Tag Archives: Islamic State

US Forces reorganize for IS fight, Iranian leaders denounce Nuke Deal, and Al Shabaab overruns army base…

US Forces reorganize in face of Islamic State resiliency

In a rare public show of cooperation, the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) have coordinated their efforts and began drone strike operations against ‘high level’ IS targets in Syria. First, the CIA identifies the targets, and then the JSOC carries out the strikes, with the NSA tasked with disrupting their communications and social media presence. Reflecting the policy change, one of the first killed was Junaid Hussein, who was active on Twitter and other online platforms recruiting for ‘lone wolf’ attacks in the West. While publicaly Syria is a ‘denied area’ for the CIA, meaning it has no acknowledged presence in country, the new directive gives it the authority to identify IS leaders and other jihadists there. While the military continues its operations to ‘degrade and destroy’ IS without much success, this development reflects a change in the way the counter-terrorism strategy is executed.

In other countries where strikes are conducted against Islamic terrorists (Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan for example) the CIA operates autonomously. However, the new directive of cooperation with the JSOC in Syria demonstrates that the goal is to bring all the resources to bear against a resilient organization whose self-declared ‘Caliphate’ is now entering into its second year of existence.

Top Iranian voices denounce nuclear deal and US

In a show of force, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Maj. Gen. Muhammad Ali Jafari, said that the despite the nuclear deal, the United States remains Iran’s number one enemy and that he would seek to expand Iranian missile reach capability. As the country’s top military official and head of the IRGC’s vast business interests both in and out of Iran, his words carry a lot of weight. Other voices of the clerical regime echoed Jafari’s. President Hassan Rouhani said that any violation by Iran of the UN ban on its ballistic missile program would not impact the nuclear deal with the US and other powers. Similarly, Muhammad Yazdi, president of the Assembly of Experts, inaugurated its annual meeting by denouncing the nuclear accord, warning that should not, and would not lead to any wider relationship with the US. Taken together, these remarks paint a clear picture of how the nuclear accord will play out in Tehran: increasing offensive military capabilities while expressing disregard for international agreements.

Conflicting reports on al-Shabab attack in Somalia

Al-Qaeda’s Somali affiliate, al-Shabab reportedly overran an African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) base in the Janale district located in the south of the country. Employing a preliminary suicide bombing followed by a conventional arms assault, the terrorists claim to have taken over the base with a reported 50 Ugandan soldiers killed.

On the other hand, AMISOM spokesman Lt. Colonel Paul Njuguna confirms that al-Shabab did attack the base, but denies that they gained control of it. Although civilian witnesses report that Al-Shabab fighters looted weapons stores inside the base, the AMISOM spokesman maintains that following a tactical withdrawal, the Ugandan troops fought back and were able to recover control. The pattern of attacks by al-Shabab continues unabated, despite the presence of approximately 20,000 troops from nations bordering Somalia and others as part of the UN Security Council mandate. In keeping with their goal of establishing an Islamic government, the terrorist group will undoubtedly continue to step up their attacks against the AMISOM troops and other targets.

Kuwait arrests Hizballah suspects

Kuwait internal security forces arrested 23 suspects, charging them with spying for Hizballah and Iran and plotting to launch attacks. Seizing weapons, ammunition, and explosives, the public prosecutor’s office ordered the suspects to be detained indefinitely, as the investigation into their activities continues. As a major target of the regime in Tehran, Kuwaiti authorities are in a state of alert following the bombing of a Shia mosque in Kuwait City on June 26th. The detention of these suspects strongly suggests that Iran and its proxy Hizballah are intent on spreading their tactics along the Gulf countries, seeking to undermine the pro-American regimes in the region. Alertness and sound counter-intelligence work from the Kuwaiti security forces will remain vital if they are to inhibit Tehran’s designs and disrupt the next potential terror plot.

Democracy under fire in Burundi

Political violence flared up in the Burundian capital, Bujumbura, following the disputed election of President Pierre Nkurunziza to a third term. Following the example of US counter-terrorism partners in Rwanda and Uganda, who have amended their constitutions so as to allow them to run for election repeatedly, Nkurunziza is the latest leader to exploit the participation in the African Union mission in Somalia (AMISOM) in order to fend off criticism of violating democratic norms. From his hometown Ngozi, located in the north of the country, Nkurunziza is warning domestic and exiled opposition to come to terms with his continued rule or face the consequences. Although no group has claimed responsibility for the latest attacks in the capital, it is clear that the opposition will grow bolder, as Nkurunziza’s move violates the terms of the fragile peace which ended Burundi’s civil war ten years ago. While Burundi’s National Assembly Chairman Pascal Nyabenda lays the blame at unidentified external actors, it is more than likely that the internal opposition is leading the attacks. The democratic experiment in Burundi is showing signs of unraveling as the volatile mix of power seeking and civil war wounds manifest once again.

