essential duty of
the caliph.
Choudary took pains to present the laws of war under which the
Islamic State operates as policies of mercy rather than of brutality. He
told me the state has an obligation to terrorize its enemies—a holy
order to scare the shit out of them with beheadings and crucifixions and
enslavement of women and children, because doing so hastens victory and
avoids prolonged conflict.
Choudary’s colleague Abu Baraa explained that Islamic law permits
only temporary peace treaties, lasting no longer than a decade.
Similarly, accepting any border is anathema, as stated by the Prophet
and echoed in the Islamic State’s propaganda videos. If the caliph
consents to a longer-term peace or permanent border, he will be in
error. Temporary peace treaties are renewable, but may not be applied to
all enemies at once: the caliph must wage jihad at least once a year.
He may not rest, or he will fall into a state of sin.
One comparison to the Islamic State is the Khmer Rouge, which killed
about a third of the population of Cambodia. But the Khmer Rouge
occupied Cambodia’s seat at the United Nations. “This is not permitted,”
Abu Baraa said. “To send an ambassador to the UN is to recognize an
authority other than God’s.” This form of diplomacy is shirk, or
polytheism, he argued, and would be immediate cause to hereticize and
replace Baghdadi. Even to hasten the arrival of a caliphate by
democratic means—for example by voting for political candidates who
favor a caliphate—is shirk.
It’s hard to overstate how hamstrung the Islamic State will be by its
radicalism. The modern international system, born of the 1648 Peace of
Westphalia, relies on each state’s willingness to recognize borders,
however grudgingly. For the Islamic State, that recognition is
ideological suicide. Other Islamist groups, such as the Muslim
Brotherhood and Hamas, have succumbed to the blandishments of democracy
and the potential for an invitation to the community of nations,
complete with a UN seat. Negotiation and accommodation have worked, at
times, for the Taliban as well. (Under Taliban rule, Afghanistan
exchanged ambassadors with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab
Emirates, an act that invalidated the Taliban’s authority in the Islamic
State’s eyes.) To the Islamic State these are not options, but acts of
apostasy.
The United States and
its allies have reacted to the Islamic State belatedly and in an
apparent daze. The group’s ambitions and rough strategic blueprints were
evident in its pronouncements and in social-media chatter as far back
as 2011, when it was just one of many terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq
and hadn’t yet committed mass atrocities. Adnani, the spokesman, told
followers then that the group’s ambition was to “restore the Islamic
caliphate,” and he evoked the apocalypse, saying, “There are but a few
days left.” Baghdadi had already styled himself “commander of the
faithful,” a title ordinarily reserved for caliphs, in 2011. In April
2013, Adnani declared the movement “ready to redraw the world upon the
Prophetic methodology of the caliphate.” In August 2013, he said, “Our
goal is to establish an Islamic state that doesn’t recognize borders, on
the Prophetic methodology.” By then, the group had taken Raqqa, a
Syrian provincial capital of perhaps 500,000 people, and was drawing in
substantial numbers of foreign fighters who’d heard its message.
If we had identified the Islamic State’s intentions early, and
realized that the vacuum in Syria and Iraq would give it ample space to
carry them out, we might, at a minimum, have pushed Iraq to harden its
border with Syria and preemptively make deals with its Sunnis. That
would at least have avoided the electrifying propaganda effect created
by the declaration of a caliphate just after the conquest of Iraq’s
third-largest city. Yet, just over a year ago, Obama told The New Yorker that he considered ISIS
to be al-Qaeda’s weaker partner. “If a jayvee team puts on Lakers
uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,” the president said.
Our failure to appreciate the split between the Islamic State and
al-Qaeda, and the essential differences between the two, has led to
dangerous decisions. Last fall, to take one example, the U.S. government
consented to a desperate plan to save Peter Kassig’s life. The plan
facilitated—indeed, required—the interaction of some of the founding
figures of the Islamic State and al-Qaeda, and could hardly have looked
more hastily improvised.
It
entailed the enlistment of Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi, the Zarqawi mentor
and al-Qaeda grandee, to approach Turki al-Binali, the Islamic State’s
chief ideologue and a former student of Maqdisi’s, even though the two
men had fallen out due to Maqdisi’s criticism of the Islamic State.
Maqdisi had already called for the state to extend mercy to Alan
Henning, the British cabbie who had entered Syria to deliver aid to
children. In December, The Guardian reported that the U.S.
government, through an intermediary, had asked Maqdisi to intercede with
the Islamic State on Kassig’s behalf.
Maqdisi was living freely in Jordan, but had been banned from
communicating with terrorists abroad, and was being monitored closely.
After Jordan granted the United States permission to reintroduce Maqdisi
to Binali, Maqdisi bought a phone with American money and was allowed
to correspond merrily with his former student for a few days, before the
Jordanian government stopped the chats and used them as a pretext to
jail Maqdisi. Kassig’s severed head appeared in the Dabiq video a few
days later.
Maqdisi gets mocked roundly on Twitter by the Islamic State’s fans,
and al‑Qaeda is held in great contempt for refusing to acknowledge the
caliphate. Cole Bunzel, a scholar who studies Islamic State ideology,
read Maqdisi’s opinion on Henning’s status and thought it would hasten
his and other captives’ death. “If I were held captive by the Islamic
State and Maqdisi said I shouldn’t be killed,” he told me, “I’d kiss my
ass goodbye.”
Kassig’s death was a tragedy, but the plan’s success would have been a
bigger one. A reconciliation between Maqdisi and Binali would have
begun to heal the main rift between the world’s two largest jihadist
organizations. It’s possible that the government wanted only to draw out
Binali for intelligence purposes or assassination. (Multiple attempts
to elicit comment from the FBI were unsuccessful.) Regardless, the
decision to play matchmaker for America’s two main terrorist antagonists
reveals astonishingly poor judgment.
Chastened by our earlier indifference,
we are now meeting the Islamic State via Kurdish and Iraqi proxy on the
battlefield, and with regular air assaults. Those strategies haven’t
dislodged the Islamic State from any of its major territorial
possessions, although they’ve kept it from directly assaulting Baghdad
and Erbil and slaughtering Shia and Kurds there.
Some observers have called for escalation, including several
predictable voices from the interventionist right (Max Boot, Frederick
Kagan), who have urged the deployment of tens of thousands of American
soldiers. These calls should not be dismissed too quickly: an avowedly
genocidal organization is on its potential victims’ front lawn, and it
is committing daily atrocities in the territory it already controls.
One way to un-cast the Islamic State’s spell over its adherents would
be to overpower it militarily and occupy the parts of Syria and Iraq
now under caliphate rule. Al‑Qaeda is ineradicable because it can
survive, cockroach-like, by going underground. The Islamic State cannot.
If it loses its grip on its territory in Syria and Iraq, it will cease
to be a caliphate. Caliphates cannot exist as underground movements,
because territorial authority is a requirement: take away its command of
territory, and all those oaths of allegiance are no longer binding.
Former pledges could of course continue to attack the West and behead
their enemies, as freelancers. But the propaganda value of the caliphate
would disappear, and with it the supposed religious duty to immigrate
and serve it. If the United States were to invade, the Islamic State’s
obsession with battle at Dabiq suggests that it might send vast
resources there, as if in a conventional battle. If the state musters at
Dabiq in full force, only to be routed, it might never recover. Abu
Baraa, who maintains a YouTube channel about Islamic law, says the
caliph, Baghdadi, cannot negotiate or recognize borders, and must
continually make war, or he will remove himself from Islam.And
yet the risks of escalation are enormous. The biggest proponent of an
American invasion is the Islamic State itself. The provocative videos,
in which a black-hooded executioner addresses President Obama by name,
are clearly made to draw America into the fight. An invasion would be a
huge propaganda victory for jihadists worldwide: irrespective of whether
they have given baya’a to the caliph, they all believe that the
United States wants to embark on a modern-day Crusade and kill Muslims.
Yet another invasion and occupation would confirm that suspicion, and
bolster recruitment. Add the incompetence of our previous efforts as
occupiers, and we have reason for reluctance. The rise of ISIS,
after all, happened only because our previous occupation created space
for Zarqawi and his followers. Who knows the consequences of another
botched job? Given everything we know about the
Islamic State, continuing to slowly bleed it, through air strikes and
proxy warfare, appears the best of bad military options. Neither the
Kurds nor the Shia will ever subdue and control the whole Sunni
heartland of Syria and Iraq—they are hated there, and have no appetite
for such an adventure anyway. But they can keep the Islamic State from
fulfilling its duty to expand. And with every month that it fails to
expand, it resembles less the conquering state of the Prophet Muhammad
than yet another Middle Eastern government failing to bring prosperity
to its people.
The humanitarian cost of the Islamic State’s existence is high. But
its threat to the United States is smaller than its all too frequent
conflation with al-Qaeda would suggest. Al-Qaeda’s core is rare among
jihadist groups for its focus on the “far enemy” (the West); most
jihadist groups’ main concerns lie closer to home. That’s especially
true of the Islamic State, precisely because of its ideology. It sees
enemies everywhere around it, and while its leadership wishes ill on the
United States, the application of Sharia in the caliphate and the
expansion to contiguous lands are paramount. Baghdadi has said as much
directly: in November he told his Saudi agents to “deal with the rafida [Shia] first … then al-Sulul [Sunni supporters of the Saudi monarchy] … before the crusaders and their bases.”
The foreign fighters (and their wives and
children) have been traveling to the caliphate on one-way tickets: they
want to live under true Sharia, and many want martyrdom. Doctrine,
recall, requires believers to reside in the caliphate if it is at all
possible for them to do so. One of the Islamic State’s less bloody
videos shows a group of jihadists burning their French, British, and
Australian passports. This would be an eccentric act for someone
intending to return to blow himself up in line at the Louvre or to hold
another chocolate shop hostage in Sydney.
A few “lone wolf” supporters of the Islamic State have attacked
Western targets, and more attacks will come. But most of the attackers
have been frustrated amateurs, unable to immigrate to the caliphate
because of confiscated passports or other problems. Even if the Islamic
State cheers these attacks—and it does in its propaganda—it hasn’t yet
planned and financed one. (The Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris in
January was principally an al‑Qaeda operation.) During his visit to
Mosul in December, Jürgen Todenhöfer interviewed a portly German
jihadist and asked whether any of his comrades had returned to Europe to
carry out attacks. The jihadist seemed to regard returnees not as
soldiers but as dropouts. “The fact is that the returnees from the
Islamic State should repent from their return,” he said. “I hope they
review their religion.”
Properly contained, the Islamic State is likely to be its own
undoing. No country is its ally, and its ideology ensures that this will
remain the case. The land it controls, while expansive, is mostly
uninhabited and poor. As it stagnates or slowly shrinks, its claim that
it is the engine of God’s will and the agent of apocalypse will weaken,
and fewer believers will arrive. And as more reports of misery within it
leak out, radical Islamist movements elsewhere will be discredited: No one has tried harder to implement strict Sharia by violence. This is what it looks like.
Even so, the death of the Islamic State is unlikely to be quick, and
things could still go badly wrong: if the Islamic State obtained the
allegiance of al‑Qaeda—increasing, in one swoop, the unity of its
base—it could wax into a worse foe than we’ve yet seen. The rift between
the Islamic State and al-Qaeda has, if anything, grown in the past few
months; the December issue of Dabiq featured a long account of an
al‑Qaeda defector who described his old group as corrupt and
ineffectual, and Zawahiri as a distant and unfit leader. But we should
watch carefully for a rapprochement.
Without a catastrophe such as this, however, or perhaps the threat of
the Islamic State’s storming Erbil, a vast ground invasion would
certainly make the situation worse.
V. Dissuasion
It would be facile, even exculpatory, to call the problem of the
Islamic State “a problem with Islam.” The religion allows many
interpretations, and Islamic State supporters are morally on the hook
for the one they choose. And yet simply denouncing the Islamic State as
un-Islamic can be counterproductive, especially if those who hear the
message have read the holy texts and seen the endorsement of many of the
caliphate’s practices written plainly within them.
Muslims can say that slavery is not legitimate now, and that crucifixion is wrong at this historical juncture.
Many say precisely this. But they cannot condemn slavery or crucifixion
outright without contradicting the Koran and the example of the
Prophet. “The only principled ground that the Islamic State’s opponents
could take is to say that certain core texts and traditional teachings
of Islam are no longer valid,” Bernard Haykel says. That really would be
an act of apostasy.
The Islamic State’s ideology exerts powerful sway over a certain
subset of the population. Life’s hypocrisies and inconsistencies vanish
in its face. Musa Cerantonio and the Salafis I met in London are
unstumpable: no question I posed left them stuttering. They lectured me
garrulously and, if one accepts their premises, convincingly. To call
them un-Islamic appears, to me, to invite them into an argument that
they would win. If they had been froth-spewing maniacs, I might be able
to predict that their movement would burn out as the psychopaths
detonated themselves or became drone-splats, one by one. But these men
spoke with an academic precision that put me in mind of a good graduate
seminar. I even enjoyed their company, and that frightened me as much as
anything else.
Non-muslims cannot tell Muslims
how to practice their religion properly. But Muslims have long since
begun this debate within their own ranks. “You have to have standards,”
Anjem Choudary told me. “Somebody could claim to be a Muslim, but if he
believes in homosexuality or drinking alcohol, then he is not a Muslim.
There is no such thing as a nonpracticing vegetarian.”
There is, however, another strand of Islam that offers a hard-line
alternative to the Islamic State—just as uncompromising, but with
opposite conclusions. This strand has proved appealing to many Muslims
cursed or blessed with a psychological longing to see every jot and
tittle of the holy texts implemented as they were in the earliest days
of Islam. Islamic State supporters know how to react to Muslims who
ignore parts of the Koran: with takfir and ridicule. But they
also know that some other Muslims read the Koran as assiduously as they
do, and pose a real ideological threat.
Baghdadi is Salafi. The term Salafi has been villainized, in
part because authentic villains have ridden into battle waving the
Salafi banner. But most Salafis are not jihadists, and most adhere to
sects that reject the Islamic State. They are, as Haykel notes,
committed to expanding Dar al-Islam, the land of Islam, even,
perhaps, with the implementation of monstrous practices such as slavery
and amputation—but at some future point. Their first priority is
personal purification and religious observance, and they believe
anything that thwarts those goals—such as causing war or unrest that
would disrupt lives and prayer and scholarship—is forbidden.
They live among us. Last fall, I visited the Philadelphia mosque of
Breton Pocius, 28, a Salafi imam who goes by the name Abdullah. His
mosque is on the border between the crime-ridden Northern Liberties
neighborhood and a gentrifying area that one might call Dar al-Hipster;
his beard allows him to pass in the latter zone almost unnoticed.
Pocius
converted 15 years ago after a Polish Catholic upbringing in Chicago.
Like Cerantonio, he talks like an old soul, exhibiting deep familiarity
with ancient texts, and a commitment to them motivated by curiosity and
scholarship, and by a conviction that they are the only way to escape
hellfire. When I met him at a local coffee shop, he carried a work of
Koranic scholarship in Arabic and a book for teaching himself Japanese.
He was preparing a sermon on the obligations of fatherhood for the 150
or so worshipers in his Friday congregation.
Pocius said his main goal is to encourage a halal life for worshipers
in his mosque. But the rise of the Islamic State has forced him to
consider political questions that are usually very far from the minds of
Salafis. “Most of what they’ll say about how to pray and how to dress
is exactly what I’ll say in my masjid [mosque]. But when they get to questions about social upheaval, they sound like Che Guevara.”
When Baghdadi showed up, Pocius adopted the slogan “Not my khalifa.”
“The times of the Prophet were a time of great bloodshed,” he told me,
“and he knew that the worst possible condition for all people was chaos,
especially within the umma [Muslim community].” Accordingly,
Pocius said, the correct attitude for Salafis is not to sow discord by
factionalizing and declaring fellow Muslims apostates.
Instead, Pocius—like a majority of Salafis—believes that Muslims
should remove themselves from politics. These quietist Salafis, as they
are known, agree with the Islamic State that God’s law is the only law,
and they eschew practices like voting and the creation of political
parties. But they interpret the Koran’s hatred of discord and chaos as
requiring them to fall into line with just about any leader, including
some manifestly sinful ones. “The Prophet said: as long as the ruler
does not enter into clear kufr [disbelief], give him general
obedience,” Pocius told me, and the classic “books of creed” all warn
against causing social upheaval. Quietist Salafis are strictly forbidden
from dividing Muslims from one another—for example, by mass
excommunication. Living without baya’a, Pocius said, does indeed make one ignorant, or benighted. But baya’a
need not mean direct allegiance to a caliph, and certainly not to Abu
Bakr al‑Baghdadi. It can mean, more broadly, allegiance to a religious
social contract and commitment to a society of Muslims, whether ruled by
a caliph or not.
Quietist Salafis believe that Muslims should direct their energies
toward perfecting their personal life, including prayer, ritual, and
hygiene. Much in the same way ultra-Orthodox Jews debate whether it’s
kosher to tear off squares of toilet paper on the Sabbath (does that
count as “rending cloth”?), they spend an inordinate amount of time
ensuring that their trousers are not too long, that their beards are
trimmed in some areas and shaggy in others. Through this fastidious
observance, they believe, God will favor them with strength and numbers,
and perhaps a caliphate will arise. At that moment, Muslims will take
vengeance and, yes, achieve glorious victory at Dabiq. But Pocius cites a
slew of modern Salafi theologians who argue that a caliphate cannot
come into being in a righteous way except through the unmistakable will
of God.
The Islamic State, of course, would agree, and say that God has
anointed Baghdadi. Pocius’s retort amounts to a call to humility. He
cites Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Prophet’s companions, who sat down
with dissenters and asked them how they had the gall, as a minority, to
tell the majority that it was wrong. Dissent itself, to the point of
bloodshed or splitting the umma, was forbidden. Even the manner of the establishment of Baghdadi’s caliphate runs contrary to expectation, he said. “The khilafa
is something that Allah is going to establish,” he told me, “and it
will involve a consensus of scholars from Mecca and Medina. That is not
what happened. ISIS came out of nowhere.”
The Islamic State loathes this talk, and its fanboys tweet derisively
about quietist Salafis. They mock them as “Salafis of menstruation,”
for their obscure judgments about when women are and aren’t clean, and
other low-priority aspects of life. “What we need now is fatwa about how
it’s haram [forbidden] to ride a bike on Jupiter,” one tweeted drily.
“That’s what scholars should focus on. More pressing than state of
Ummah.” Anjem Choudary, for his part, says that no sin merits more
vigorous opposition than the usurpation of God’s law, and that extremism
in defense of monotheism is no vice. Pocius doesn’t court any kind of
official support from the United States, as a counterweight to jihadism.
Indeed, official support would tend to discredit him, and in any case
he is bitter toward America for treating him, in his words, as “less
than a citizen.” (He alleges that the government paid spies to
infiltrate his mosque and harassed his mother at work with questions
about his being a potential terrorist.)
Still, his quietist Salafism offers an Islamic antidote to
Baghdadi-style jihadism. The people who arrive at the faith spoiling for
a fight cannot all be stopped from jihadism, but those whose main
motivation is to find an ultraconservative, uncompromising version of
Islam have an alternative here. It is not moderate Islam; most Muslims
would consider it extreme. It is, however, a form of Islam that the
literal-minded would not instantly find hypocritical, or blasphemously
purged of its inconveniences. Hypocrisy is not a sin that ideologically
minded young men tolerate well.
Western officials would probably do best to refrain from weighing in
on matters of Islamic theological debate altogether. Barack Obama
himself drifted into takfiri waters when he claimed that the
Islamic State was “not Islamic”—the irony being that he, as the
non-Muslim son of a Muslim, may himself be classified as an apostate,
and yet is now practicing takfir against Muslims. Non-Muslims’ practicing takfir elicits chuckles from jihadists (“Like a pig covered in feces giving hygiene advice to others,” one tweeted).
I suspect that most Muslims appreciated Obama’s sentiment: the
president was standing with them against both Baghdadi and non-Muslim
chauvinists trying to implicate them in crimes. But most Muslims aren’t
susceptible to joining jihad. The ones who are susceptible will only
have had their suspicions confirmed: the United States lies about
religion to serve its purposes.
Within the narrow bounds
of its theology, the Islamic State hums with energy, even creativity.