Other Stories We’re Watching:

Russia increases military involvement in Syria

First reported attack in Syrian Alawite stronghold in Latakia

New head of North American Islamic Trust tied to Muslim Brotherhood

Houthis show off destruction of Saudi and Emirati tanks with Iranian weaponry

Congolese warlord trial begins in The Hague

Nigeria planning drone surveillance to halt oil piracy

Chinese PLA-N conducts joint Naval Exercise with Russia in Bering Sea

Islamic State Deploys Chemical Weapons, Truck Bombs, as Fighting Continues

The Islamic State reportedly used a mustard agent against Kurdish force in Erbil, Iraq August 14, 2015. In 2013, the Syrian government admitted to having large amounts of chemical weapons, and claimed it would renounce its arsenal following the U.S. ultimatum. Syrian government forces have reportedly used chemical weapons against the rebel forces in the continuing civil war.

The mustard agent is a potential upgrade in the Islamic State’s battlefield capabilities that are already giving the U.S. trained forces problems. Reports indicate that around 60 Peshmerga fighters that help protect the Kurdish areas in northern Iraq, suffered injuries to their throats consistent with a chemical weapons attack.

This attack raises questions about the ability of the U.S. allies on the ground to fight the Islamic State. Kurdish, Iraqi, and U.S.-supported Syria rebels say they are not receiving enough U.S. aid to combat the Islamic State’s conventional weapons capabilities.
If the Islamic State gains access to more unconventional weapon that only makes matters worse. The U.S. allied forces would need specialized equipment and training to help protect them against unconventional weapon attacks. In the Syrian case this is a potential problem, since most Syrian rebels fight alongside the Al-Qaeda-linked al Nusra Front.

In addition, the Islamic State has claimed responsibility on August, 13, 2015 for a truck bomb explosion killing sixty people, at the Jamila market, in Shiite neighborhood in Baghdad, the deadliest attack in Baghdad since 2103.

Despite the U.S. continued bombing campaign and the presence of 3,000 American advisor troops for training Iraqi forces. Iraq struggles to regain territory seized by the Islamic State. General Ray Odierno, the U.S. Army chief of staff, described the battle against the Islamic State as a “kind of stalemate” in a Pentagon news conference.

Thus far, Iranian-supported Shiite militia forces and Kurdish Peshmerga forces have been the main contributors to fighting the Islamic State. The Islamic State is continuing to spread in the region despite U.S. bombing raids, which shows the importance of a reliable force on the ground to oppose Islamic State.

Unfortunately the U.S. has remained opposed to directly arming the Kurds, described as the most effective fighting force against IS, while continuing to support Iraqi troops and Syrian rebels, which have proven unreliable or unsuccessful time and time again.

Until the U.S. is prepared to adopt a full spectrum approach to defeating the Islamic State, the situation will continue to worsen.

Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan Swears Allegiance To Islamic State

On August 6th, the Pakistan-based jihadist organization Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, previously covered here, released a video of its leader Usmon Ghazi and several associates swearing loyalty to Islamic State and becoming part of the Khorasan state. The announcement comes in the wake of the Taliban admitting that the Taliban leader Mullah Omar was killed two years earlier. In September 2014, Ghazi had officially stated that the IMU was siding with the Islamic State, yet withheld direct allegiance at that time.

Earlier this year, an Uzbek leader of a cell claiming to be part of the IMU, Sadullah Urgenji, stated that his group was changing their affiliation from the Afghan Taliban to Islamic State due to the failure of Mullah Omar to make an appearance after thirteen years.

The change of allegiance to Islamic State is, in light of Mullah Omar’s death, unsurprising, though notable for a group that has traditionally been strong allies of both Al-Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban. Islamic State has repeatedly attempted to turn groups formerly affiliated with Al-Qaeda to their own side, particularly in Central Asia. which positions them to take advantage of the announcement of Mullah Omar’s death. This is particularly the case since Islamic State had already used rumors of Omar’s death as a recruiting tactic. With recent events, it is very likely that the Taliban were keeping the news of Mullah Omar’s death secret in order to prevent groups such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan from leaving the Taliban fold.   Having now been caught covering up Omar’s death however, the Taliban is likely to see that effort backfire.

Understanding the Islamic State’s Treatment of Women

At a recent a Congressional hearing on the Islamic State’s violence against women and girls, Edward Watts, director and producer of Escaping ISIS, spoke about the accounts of women who have escaped from Islamic State territory. He spoke about IS’s extensive violence towards women, and in particular towards the Yazidis, explaining how many of them are captured, forced to marry Islamist fighters, and used, traded, or sold as sex slaves. It is well known that the Islamic State utilizes and promotes sex slavery, with Bloomberg News publishing a story about a recent “Price list” offered by Islamic State for captured girls based on age.