Outside those bounds, it could hardly be more arid and silent: a vision
of life as obedience, order, and destiny. Musa Cerantonio and Anjem
Choudary could mentally shift from contemplating mass death and eternal
torture to discussing the virtues of Vietnamese coffee or treacly
pastry, with apparent delight in each, yet to me it seemed that to
embrace their views would be to see all the flavors of this world grow
insipid compared with the vivid grotesqueries of the hereafter.
I could enjoy their company, as a guilty intellectual exercise, up to a point. In reviewing Mein Kampf
in March 1940, George Orwell confessed that he had “never been able to
dislike Hitler”; something about the man projected an underdog quality,
even when his goals were cowardly or loathsome. “If he were killing a
mouse he would know how to make it seem like a dragon.” The Islamic
State’s partisans have much the same allure. They believe that they are
personally involved in struggles beyond their own lives, and that merely
to be swept up in the drama, on the side of righteousness, is a
privilege and a pleasure—especially when it is also a burden.
Fascism, Orwell continued, is
psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception
of life … Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way,
have said to people “I offer you a good time,” Hitler has said to them,
“I offer you struggle, danger, and death,” and as a result a whole
nation flings itself at his feet … We ought not to underrate its
emotional appeal.
Nor, in the case of the Islamic State, its religious or intellectual
appeal. That the Islamic State holds the imminent fulfillment of
prophecy as a matter of dogma at least tells us the mettle of our
opponent. It is ready to cheer its own near-obliteration, and to remain
confident, even when surrounded, that it will receive divine succor if
it stays true to the Prophetic model. Ideological tools may convince
some potential converts that the group’s message is false, and military
tools can limit its horrors. But for an organization as impervious to
persuasion as the Islamic State, few measures short of these will
matter, and the war may be a long one, even if it doesn’t last until the
end of time.
Graeme Wood is a contributing editor at The Atlantic. His personal site is gcaw.net.
Iraq envoy to UN: Islamic State might be harvesting organs
By CARA ANNA
7 hours ago
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Iraq's
ambassador to the United Nations asked the U.N. Security Council on
Tuesday to look at allegations that the Islamic State group is using
organ harvesting as a way to finance its operations.
Ambassador
Mohamed Alhakim told reporters that in the past few weeks, bodies with
surgical incisions and missing kidneys or other body parts have been
found in shallow mass graves.
"We have bodies. Come and examine them," he said. "It is clear they are missing certain parts."
He also said a dozen doctors have been "executed" in Mosul for refusing to participate in organ harvesting.
Alhakim briefed the council on
the overall situation in Iraq and accused the Islamic State group of
"crimes of genocide" in targeting certain ethnic groups.
The
outgoing U.N. envoy to Iraq, Nikolay Mladenov, told the council that
790 people were killed in January alone by terrorism and armed conflict.
Mladenov
noted the increasing number of reports and allegations that the Islamic
State group is using organ harvesting as a financing method, but he
said only that "it's very clear that the tactics ISIL is using expand by
the day." He used an acronym for the group.
He
said Iraq's most pressing goal is to win back the vast territory that
the Islamic State group has seized in the past year. The Sunni militants
seized a third of both Iraq and neighboring Syria and imposed strict
Sharia law.
"Especially
worrying is the increasing number of reports of revenge attacks
committed particularly against members of the Sunni community in areas
liberated from ISIL control," Mladenov said.
http://www.vox.com/
This one paragraph shows just how bad things in Libya have gotten
On Sunday, Libyan militants claiming to represent
ISIS released a video in which they beheaded 21 Egyptian Christians. The
video is horrifying, which is what makes the truth of this statement
even more astonishing: the small ISIS contingent in eastern Libya is in
some ways just a symptom of the country's larger problems.
To get a sense of just how bad the situation in
Libya is, here is one very absolutely devastating paragraph from Jon Lee
Anderson's long dispatch from the country in the New Yorker:
There is no overstating the chaos of post-Qaddafi
Libya. Two competing governments claim legitimacy. Armed militias roam
the streets. The electricity is frequently out of service, and most
business is at a standstill; revenues from oil, the country's greatest
asset, have dwindled by more than ninety per cent. Some three thousand
people have been killed by fighting in the past year, and nearly a third
of the country's population has fled across the border to Tunisia. What
has followed the downfall of a tyrant-a downfall encouraged by NATO air
strikes-is the tyranny of a dangerous and pervasive instability.
Nearly a thirdof the country has fled. A third. That's
how horrible the post-2011 collapse has been for Libya's citizens. You
see that chaos play out in many ways: the collapse in central
governance, the rising extremism, the militia alliance controlling much
of the country's west, the army run by General Khalifa Hifter entrenched
in the east, and the fighting that continues to kill so many. A number
of Libyans are trying bravely to bring order to their country, but there
is little hope on the horizon.
ISIS' incredible show of force on Europe's doorstep: Terrorists in
Libya who beheaded 21 Egyptian Christians parade their fleet of brand
new 'police cars' in front of cheering children
The video shows fleet of Toyota pickup trucks carrying Islamic State flagsMen, women and children cheer as the cars drive through city of Benghazi Uploaded by extremist group Ansar al-Sharia who want Sharia law in LibyaThe terror group pledged its allegiance to Islamic State in October last yearLinked to public and bloody executions of 21 Egyptian Christians this week
Published:
12:24 EST, 17 February 2015
| Updated:
18:41 EST, 17 February 2015
The
video appears to show a fleet of Toyota Land Cruisers carrying the
notorious black flag of Islamic State as they drive in perfect unison
through the streets of Libya.
Men,
women and children cheer and salute the pick-up trucks as they drive
freely through what is believed to be the city of Benghazi.
The carefully produced propaganda video was uploaded by terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia on February 5.
The
group declared city an 'Islamic emirate' in July 2014 before pledging
allegiance to Islamic State just three months later. In November of that
year, the UN blacklisted it as a terrorist organisation.
The
group was widely blamed for the death of US Ambassador Christopher
Stephens in Benghazi in 2012. And only this week, it was linked to the
bloody executions of 21 Egyptian Christians on a beach in Libya.
Fears
of an equally brutal execution were raised following the news that 35
more Egyptians may have been kidnapped by Jihadists in the country.
The
latest abduction is thought to be a direct response to Egyptian
airstrikes on extremist locations in the Libyan city of Derna, following
the mass murder of their countrymen.
Procession: A fleet of cars parade
freely through the Libyan city of Benghazi, showing the level of control
they exercise in the country ruled almost entirely by rebel forces
Power: The ominous show of discipline
and wealth shows how the country has been overrun by extremism as
efforts to suppress ISIS focus on Iraq and Syria
Support: The parade of Toyota Land
Cruisers is welcomed by the locals in Benghazi. The video was posted by
terrorist group Ansar Al-Sharia - who pledged allegiance to Islamic
State last October
SHARE PICTURE
Copy link to paste in your message
Chilling: Even young children salute the procession of cars as they pass undeterred through the streets of Benghazi
Spreading extremism: Dr Theodore
Karasik told MailOnline: 'Libya is seen by North Africans now as the
place to go spread the Caliphate'
SHARE PICTURE
Copy link to paste in your message
In plain sight: The slickly-edited
video - in style with Islamic State's propaganda videos - ends with a
group of masked men aggressively facing the camera as one man addresses
the viewer
The
Islamic Youth Shura Council - a branch of Ansar Al-Sharia - was
responsible for the very first footage of a beheading to surface from
the North-African country.
In
November 2014, it released footage showing the murder of an Egyptian
soldier who publicly supported his government's forces led by General
Khalifa Haftar.
Masked men in camouflage cut Muftah el-Nazihi's neck with a knife before removing his head and placing it on his back.
The
group has been enforcing Sharia Law by carrying out public beheadings
and beatings in Libya since their formation in at least August 2014.
Power
exorcised by radical groups like the Islamic Youth Shura Council
continued to grow until February this year when the Islamic State of
Levant self-declared 'caliphate' in Sirte - where 21 Egyptians were
believed to be beheaded recently.
Its
fighters traveled to the district in 40 heavily armoured cars and
ordered residents to follow Islamic State's leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
He
has since appointed Ali Al-Qarqaa as Libya's Emir- or leader - meaning
control over the country's fractured terror groups falls to him
according to Gulf-based analyst Dr Theodore Karasik.
He
told MailOnline: 'Libya is seen by North Africans now as the place to
go spread the Caliphate. Unlike a few years ago, when everyone was
leaving Libya to go to the Levant, you now have people going back.
'Because
the idea of 'state' is there and now with the executions, they will
feel like there are enough numbers on the ground to fight. They know at
the same time the West is slow at acting.'
Three
years after the removal of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi as the country's
ruler, Libya's main cities have surrendered control to a melting pot of
extremist groups.
Most
of them - including Ansar al-Sharia, Libya Dawn and the Islamic Youth
Shura Council - have pledged their allegiance to Islamic State who seek
to use the country's location to establish a foothold in North Africa.
SHARE PICTURE
Copy link to paste in your message
Overrun: The majority of Libya's
coastal cities have surrendered control to Islamic State and other rebel
extremist groups created to oppose the NATO-led invasion which removed
Gaddafi from power
SHARE PICTURE
Copy link to paste in your message
Support: A young girl cheers and waves
at the dozens of cars driving in perfect unison through the Libyan city
of Benghazi as they carry the black flags of Islamic State
Islamic State:
Most of Libya's fractured extremist groups - including Ansar al-Sharia,
Libya Dawn and the Islamic Youth Shura Council - have pledged their
allegiance to ISIS
Terrorism: Dr Theodore Karasik said
Libyans who traveled to fight in Syria are returning to their home
country, where there are 'enough numbers on the ground to fight'
Total control: Flags and signposts featuring the black flag of Islamic State litter the city of Benghazi
The internationally recognised government and parliament have since fled to Tobruk, near the Egyptian border.
ISIS
exploited the gaps between the democratically elected Libyan government
in Torbruk and the Islamist-led General National Congress in the
capital Tripoli.
Their
joint failure to stop the spread of Islamic State has allowed the
extremist group to seize control in a number of coastal cities including
Nofaliya, Benghazi, Derna and Sirte - where the Coptic Christians were
executed on Sunday.
The
caption alongside the five-minute documenting the murderous video read:
'The people of the cross, followers of the hostile Egyptian church.'
Before
the killings, one of the militants stood with a knife in his hand and
said: 'Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for.'
Egyptian
warplanes struck Islamic State targets in Libya on Monday in swift
retribution for the extremists' beheading of a group of Egyptian
Christian hostages on a beach, shown in a grisly online video released
hours earlier.
Copy link to paste in your message
Executed: At least 35 more Egyptians
are believed to have been kidnapped by jihadists in Libya, raises the
chilling prospect of yet another mass execution like the one seen on
Sunday when the Islamic State released a horrific video showing the
beheading of 21 Christians on a beach (above)
Retaliation:
Egypt blitzed ISIS training camps, weapons stockpiles and fighters in
two waves of air strikes following the gruesome murder of captured
Egyptian workers in a video (above) released on Sunday
Copy link to paste in your message
Horror: Blood is seen in the Mediterranean Sea. In the video the jihadis say they now plan to 'conquer Rome'
SHARE PICTURE
Copy link to paste in your message
Murder: The Islamic Youth Shura
Council - a branch of Ansar Al-Sharia - was responsible for the very
first footage of a beheading to surface from the North-African country.
Masked men in camouflage cut Muftah el-Nazihi's (pictured) neck with a
knife before removing his head and placing it on his back.
In
a radio interview today, Egypt's president said a UN-backed coalition
was Libya's best chance of ridding Libya of its many extremist groups.
Speaking
to France's Europe 1 Radio, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi said Egyptian
airstrikes against Islamic State group positions in Libya on Monday were
in self-defense.
He
siad: 'We will not allow them to cut off the heads of our children. We
have abandoned the Libyan people as prisoners of the militias.
'The
militias have to give up their arms and must work in a civil context.
We have to disarm and prevent arms from falling into the hands of
extremists.
'What
happened [beheading of Egyptian Christians] is a crime, a monstrous
terrorist crime that our children have their throats cuts in Libya and
not to react. It's a kind of self-defense accepted by the international
community. We will not allow them to cut off the heads of our children.'
Meanwhile
British Prime Minister David Cameron says he does not regret his
country's efforts to rid Libya of Muammar Gaddafi, despite growing
unrest and the threat from terrorists.
The
Prime Minister said UK would not abandon Libya as he maintained his
decision to send British military forces to the north African country in
2011 was the 'right thing to do'.
He
said: 'Britain is giving Libya support through our aid budget. We did a
major training project for the Libyan security forces. We are doing
work to try and bring together a national unity government in Libya.
'But
of course what we face in Libya is a very difficult situation with far
too many armed militias, without a proper government and with the growth
of ungoverned space, and we've had the appalling events of the last few
days with the brutal, senseless murders of Coptic Christians on the
beach, which I know has shocked the whole world.
'I
discussed it yesterday with the president of Egypt and what the whole
world needs to do is come together and work for a Libya that has a
national unity government, obviously excluding terrorists, and that can
start to build the institutions of a state.'
http://www.ibtimes.com
ISIS Demands Blood Donations For Wounded Fighters In Syria, Mandatory Transfusions Performed Without Proper Medical Tools
Smoke raises behind an
Islamic State flag after Iraqi security forces and Shiite fighters took
control of Saadiya in Diyala province from Islamist State militants,
Nov. 24, 2014.
REUTERS/Stringer
As
U.S.-led airstrikes continued to take down Islamic State group fighters
this week, the extremists reportedly forced Syrian civilians to donate
blood for their wounded. Up to 100 residents of Raqqa, the ISIS capital
in eastern Syria, were required to get blood drawn at the city's private
hospitals, according to the Independent. Most were men.
“Forcing civilians to donate blood is prohibited and inhuman,
especially since the IS group does so randomly, regardless of the type
of blood,” al-Quds al-Arabi newspaper reporter Jiwan Soz told ARA News. "The group is drawing blood in a primitive way without using the medical tools necessary for this process."
Blood transfusions in Raqqa used to be voluntary and even popular at
one point when bombs were hitting civilians in 2014. But this recent
blood drive was mandatory, motivated by the need to care for militants
hurt by airstrikes in Kobani, Syria, and battles with Kurdish fighters
near Mosul, Iraq, according to the Independent. There have also been
reports of female Yazidi hostages being forced to give blood.
"They even take our girls' and old women's blood," Yazidi activist
Nareen Shammo told the Independent. "They use it for their wounded ISIS
fighters."
The extremist organization has been treating its members in private
hospitals, so it's difficult to estimate death tolls. Reuters reported
that at least 20 ISIS fighters died Thursday, and since August, U.S.-led
coalition bombs have killed about 7,000 ISIS militants. The CIA
estimated last year that ISIS' membership in the Middle East was between
20,000 and 31,500.
"We will continue to fight this war until we have achieved its goal,
wiping ISIS from the face of the Earth," Maj. Gen. Mansour Jabour of the
Royal Jordanian Air Force told the Washington Post.
In addition to the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France,
Netherlands and the United Kingdom are dropping bombs in Iraq.
Coalition countries conducting airstrikes in Syria include the U.S.,
Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.
ISIS Turns to Chemical Weapons As It Loses Ground in Iraq
By Riyadh Mohammed
4 hours ago
A few weeks ago, the US Central Command announced that
an air raid had killed an ISIS chemical weapon expert in Mosul. The
ISIS operative, Iraqi engineer Mahmoud al-Sabawi, used to work at Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons program before he joined al-Qaeda in Iraq after the 2003 US led invasion.
The idea that ISIS terrorists have access to chemical weapons brings
back images of the genocide inflicted on the Kurds by Saddam Hussein in
the late 1980’s. The Halabja Massacre killed up to 5,000 and injured between 7,000 and 10,000 more.
If ISIS jihadists have a stash of chemical weapons, they won’t
hesitate to use them on the Kurdish people or anyone else who has
challenged their authority. Since President Obama has just asked
Congress to for additional war powers to fight ISIS, it is important to
know if the enemy has such weapons.
ISIS’s chemical weapons aspiration dates back to the very early roots
of the group. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the late Jordanian terrorist and
the founder of ISIS predecessor organization al-Qaeda in Iraq was very
interested in acquiring chemical weapons and using poisons in terrorist
attacks. Related: US Marines on the Ground in Iraq as ISIS Burns 45 Alive
Zarqawi was born in Jordan in 1967 where he was involved in several
terrorist plots and spent several years in prison. He also traveled
twice to Afghanistan to join the Afghan Jihad. Around the year 2000 and
during his second term in Afghanistan, he arranged a deal with Osama bin
Laden that enabled him to establish a training camp in the eastern
Afghan city of Herat for Jordanian extremists without pledging
allegiance to al-Qaeda. His organization researched the making and usage of poisons and chemical weapons.
When the US invasion of Afghanistan took place in October 2001 --
following the 9/11 attacks -- Zarqawi fought against the Americans, then
reportedly fled to Iran and then Iraq. There, he had reportedly
developed a relationship with a Kurdish Iraqi extremist group called
Ansar al-Islam.
Ansar al-Islam was established in September 2001 and it controlled a
small area in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Iraq by the Iranian border.
Just like Zarqawi, the group was supported by al-Qaeda but it was independent. It was also very interested in developing and using chemical weapons and poisons in terrorist attacks.
In 2002 and in early 2003, Ansar al-Islam’s activities prompted a
disagreement among President Bush’s advisors over whether or not to
strike its camps in northern Iraq. The US Defense department favored the
action, but the State department opposed. Bush sided with the later. Related: Beheadings Show ISIS Has Formed a New Power Center
When the Americans invaded Iraq in March 2003, they raided the camps
of Ansar al-Islam in northern Iraq and uncovered labs where the group
was experimenting with chemicals and poisons. In the meantime, Zarqawi
rose up to be the leader of the deadliest insurgency group, named in
2004 to lead al-Qaeda branch in Iraq. Zarqawi was by then able to
acquire more resources to continue his chemical weapons program, which
included access to Saddam Hussein’s former engineers, funding from
several sources including hostage taking and taxes on businesses,
materials from Saddam Hussein’s looted factories and weapons caches, and
lands that insurgents who reported to him controlled.
“Zarqawi assigned Abu Mohammed al-Lubnani and an engineer called
Ammar al-Ani to handle the chemical weapons profile”, said Hisham
al-Hashimi, ISIS analyst at the Iraqi National Security Advisor office.
Al-Lubnani was Zarqawi’s second in command.
“Special development units were built on farms…to the north of
Baghdad. However, all the development experiments failed due to
difficulties in acquiring basic manufacturing materials or local
replacements. They were also unable to control the strength of the
explosion once the chemicals or poisonous stuff burned or melted,” added
al-Hashimi.
Zarqawi’s terror wasn’t limited to Iraq. U.S. officials believe that
Zarqawi trained others in the use of poison (ricin) for possible attacks
in Europe. On April 26, 2004, Jordanian authorities announced they had
broken up an al-Qaeda plot to use chemical weapons in Amman. Among the
targets were the U.S. Embassy, the Jordanian prime minister’s office and
the headquarters of Jordanian intelligence. The Jordanian authorities
seized 20 tons of chemicals. Related: 9 ISIS Weapons That Will Shock You
When Zarqawi was killed in an air raid in Iraq in 2006, his
successors Abu Ayoub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi continued the
terror organization’s chemical project. The two men established the
Islamic State of Iraq in October 2006. In that month, a series of
Chlorine bombings began in Iraq. More than a dozen attacks with Chlorine
took place between October 2006 and June 2007.
In January 2007, a suicide bomber drove a dump truck carrying chlorine tank killing 16 people by the explosives, not by the chlorine.
In February 2007, a suicide bombing in Ramadi involving chlorine
killed two Iraqi security forces and wounded 16 other people. A bomb
blew up a tanker carrying chlorine north of Baghdad, killing nine and
made 148 others ill. A pickup truck carrying chlorine gas cylinders exploded in Baghdad, killing at least five people and hospitalizing over 50.
In March 2007, three separate suicide attacks used chlorine in one
day. The first attack occurred in Ramadi, when a truck bomb wounded one
US service member and one Iraqi civilian. A second truck bomb detonated
in Fallujah, killing two police officers, leaving a hundred Iraqis with
signs of chlorine exposure.
Another chlorine-laden truck bomb exploded south of Fallujah, killing six and injuring 250. On another day, suicide bombers detonated a pair of truck bombs, one containing chlorine in Fallujah. It left 14 American forces and 57 Iraqi forces wounded.