While it is horrifying to hear about such treatment there was no recognition during the hearing that Islamic State’s views towards women are derived from Shariah, Islamic law. Indeed one witness proposed utilizing Islamic scholarship to oppose IS ideology. The Bloomberg article cites James Madison University professor, Kerry Crawford, on violating “taboos” in an attempt to explain the behavior:

“If you and your group are doing something that is considered taboo, your doing it together forms a bond,” [Professor Kerry Crawford] said. “Sexual violence does really create fear within a population.”

The assumption that sexual violence is a taboo to Islamic State fighters is wrong.  Islamic State does not view itself as violating a taboo. Rather they say their position is based on solid Islamic jurisprudence saying sex slavery is permissible.

In ‘The Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law’ by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1368) and published in English translation by Nuh Ha Mim Keller in 1994 under the section “Rules of Warfare” states:

“o9.13 When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled”.

That ruling is derived from Quran Sura 4:25, where women acquired through war are referred to as those “that your right hand possesses.” Shariah law prohibits adultery or illicit intercourse (zina), but this does not apply to women captured during Jihad.

It’s worth pointing out that this understanding of sexual slavery isn’t limited to just Islamic State and its fighters. In 2011, a female Kuwaiti lawmaker also called for reinstating sexual slavery.

Islamic scholars and leaders who adhere to Shariah doctrine can point to specific verses and sections of the Quran that condone such behaviors, and so attempting to devise a counter-messaging campaign which relies solely on utilizing Islamic themes becomes problematic.

Likewise, researchers have proven befuddled by the role played by women in the Islamic State’s recruitment and indoctrination efforts. The media repeatedly covers stories of women traveling to Islamic State held territory in order to marry fighters.

The Quilliam think tank provides a translation of a “Manifesto on Muslim Women,” a document used as a propaganda piece to attract Arabic-speaking women to the Islamic State. The document discusses the ideal Muslim woman, how the western model for women has failed, and the role of a Muslim woman outside of the house and states,

“…woman was created to populate the Earth just as man was. But, as God wanted it to be, she was made from Adam for Adam. Beyond this, her creator ruled that there was no responsibility greater for her than that of being a wife to her husband”.

Islamic State cites Quranic and juridical sources for their assertion that Muslim women are not destined for roles outside of the house, except for in specific circumstances, or when they suggest that a woman’s role revolves around working towards being a better Muslim, being a good wife by taking care of her husband and providing for his needs, bearing children and raising them in strict accordance with Shariah law. Indeed, Islamic State insists that women, not be “illiterate or ignorant”, saying that they must “learn to read and write, about their religion and fiqh,” fiqh meaning Islamic jurisprudence and the understanding of Shariah.

The Islamic State aggressively emphasizes its ability to provide Muslim women with a fully Shariah compliant life. It is actively seeking to recruit those who are opposed to “westernization.” This includes the strict enforcement of Mahram (guardian) requirements, and the strictest enforcement of the “hijab” modesty requirements as given in Quran Sura 33:59:

Allah says to the Prophet Mohammad, “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known, so as not to be annoyed”.

The Islamic State then criticizes even other Islamic governments (like Saudi Arabia), for not adhering accurately to Shariah strictures regarding women.

This is quite a different picture than the average Western view. For those accustomed to hearing about “gender equality”, “equal pay for men and women”, and feminist ideals, the role of women in such a system can seem repellant and unacceptable.

But it does have its appeal with the intended audience of shariah adherent believers, and that appeal must be understood.

While efforts to attract young men to join jihad are fairly well understood, the effort by Islamic State to attract young women is a reflection of their effort to not just wage jihad, but to establish a functioning caliphate.

As Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi declared in his first official statement as Caliph:

“The State is a state for all Muslims. The land is for the Muslims, all the Muslims. O Muslims everywhere, whoever is capable of performing hijrah (emigration) to the Islamic State, then let him do so, because hijrah to the land of Islam is obligatory. …”

Emigration is considered “obligatory” in Islamic jurisprudence in cases where a Muslim cannot practice their religion in their native land. Thus Islamic State’s insistence to its female audience that the West, and even the Gulf States are not permitting the free practice of obligatory requirements (such as hijab, etc), creates an impetus to join IS and leave their home countries. This then provides the legal justification for Islamic State to push other boundaries by permitting young women to leave their parents and travel to the Islamic State and to marry without parental permission.

As Western countries continue to struggle to defeat Islamic State, and to disrupt the terror groups ability to recruit internationally, they must understand Islamic State’s treatment of women, whether as obedient wives or oppressed sexual slaves, is grounded in the group’s understanding of Shariah. Crafting responses based on the misattribution or misunderstanding of IS’s motives is a recipe for failure.