In April 2007, a chlorine-laden suicide truck bomb detonated in Ramadi, leaving 27 dead. Thirty people were wounded. Many more suffered breathing difficulties. A chlorine truck bomb detonated in western Baghdad, killing one Iraqi and wounding two others. A tanker laden with chlorine exploded in Ramadi, killing six people and wounding 10.
In May 2007, a chlorine bomb exploded in a village of in Diyala province, killing 32 people and injuring 50. A suicide truck bomb exploded his vehicle outside Ramadi, killing two police officers and wounding 11 others.
The attacks in Iraq were poorly executed because much of the chemical agent was rendered nontoxic
by the heat of the explosives. The attacks resulted in hundreds of
injuries but were not a feasible way of inflicting large loss of life.
Their primary effect was widespread panic, with many civilians suffering
non-life threatening injuries. Higher levels of exposure can cause fatal
lung damage; but because the gas is heavier than air, it will not
disperse, and it is ineffective as an improvised chemical weapon. Related: The Perverted, Powerful Logic Behind ISIS’s Burned Pilot
In all the previous attacks and others, the ISIS experiments
ultimately failed. Unless the target is enclosed and has been hit
directly by the gas, the gas won’t be particularly lethal.
The American forces attacked ISIS factories in al-Tarmiya in 2008.
They killed Abu Gazwan al-Hayali, who supervised and protected the
engineers and specialists there. But they didn’t find any ready to
produce materials or important raw materials, al-Hashimi added. ISIS Rethinks Its Chemical Strategy
In 2010, the Iraqi and American forces killed Zarqawi’s successors. That opened the door for Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
to rebuild his dismantled jihad organization. When the Syrian
revolution broke out in 2011, he seized the opportunity to expand and
gradually his organization grew into ISIS. In June 2014, they were able
to capture the city of Mosul. Related: The Three Hidden Messages Behind ISIS’s Bloody Rampages
With the fall of massive areas in northern and western Iraq, ISIS was
able to control a key area north of Baghdad that used to produce
chemical weapons under Saddam. However, the site was empty. The UN
inspection teams had destroyed and cleared the site completely
from the industrial tools and the main materials that could be used to
make chemical or biological weapons, according to the UN teams’ reports.
When the US led alliance started to bomb ISIS positions in Iraq and
in Syria after August 2014, ISIS lost its momentum in Iraq. Since
October, ISIS has suffered a series of defeats on every front in Iraq. This weakened position could explain why ISIS chemical ambitions have been recently renewed.
In late January 2015 in one of ISIS bomb-making factories in Mosul,
something went wrong while preparing a chlorine bomb. “ISIS members
informed the nearby residents to close their doors and windows. They
said a gas leak was caused by an air raid. But there were no air
raids...people were panicked,” said Maouris Milton, a blogger from
Mosul.
A few days later, On January 29, ISIS tried to extract some chemical
and poisonous waste buried carefully by UN teams in Tikrit. But the
concrete structure around the burial site stood as an obstacle despite
numerous attempts to destroy it with explosives, Hashimi recalled.
Currently, the man in charge of
ISIS chemical weapons is an Egyptian engineer with an MS from Cairo. It
is believed that he operates somewhere in an agricultural area in
southern Baghdad. Hashimi says his assistant was killed by a US air
raid a few weeks ago.
UK worries how to stop teenage girls traveling to Syria
By Katherine Haddon
12 hours ago
London (AFP) - Britain debated Sunday how to stop teenage girls joining
the Islamic State group in Syria after three high-achieving youngsters
became the latest to run away from home.School friends Kadiza Sultana, 17, and 15-year-olds Shamima Begum and
Amira Abase left their east London homes on Tuesday and flew to
Istanbul, raising concerns they would travel on to Syria to join IS
jihadists.All three were spoken to in December by police investigating the
disappearance of a friend who went to Syria but Scotland Yard insists
nothing indicated they would follow suit.
Amira's father Abase Hussen, 47,
said nothing in his daughter's behaviour indicated anything was wrong
when she told him he was leaving to attend a wedding.
"She
said 'Daddy, I'm in no hurry'," Hussen Abase told journalists at police
headquarters. "There was no sign to suspect her at all."
In fact, she had travelled to
Gatwick Airport to take a flight to Turkey, despite never showing signs
of an interest in extremism to her family.
"She
doesn't dare discuss something like this with us. She knows what the
answer would be," Abase Hussen, holding a Chelsea FC teddy bear that his
football fan daughter had given her mother.
"The
message we have for Amira is to get back home. We miss you. We cannot
stop crying. Please think twice. Don't go to Syria," he said.
Abase Hussen, father of 15-year-old British girl Amira Abase who left her east London home on Februa …
Some have questioned whether more could have been done to stop them leaving.
Someone
using a Twitter account in Shamima Begum's name last Sunday seems to
have contacted Aqsa Mahmood, a woman from Glasgow, Scotland who
reportedly travelled to Syria last year to marry an IS group fighter.
Mahmood's
family, who strongly condemn her actions, have questioned why
authorities did not act on the message as her social media accounts are
monitored.
"She is now
engaging with other young people and trying to recruit them," Aamer
Anwar, a lawyer for the Mahmood family, told the BBC on Sunday.
"(The family are) saying 'what exactly are the security services doing in this country?'"
- Jihadi bride -
After
the girls' friend disappeared last year and was thought to have
travelled to Syria, Renu Begun, 27, asked her sister Shamima: "You
wouldn't do anything stupid like that, would you?"
The eldest sister of missing British girl Shamima Begum, holds a picture of her sister while being i …
Shamima had replied that she would not as she had the support of her family, Renu recalled.
"She's a clever girl but she's only young and young minds can easily be swayed," Renu said.
"My
little sister is an A-star student. To convince such young girls at
that age, who are vulnerable, it's just wrong. It's a really evil thing
to do," Begum added.
Counter-terrorism experts estimate that
around 50 women have travelled from the UK to Syria to join the IS
group, while tales of "jihadi brides" have become a staple of Britain's
tabloid press.
Some 550 women from across Europe have gone to Iraq
and Syria, where they often marry fighters and help to recruit others,
according to a study from the Institute of Strategic Dialogue think-tank
last month.
In an attempt to stop the flow of IS supporters to
Syria, the passports of Britons suspected of travelling to Syria or Iraq
can be seized before travel under a new law that came into effect this
month.
However, in this case the girls involved were not suspected in advance.
Prime
Minister David Cameron, who plans to introduce additional measures
including enhanced screening at airports, said that schools and
universities had to help identify those at risk.
"The fight against Islamist extremist terror is not just one that we can wage by the police and border control," Cameron said.
Turkish
Airlines, with whom the girls flew to Istanbul, said its responsibility
was checking passengers' visas and pre-flight security issues were the
"responsibility of official airport authorities."
Britain's
first female Muslim cabinet minister, Sayeeda Warsi, who resigned last
year over the government's Gaza policy, warned of the role of the
Internet in radicalising young Muslims.
There is no "single journey to somebody becoming a terrorist," she told Sky News.
That
was echoed by Ross Frenett of the Institute of Strategic Dialogue, who
stressed more effort should be made to counter online propaganda.
"An awful lot of extremism... is people looking for a sense of belonging," Frenett said.
"That's
not unique to people who are maladjusted. An awful lot of extremism of
all types actually comes from people with well-off backgrounds who tend
to be very well-adjusted".
Perverted ISIS militants are trying to score Viagra to fuel their lust for “brutal and abnormal” sex, according to a shocking report from activists in the terror group’s main Syrian stronghold.
The supposedly ultra-conservative Muslim fundamentalists have been
forcing women in the city of Raqqa to marry them and engage in savage
sex acts that result in hospital treatment, the report says.
The jihadists also buy kinky lingerie — described in the report as
“strange underwear” — for their reluctant brides, according to the
“Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently” activist group.
“A large section of ISIS members suffer from sexual anomalies and
brutal instinctive desire for sex,” the group wrote on its website.
Several families have reportedly fled the city — and one girl committed suicide — to avoid the lusty ISIS terrorists’ clutches.
ISIS overran Raqqa in 2013 and turned the northern Syrian city into
its de facto capital, imposing harsh religious laws and publicly
beheading and crucifying opponents in the ironically named Paradise
Square.
In a related development, two British human rights groups on
Wednesday said ISIS kidnapped at least 3,000 women and girls last year
from the areas it controls in Iraq.
Some victims were forced to marry ISIS terrorists, while others were
sold into sexual slavery, according to a report by Minority Rights Group
International and the Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights.
The report said firsthand accounts from victims who spoke secretly by
phone in August revealed that ISIS fighters were raping women on a
daily basis, with some victims begging the activists to arrange
airstrikes on their locations and end their suffering.
One kidnapped girl who belongs to the minority Yazidi religious group
also said she was among 350 girls transported to Syria and offered for
sale “as if in a chicken market.” With Post Wires
ISIS Burns 8000 Rare Books and Manuscripts in Mosul
By Riyadh Mohammed
15 hours ago
ISIS Burns 8000 Rare Books and Manuscripts in Mosul
While
the world was watching the Academy Awards ceremony, the people of Mosul
were watching a different show. They were horrified to see ISIS members
burn the Mosul public library. Among the many thousands of books it
housed, more than 8,000 rare old books and manuscripts were burned.
“ISIS militants bombed the Mosul Public Library.
They used improvised explosive devices,” said Ghanim al-Ta'an, the
director of the library. Notables in Mosul tried to persuade ISIS
members to spare the library, but they failed.
The
former assistant director of the library Qusai All Faraj said that the
Mosul Public Library was established in 1921, the same year that saw the
birth of the modern Iraq. Among its lost collections
were manuscripts from the eighteenth century, Syriac books printed in
Iraq's first printing house in the nineteenth century, books from the
Ottoman era, Iraqi newspapers from the early twentieth century and some
old antiques like an astrolabe and sand glass used by ancient Arabs. The
library had hosted the personal libraries of more than 100 notable
families from Mosul over the last century.
During the US led
invasion of Iraq in 2003, the library was looted and destroyed by mobs.
However, the people living nearby managed to save most of its
collections and rich families bought back the stolen books and they were
returned to the library, All Faraj added. Related: 9 ISIS Weapons That Will Shock You
“900
years ago, the books of the Arab philosopher Averroes were collected
before his eyes...and burned. One of his students started crying while
witnessing the burning. Averroes told him... the ideas have wings...but I
cry today over our situation,” said Rayan al-Hadidi, an activist and a
blogger from Mosul. Al-Hadidi said that a state of anger and sorrow are dominating Mosul now. Even the library's website was suspended.
“What
a pity! We used to go to the library in the 1970s. It was one of the
greatest landmarks of Mosul. I still remember the special pieces of
paper where the books’ names were listed alphabetically,” said Akil Kata who left Mosul to exile years ago.
On
the same day the library was destroyed, ISIS abolished another old
church in Mosul: the church of Mary the Virgin. The Mosul University
Theater was burned as well, according to eyewitnesses. In al-Anbar
province, Western Iraq, the ISIS campaign of burning books has managed
to destroy 100,000 titles, according to local officials. Last December, ISIS burned Mosul University’s central library. Related: The Perverted, Powerful Logic Behind ISIS’s Burned Pilot
Iraq,
the cradle of civilization, the birthplace of agriculture and writing
and the home of the Sumerian, Akkadian, Assyrian, Babylonian and Arab
civilizations had never witnessed such an assault on its rich cultural
heritage since the Mongol era in the Middle Ages.
Last
week, a debate in Washington and Baghdad became heated over when, how
and who will liberate Mosul. A plan was announced to liberate the city
in April or May by more than 20,000 US trained Iraqi soldiers. Either
way, and supposing everything will go well and ISIS will be defeated
easily which is never the case in reality, that means the people of
Mosul will still have to wait for another two to three months.
Until then, Mosul will probably have not a single sign of its rich history left standing.
A Kurdish fighter poses next to a destroyed ISIS truck. (Ahmad al-Rubaye/AFP/Getty Images)
If you want to understand what's happening in the Middle East today, you need to appreciate one fundamental fact: ISIS is losing its war for the Middle East.
This may seem hard to believe: in Iraq and Syria, the group still
holds a stretch of territory larger than the United Kingdom, manned by a
steady stream of foreign fighters. Fighters pledging themselves to ISIS
recently executed 21 Christians in Libya.
It's certainly true that ISIS remains a terrible and urgent threat to
the Middle East. The group is not on the verge of defeat, nor is its
total destruction guaranteed. But, after months of ISIS expansion and
victories, the group is now being beaten back. It is losing territory in
the places that matter. Coalition airstrikes have hamstrung its ability
to wage offensive war, and it has no friends to turn to for help. Its
governance model is unsustainable and risks collapse in the long run.
Unless ISIS starts adapting, there's a very good chance its so-called caliphate is going to fall apart.
Believe it or not, Iraq is looking better than anyone could have hoped six months ago
One year ago, ISIS was soon to launch the offensive in Iraq that, in
June, would sweep across northern Iraq and conquer the country's
second-largest city, Mosul. Today, the Iraqi government is prepping a
counter-offensive aimed at seizing Mosul back, which the US believes
will launch in April.
In that year, the situation has changed dramatically. After ISIS's
seemingly unstoppable rampage from June to August of 2014, the Iraqi
government and its allies have turned the tide. Slowly, unevenly, but
surely, ISIS is being pushed back.
"There's really nowhere where [ISIS] has momentum," Kirk Sowell, the
principal at Uticensis Risk Services and an expert on Iraqi politics,
told me in late January.
"There are a significant string of [Iraqi] victories all along the
northern river valley, up through Diyala and Salahuddin [two central
Iraqi provinces]," Doug Ollivant, National Security Council Director for
Iraq from 2008-2009 and current managing partner at Mantid
International, explained. "The Islamic State ... will lose its battle to hold territory in Iraq"
In northern Iraq, Kurdish forces are threatening to cut off a highway
that serves as ISIS's main supply line between Iraq and Syria. They
took the town of Sinjar, which sits on the highway, in December; by late January, they had taken a longer stretch of the highway near a town called Kiske.
Ollivant describes much of the Kurdish progress in the north as a
"circling around Mosul." Though the Kurds won't attempt to retake the
city on their own, a joint Iraqi-Kurdish force is now poised to do so. Re-taking Mosul would be a major blow to ISIS.
To be clear, ISIS isn't on the retreat everywhere. "The news in
[western province] Anbar is more mixed," Ollivant says. "Things are
shifting, but not to anyone's particular advantage. The Iraqi government
gains ground here, and loses ground there." In February, an ISIS offensive in Anbar threatened al-Asad airbase, where US troops are training Iraqi soldiers.
Still, ISIS is falling back in most places where it's facing a
serious push. And Iraq watchers are starting to see ISIS's struggles as
harbingers of a larger collapse.
"The Islamic State ... will lose its battle to hold territory in Iraq," Ollivant writes in War on the Rocks. "The outcome in Iraq is now clear to most serious analysts."
Sowell agrees. "There is no Islamic 'State' in Iraq. They're
basically operating as an insurgency/mafia," he says. "They just don't
have the ability, the wherewithal in Iraq to set up Sharia courts,
patrol, and really govern a state."
ISIS is at a standstill in Syria
Kurdish fighters in Kobane. (Ahmet Sik/Getty Images)
Syria is a different story. ISIS has a firm hold on the Syrian city
Raqqa and its environs; it's stronger there than it is anywhere in Iraq.
No faction in Syria is in a position to challenge ISIS's core holdings,
at least in the near term.
Still, ISIS's months of progress in Syria have stalled. And that bodes poorly for the group's long-term prospects.
By the end of January, ISIS had been driven out of Kobane, a Kurdish
town in northern Syria that it had spent enormous amounts of manpower
and resources trying to seize. Kobane isn't hugely important in
strategic terms. But the fact that Kurdish forces pushed ISIS back
there, with support from heavy American airstrikes, does matter.
"We can take [Kobane], to a limited extent, as a signal that the
airstrikes are helping roll back or at least stop [ISIS] progress in
Syria," says Sasha Gordon, an associate at the private research and
consulting firm Caerus Associates, who tracks developments on the ground
at Syria closely.
"A lot of [elite ISIS forces] might have been lost at Kobane," adds Yasir Abbas, another Caerus associate on the Syria desk.
And ISIS has failed to make major gains
outside of Kobane. "If you start with the beginning of US airstrikes in
late September," Gordon says, "you'll find that ISIS hasn't taken any
territory to speak of, and in fact has been rolled back in areas."
Control of territory in Syria, as of February 15, 2015. (Thomas van Linge)
Though there have been some reports of ISIS advances in western
Syria, "the territories they have gained are meaningless [or] they
didn't get to keep them," Abbas explains.
"All of their major offensives since the airstrikes began — Kobane,
[Deir ez-Zor] Air Base, Sha'ir Gas Field — have either been stalemates
or ended in outright defeat once they squared off against Assad's
troops," Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for
the Defense of Democracies, told me in late January.
Part of the reason ISIS hasn't been pushed back further is that no
other faction in Syria — Bashar al-Assad's regime, al-Qaeda affiliate
Jabhat al-Nusra, or the major rebel groups — have concentrated their
efforts on the Islamic State.
"Everyone in Syria sees [ISIS] as a secondary priority," Gordon says,
"because it's so universally unpopular that destroying it is very easy
to sell and easier to do than for the regime to defeat the opposition or
vice versa."
This is good and bad news for ISIS. Syria's other major groups are
all focused on one another. But, at some point, that's going to change,
and when it does ISIS's situation will be much more difficult.
"Do I think [ISIS] is going to be around forever? I don't think so,"
Gordon concludes. "But I think it can limp along so long as there's no
army to take care of it."
Why ISIS is being pushed back: they're outgunned, outnumbered, and friendless
A US airstrike near Kobane. (Kutluhan Cucel/Getty Images)
There are three simple reasons why ISIS is so weak in its supposed strongholds. (1) Coalition airstrikes. No one expects airstrikes
to collapse ISIS on their own. But they've been extraordinarily
effective at blunting ISIS's ability to launch offensives in Iraq and
Syria. Large masses of ISIS troops, required for such offensives, are
really easy to target from the air.
"Their freedom of movement, even within their own territory [in
Syria], has been significantly affected" by the strikes, Abbas says.
"Before, they could send a group of elite fighters to al-Hasakah [in]
the east, fight there for a couple of days, take territory then, and
retreat and go and fight in Deir ez-Zor."
ISIS "relied heavily" on fast movement of elite forces for military
success in both Iraq and Syria, according to Abbas. That tactic "has
been taken away from them."
Moreover, US and allied air strikes have been effective at aiding
ground operations against ISIS. This was most most obviously true in
Kobane, where a barrage of US airstrikes was critical to the Kurdish
defense's success. The strikes have also help enabled the Iraqi and
Kurdish advances in Iraq. (2) ISIS has lost the element of surprise. In
conventional terms, ISIS is pretty badly outnumbered. The CIA estimates
that ISIS has between 20,000 and 31,500 fighters; some private sector
sources suggest that figure may be closer to 100,000. There are about 48,000 official Iraqi government soldiers, but they're buttressed by 100,000 to 120,000 Shia militiamen fighting on the government's side. The BBC reports that there are 190,000 Kurdish peshmerga in Iraq's north. And that's to say nothing of ISIS's enemies in Syria.
Now, ISIS has always been outnumbered, but had used quick surprise
strikes to overwhelm its enemies. One reason ISIS managed to sweep
northern Iraq last June, according to Ollivant, is that Iraqi forces
were "misdeployed:" positioned in small units designed to deal with an
insurgency, but vulnerable to ISIS's fast, massed vehicular assaults.
Peshmerga on their way to the Mosul Dam in August, celebrating
progress against ISIS. (Ahmad al-Rubaye/AFP/Getty Images)
Now, American airstrikes are hampering ISIS's ability to conduct fast
advances, and ISIS's enemies have redeployed. That'll allow anti-ISIS
forces to leverage their superior numbers.
ISIS might be able to deal with its numbers problem if it had allies. But it doesn't, and that's the third major problem: (3) ISIS is congenitally incapable of making allies. The
group's ideology demands total and absolute adherence to its narrow and
extremist interpretation of Islamic law. In their view, nobody —
including al-Qaeda — is sufficiently pure. This causes ISIS fighters to
lash out at people and groups who would otherwise be allies, making any
alliances that ISIS forms temporary at best.
This is most pronounced in Syria: unlike Jabhat al-Nusra, the
al-Qaeda franchise, ISIS has had a tough time cooperating with other
rebel factions against the Assad regime, and indeed has clashed with
every major faction in Syria at one point or another. In a civil war
defined by the fact that no one group can overpower another, ISIS's
isolation puts it at serious risk.
This is part of why ISIS "is in a much worse situation" than it was
several months ago, says Joshua Landis, Director of the University of
Oklahoma's Center for Middle East Studies.
"Had they just taken this large Sunni tribal region from the edge of
Baghdad all the way to Aleppo, they might have been able to keep it,"
Landis says. "If ISIS had kept its head down, and not had such an
expansive revolutionary ideology to reconquer the entire Middle East and
to take on all of the crusader states, it could have been left alone by
the international community."
ISIS's self-destructive ideology is its greatest weakness
ISIS's so-called "caliph" Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
(Al-Furqan Media/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
ISIS has staked its entire political project on one theory: they are
the true revival of the early Islamic caliphate, destined not only to
maintain and expand their theocratic state but to bring on the
apocalypse. Once you understand that, ISIS's blunders look less like
miscalculations and more like inevitable results of its animating
ideology.
"When they declared the caliphate, their legitimacy came to
rest on the continuing viability of their state," Gartenstein-Ross told
me in October.
More rational insurgent groups, facing a conventionally stronger foe,
have a well-established playbook. Stay away from open engagements, hide
among a population that's willing to shelter you, and use hit-and-run
attacks to bleed the enemy to death.
The Taliban, for example, responded to the 2001 US-led invasion by
giving up its state and becoming a highly durable insurgency, one that
is now resurgent in Afghanistan. But ISIS so far insists on maintaining
its state — even if that means fighting battles it is likely to lose
against more powerful enemies. More than that, even, the group's
ideology demands that it continue expanding, exposing its
vulnerabilities even further.
"To be the caliph, one must meet conditions outlined in Sunni law," Graeme Wood explains in an excellent Atlantic
feature on ISIS's theology. One condition is that "the caliph have
territory in which he can enforce Islamic law." Once the caliphate is
established, "the waging of war to expand the caliphate is an essential
duty of the caliph." Everything we know about ISIS suggests its members
earnestly believe this — including leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
When ISIS does something obviously shortsighted, such as deciding to
invade Iraqi Kurdistan and start a losing war with the previously
uninvolved Kurds, that's their ideology. They believe they need to
expand territory, and that God will ensure that they do in the end.
So ISIS troops will remain out in the open, making them vulnerable to
American and coalition bombs. They'll engage in conventional fights
with superior enemies, because they need to keep them out of ISIS
territory. And they'll continue attacking neutral parties or potential
partners, because they hold territory that ISIS wants.
The deeper problems that gave rise to ISIS will be around for some time
Unidentified Iraqi militants in January 2014.
(STR/AFP/Getty Images)
All of these factors have put ISIS on the path to major losses, but
that doesn't make the group's complete destruction inevitable, much less
quick or painless. And there's no reason to believe that ISIS's defeat
would solve the underlying problems that led to its rise, and will
continue to plague Iraq and Syria for some time.
Even if Iraqi troops manage to topple ISIS in their country — which
isn't guaranteed, and would take months or years of difficult fighting —
the group's individual fighters could reform as yet another Sunni
insurgency. ISIS, after all, is in many ways just one chapter in the
Iraqi sectarian war that began in 2003, and it might not be the last
one.
Syria is in even worse shape. Though ISIS is stalled there, it will
likely have a safe haven for as long the Syrian civil war remains
divided between several competing factions. Decisively addressing the
factors that allowed ISIS's rise in Syria means ending both the civil
war and the sectarianism that Bashar al-Assad cultivated since it began;
those problems could be with us for generations.
In the short term, ISIS's setbacks in Syria have had the perverse
effect of primarily benefitting not ordinary Syrians but rather
al-Qaeda, ISIS's main competitor there for the mantle of Sunni
extremism. As ISIS has retreated, the al-Qaeda franchise Jabhat al-Nusra
has advanced, standing to gain both territory and recruits.
That even the rollback of ISIS could come with such terrible
consequences is a testament to just how bad things are in Iraq and,
especially, Syria. Even still, ISIS is perhaps the world's most vicious
and inhumane militant group. That it is slowly losing its grip on its
territory — and, with it, its ability to murder and torment the people
of the Middle East — is worth appreciating.
With sledgehammer, Islamic State smashes Iraqi history
8 hours ago
By Isabel Coles and Saif Hameed
ARBIL/BAGHDAD (Reuters) -
Ultra-radical Islamist militants in northern Iraq have destroyed a
priceless collection of statues and sculptures from the ancient Assyrian
era, inflicting what an archaeologist described as incalculable damage
to a piece of shared human history.
A video published by Islamic
State on Thursday showed men attacking the artifacts, some of them
identified as antiquities from the 7th century BC, with sledgehammers
and drills, saying they were symbols of idolatry.
"The Prophet ordered us to get
rid of statues and relics, and his companions did the same when they
conquered countries after him," an unidentified man said in the video.
The militants shoved stone
statues off their plinths, shattering them on the floor, and one man
applied an electric drill to a large winged bull. The video showed a
large exhibition room strewn with dismembered statues, and Islamic songs
played in the background.
Lamia al-Gailani, an Iraqi
archaeologist and associate fellow at the London-based Institute of
Archaeology, said the militants had wreaked untold damage. "It’s not
only Iraq’s heritage: it’s the whole world’s," she said.
"They are priceless, unique.
It's unbelievable. I don’t want to be Iraqi any more," she said,
comparing the episode to the dynamiting of the Bamiyan Buddhas by the
Afghan Taliban in 2001.
As well as Assyrian statues of
winged bulls from the Mesopotamian cities of Nineveh and Nimrud, Gailani
said the Islamic State hardliners appeared to have destroyed statues
from Hatra, a Hellenistic-Parthian city in northern Iraq dating back
around 2,000 years.
Eleanor Robson, professor of
Ancient Near Eastern History at University College London, also said on
Twitter that statues from Hatra and Nineveh had been wrecked, though she
added that some objects shown in the video were modern replicas.
The director of UNESCO's Iraq
office, Axel Plathe, would not comment on the content of the video,
saying it has yet to be verified. But he described the damage to Iraq's
heritage since Islamic State overran Mosul last year as an attempt "to
destroy the identity of an entire people".
Plathe said UNESCO was working
with Iraqi authorities and governments of neighboring countries to crack
down on the smuggling of artifacts from areas under Islamic State
control, and had alerted auction houses to be on the lookout for stolen
items.
Islamic State espouses a
fiercely purist school of Sunni Islam, deeming many other Muslims to be
heretics. Its fighters have destroyed Shi'ite and Sufi religious sites
and attacked churches and other shrines in the parts of Syria and Iraq
under their control.
"Muslims, these relics you see
behind me are idols that were worshipped other than God in the past
centuries," the unidentified man in the Islamic State video said.
"What is known as Assyrians,
Akkadians and others used to worship gods of rain, farming and war other
than God and pay all sorts of tributes to them."
Last week, Islamic State released another video showing a pile of books in flames.
An employee of the Mosul museum
said he feared these books were manuscripts from the library of
endowments, although the library itself was still in tact last week.
(Writing by Dominic Evans; Editing by Mark Heinrich)
FBI: 'We Are Losing the Battle' to Stop ISIS Radicalization Online
By MIKE LEVINE
3 hours ago
FBI: 'We Are Losing the Battle' to Stop ISIS Radicalization Online (ABC News)
The FBI’s top counterterrorism official offered a blunt assessment today of U.S. efforts to stop ISIS from spreading its merciless message online: “We are losing the battle.”
The terrorist group wreaking havoc in Syria and Iraq
as it blasts videos of beheadings to the world “has proven dangerously
competent like no other group before it at employing [online] tools for
its nefarious strategy,” the head of the FBI’s counterterrorism
division, Assistant Director Michael Steinbach, told lawmakers today.
He
said the FBI and other U.S. agencies have implemented “an effective
counter narrative” online, but “the sheer volume” of ISIS messaging
online, particularly through social media, “eclipses our effort.” Few Arrests of Americans Who Fought In Syria or IraqIdentity of 'Jihadi John' RevealedIn
fact, while U.S. authorities have been warning that thousands of
Westerners recruited to fight with ISIS overseas could pose a threat to
the U.S. homeland, that threat “is a small problem” compared with the
group’s ability to reach into the United States and radicalize someone
without anyone else knowing.
Through
its online campaign, ISIS is able to target radicalized Americans who
are “frustrated” by an inability to leave the United States or just
can’t afford it, according to Steinbach.
“So
what they’re doing is … saying, 'Hey, if you can’t come to Syria, do
something in the U.S. or Western countries,’" Steinbach added.
Steinbach
cited Wednesday's arrest of three New Yorkers as “a good example” of
the threat the FBI is seeing “more and more.” Two of those arrested
allegedly discussed ways they could wage jihad inside the U.S. homeland,
from assassinating President Obama to bombing Coney Island.
Nineteen-year-old Akhror Saidakhmetov, a Kazakhstan
citizen living in Brooklyn, N.Y., was arrested at John F. Kennedy
International Airport as he was allegedly trying to leave for Syria.
24-year-old Abdurasul Hasanovich Juraboev, an Uzbekistan citizen also living in Brooklyn, was arrested at his apartment.
In
August, Juraboev allegedly posed a question on an Uzbek-language site
tied to ISIS: “I am in USA now. ... But is it possible to commit
ourselves as dedicated martyrs anyway while here?”
In
the same post, Juraboev suggested he could “shoot Obama and then get
shot ourselves … That will strike fear in the hearts of infidels,”
according to the FBI.
Over the following months, the FBI tracked
their communications and sent a confidential informant to engage with
them, recording many of their alleged conversations about traveling to
Syria and launching attacks in the U.S. homeland.
In one November
2014 discussion, Saidakhmetov allegedly suggested he join the U.S.
military so he could pass military information to ISIS – and if his plan
ever fell apart, he could open fire on American soldiers, according
charging documents.
A third Brooklyn man, 30-year-old Abror
Habivov, was arrested in Florida, accused of funding some of the pair’s
travel and operating “a domestic support network” for travel to Syria.
All
three have been charged with conspiring to provide material support to a
terrorist group and each faces 15 years in prison if convicted.
Today,
Steinbach said the type of danger they posed “is a blending of
homegrown violent extremism with the foreign fighter ideology,” calling
it “today's latest adaption of the threat."
“The West is facing
the most complex and severe terrorist threat we have seen certainly
since 9/11,” said John Cohen, the former counterterrorism adviser at the
Department of Homeland Security who’s now an ABC News consultant. “It may even be more [severe] than the ones we faced on 9/11.”
Part of the concern, Cohen said, is that traditional counterterrorism efforts -- which rely heavily on the likes of the CIA, National Security Agency
and Defense Department -- “were never intended to deal with an
individual becoming radicalized while sitting in the basement of his
home in Minneapolis.”
In fact, over the past year, the FBI has
arrested several young, Somali men from Minneapolis for allegedly trying
to join ISIS in Syria. Many others from the Twin Cities actually made
it there, though not all of them are still alive.
Countering that
type of radicalization, Cohen said, requires local police working
hand-in-hand with local faith organizations, mental health
professionals, and others in community there on the frontline.
At
the hearing today, a top law enforcement official from Minneapolis
agreed, saying it all comes down to trust and an enduring, “respectful
partnership” between everyone involved in a community.
But Hennepin County sheriff Richard Stanek said it’s important not to mix anti-radicalization efforts with community engagement.
“You
cannot, shall not mix the two,” Stanek insisted. “If members of the
diaspora community think that your community engagement techniques are
nothing more than a front for intelligence gathering to counter violent
extremism, that is a problem.”
Stanek
said his department’s efforts with communities in the Twin Cities have
paid dividends in recent years. He noted Somali leaders in Minneapolis
“renounced” a video posted over the weekend by the Somalia-based
terrorist group al-Shabab, calling for attacks at malls in the West.
“That
would not have happened several years ago” because the Somali community
did not “know how to respond” and did not feel empowered to do so,
according to Stanek.
At
today’s hearing and after yesterday’s arrests, law enforcement officials
tried to emphasize that radicalized individuals do not represent Islam
or any other religion.
“[They]
violated the true tenants of their faith in pursuit of their radical,
violent agenda,” said the head of the FBI’s field office in New York,
Diego Rodriguez, about the three men arrested yesterday for allegedly
trying to aid ISIS.
In a
statement, he urged community members to flag “those who could be
[similarly] radicalized” because “we cannot do this alone."
Outrage: Extremists take ancient statues, damage Iraqi site
By VIVIAN SALAMA and CARA ANNA
5 hours ago
BAGHDAD (AP) — Islamic State extremists trucked away statues
as they damaged the irreplaceable remains of an ancient Assyrian
capital, a local resident and a top UN official told The Associated
Press Friday.
Nimrud, a nearly 3,000-year-old city in present-day
Iraq, included monumental statues of winged bulls, bearded horsemen and
other winged figures, all symbols of an ancient Mesopotamian empire in
the cradle of Western civilization.
The discovery that extremists
removed some statues before using heavy equipment to destroy much of the
site Thursday was cold comfort as outrage spread over the extremists'
latest effort to erase history.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon considers the destruction a war crime, his spokesman said in a statement.
Iraq's
most revered Shiite cleric, the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, said in
his Friday sermon that the extremists are savaging Iraq, "not only in
the present but also to its history and ancient civilizations."
"I'm
shocked and speechless," said Zeid Abdullah, who lives in nearby Mosul
and studied at the city's Fine Arts Institute until the extremists shut
that down. "Only people with a criminal and barbaric mind can act this
way and destroy an art masterpiece that is thousands of years old."
FILE - In this March 1, 2015. file photo, Aaman at Iraq's National Museum in Baghdad walks past …
A farmer from a nearby village told the AP Friday that
militants began carrying tablets and artifacts away from the site two
days before the attack, which began Thursday afternoon. The militants
told the villagers that the artifacts are idols forbidden by Islam and
must be destroyed, the farmer said, speaking anonymously for fear of
reprisals.
But the group also is known to have sold off looted antiquities as a source of revenue.
Some
statues were "put on big trucks, and we don't know where they are,
possibly for illicit trafficking," UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova
said.
UN officials have seen images of destroyed Assyrian symbols
including statues with the head of a man, the torso of a lion and wings
of an eagle. These symbols were referred to in the Bible and other
sacred texts, she said.
"All of this is an appalling and tragic act of human destruction," she said.
FILE - This Monday, Sept. 15, 2014 file photo shows a detail of a statue from the Assyrian period di …
UN officials were studying satellite imagery of the destruction, since it remains too dangerous to approach the site, she said.
These
violent Sunni extremists have been campaigning to purge ancient relics
they say promote idolatry that violates their interpretation of Islamic
law. A video they released last week shows them smashing artifacts in
the Mosul museum and in January, the group burned hundreds of books from
the Mosul library and Mosul University, including many rare
manuscripts. Many fear Hatra, another nearby ancient site could be next.
Iraqi authorities were still trying to assess Friday exactly how badly the ancient site was damaged Thursday.
"The
destruction of Nimrud is a big loss to Iraq's history," Qais Mohammed
Rasheed, the deputy tourism and antiquities minister, told The
Associated Press on Friday. "The loss is irreplaceable."
UNESCO
previously warned that the group was selling ancient artifacts on the
black market for profit. Rasheed said authorities have not ruled out the
possibility that the militants could try to sell these, too.
This undated handout photo provided by the Library of Congress taken during the autumn of 1932 shows …
Bokova already wrote the International Criminal Court about a
possible war crimes prosecution, and plans to alert INTERPOL, major
museums, auction houses and Middle East governments to recover any
trafficked artifacts.
"Somebody is going to buy these," said Iraq's U.N. Ambassador, Mohamed Alhakim.
Nimrud,
also known as Kalhu, was the 9th century B.C., capital of Assyria, an
ancient kingdom that swept over much of present-day Iraq and the Levant.
The site spans 3.3 square kilometers on the Tigris River, and boasted
the remains of temples, palaces and a ziggurat pyramid as well as the
huge statues.
Many artifacts from Nimrud were moved to museums in Mosul, Baghdad, London and Paris.
In
the 1980s, archaeologists discovered a trove of hundreds of gold items
from Nimrud's royal tombs — considered one of the 20th century's most
significant archaeological finds. The "treasures of Nimrud" were kept in
a basement safe of the Central Bank in Baghdad for years until they
were "re-discovered" in 2003, and now most of it is in the Baghdad
Museum.
FILE - In this Nov. 24, 2009 file photo, a journalist looks at an Assyrian statue, center, in front …
Nimrud was already on the World Monument Fund's list of most
endangered sites due to extreme decay and deterioration before it was
captured in June as extremists took over nearby Mosul, Iraq's
second-largest city.
Last year, the militants destroyed the mosque
believed to be the burial place of the Prophet Younis, or Jonah, as
well as the Mosque of the Prophet Jirjis — both revered ancient shrines
in Mosul. They also threatened to destroy Mosul's 850-year old Crooked
Minaret, but residents surrounded the structure, preventing the
militants from approaching.
In July, they removed the crosses from
Mosul's 1,800-year old Mar Behnam monastery and then stormed it,
forcing the monks and priest to flee or face death.
A U.S.-led
coalition has been striking the Islamic State group since August and is
preparing a large-scale operation to retake the city of Mosul. But U.S.
and Iraqi officials have been cautious about setting a timeline for
preparing Iraq's embattled military for the campaign.
Meanwhile
the battle to recover Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit progressed
Friday with Iraqi government forces taking back the town of Dawr, 10
miles (15 kilometers) south of the city. Raed al-Jabouri, the provincial
governor, said security forces should reach Tikrit by Sunday.
The
Tikrit campaign launched Monday has been stalled because extremists
lined strategic roads into the city with explosives and land mines,
military officials said.
Dawr
is the hometown of Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, Saddam's former deputy, who
has been suspected of collaborating with the Islamic State militant
group.
___
Anna
reported from the United Nations. Sameer N. Yacoub and Ahmed Sami in
Baghdad, Verena Dobnik in New York, Amanda Myers in Washington, Jamey
Keaten in Paris and Danica Kirka in London contributed to this report.
March 13, 2015: CIA Director John Brennan addresses a
meeting at the Council on Foreign Relations, in New York.
CIA Director John Brennan said Friday that the Islamic State had
“snowballed” beyond Iraq and Syria, estimating that at least 20,000
fighters from more than 90 countries have gone to join the militant
group, several thousand of them from Western nations, including the
United States.
Brennan’s statement marks a change from the narrative the Obama
administration has been pushing on the success of the fight against
ISIS.
“Left unchecked, the group would pose a serious danger not only to
Syria and Iraq, but to the wider region and beyond, including the threat
of attacks in the homelands of the United States and our partners,”
Brennan told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.
He added that ISIS takes advantage of new technology to “coordinate
operations, attract new recruits, disseminate propaganda and inspire
sympathizers across the globe to act in their name.”
The CIA director said that the terror group has ballooned in size to
about 20,000 members, and points to the recent pledge of allegiance to
ISIS by Nigeria-based Boko Haram.
“This will be a long-term struggle,” he said. “If there is one thing
we have learned over the years, it is that success against terrorism
requires patience and determination.”
Brennan’s comments about ISIS’ staying power differs from claims made
by top Obama administration officials as recently as last month
assessing the progress against the terror organization.
Secretary of State John Kerry and retired General John Allen have
both made public statements about ISIS in the past. In February, Allen
said that half of the group’s leaders in Iraq had been killed. Kerry
took it a step further and extended the claim to Syria as well.
Experts, though, say the claims of success are overinflated.
“We currently don’t have a percentage attached to that statistic,”
Army Captain John J. Moore, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, told Bloomberg View.
Others, like Princeton University scholar of Near Eastern Studies
Cole Bunzel, told Bloomberg claims of killing half of ISIS leadership is
difficult to make because the terror organization’s “leadership” is
subjective.
He added that he was “very skeptical” that 50 percent of the group’s
leaders were killed because ISIS has publicly announced when senior
members had been killed in the past but has not made such an
announcement about someone in its core leadership being killed in the
past five years.
Michael Smith, a principal at the counterterrorism consulting group
Kronos Advisory LLC, largely echoed Bunzel’s comments and told Bloomberg
“Jihadi groups typically eulogize slain leader,” and so far, there
hasn’t been any evidence that high-ranking members had been killed.