4 Indian Teachers Detained in Islamic State-Held Territory

Four Indian men were taken hostage late Wednesday night at a checkpoint in Libya while attempting to leave Libya and return to India via Tunisia. The checkpoint, about 50km outside of Sirte, was located in territory controlled by the Islamic State. The men had all previously taught at Sirte University in Libya. Last July, the Indian government issued an “advisory asking its citizens to leave Libya”.

Friday, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs confirmed that two of the men who were detained, Laxmikant and Vijay Kumar, have “been released” and “brought back safely to the University of Sirte”. There was hope that the other two still held captive would be released within a day or two of their capture. However, as of today, there are no new developments regarding the two men still detained, Balram Kishan and T Gopikrishna. Reports indicated that at least some of the militants were former students at the University, and this may also have played a role in the decision to release the men. Additionally the captured teachers were reportedly asked to provide their religious affiliation. It’s unclear if their religious identity also played any role to the decision to release the two.

There is no official confirmation yet as to which group was behind this detention, however, the two men who were released said they were held by an Islamic State-affiliated militia.

Libya was plunged into chaos following the NATO-backed overthrow of former dictator, Muammar Gaddafi by Libyan militias, which included Al Qaeda, in 2011. As previously mentioned in Free Fire, the Islamic State has taken great advantage of this situation, and has made advances despite the presence of forces from the internationally recognized Libyan government, now located in Tobruk after being ousted by the rebel Muslim Brotherhood-linked Fajr Libya (a.k.a. “Libyan Dawn”) militia, who are located in Tripoli, Libya’s capital.

Sirte, Gaddafi’s former hometown, in particular has been a target of IS action in Libya. IS seized Sirte on May 21 of this year, following over a day of fighting. Capturing Sirte was a significant win for Islamic State members because of the city’s location in central Libya and along a major highway that connects the east to the west.

Also, on May 28 of this year, Islamic State fighters raided the civilian airbase Al-Qaradabiya near Sirte. This event raised concern about IS’s growing presence in Libya, especially in regards to neighboring countries. Italy in particular has serious concerns about Libya’s condition, given its proximity to the war-torn country. Libya provides the Islamic State several strategic opportunities including opening a second front against Egypt and opening trafficking routes into West Africa where IS has affiliates in Mali and Nigeria. It also opens up the possibility of further expansion into Europe through Italy, utilizing the the European Commission’s refugee system.

It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, officially claims responsibility for these actions and if they provide insight into the motives behind the detention.

Mullah Mansour Named as New Taliban Emir

On July 29, the Afghan government announced that the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Omar, died two years ago. He has been declared dead a number of times over the years and has not appeared publicly since 2001; however, Taliban forces generally agreed that he was alive. The Taliban has since acknowledged his death, though it has not officially said when or where Mullah Omar died. It also named his successor: Mullah Akhtar Mansour.

Mullah Mansour has long been considered as the acting head of the Taliban and was a member of Mullah Omar’s inner circle. He was born in the 1960s in Afghanistan’s Kandahar province, where he served as a shadow governor after the Taliban was removed from power in 2001. (Mullah Omar also came from Kandahar.) When the Taliban was in power from 1996 until 2001, he served as the civil aviation minister, and the UN said that he also played a role in drug trafficking. His ancestry lies in the Durrani line of the Pashtun tribe, and like Mullah Omar, he studied at the Darul Uloom Haqqania madrassa outside of Peshawar, Pakistan. He is believed to have had an important role in starting the peace talks that have been going on between the Taliban and the Afghan government.

Mullah Mansour’s elevation to the official head of the Taliban will likely be disputed by other top commanders who may not endorse peace talks with the Afghan government. This could lead to splits within the group, which is comprised of different networks of fighters all operating under the Taliban umbrella organization and brand.

Two important questions must be considered in light of the ascension of Mullah Mansour as the leader of the Taliban: will he be able to stand up to the Islamic State’s proclaimed Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi? and will Al Qaeda swear allegiance to him?

Both questions leave room for speculation but can only be truly answered with time.

In regards to the first question, the Islamic State’s legitimacy comes from its declaration of the Caliphate with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as its Caliph. As the Caliphate, the Islamic State claims a position as the supreme and ultimate Islamic authority. However, the Taliban has hinted at competing for the title of the Caliphate; Mullah Omar was called the Emir of the Faithful for many years. The title of Emir of the Faithful is often used as a synonym for the Caliph, although Omar never openly claimed the title.

The title of Emir of the Faithful has now reportedly been passed on to Mullah Mansour, but in-fighting amongst Taliban factions may lead to those who do not accept Mullah Mansour to turn to al-Baghdadi instead. A number of Taliban commanders had already defected to the Islamic State because Taliban leadership had been unable to prove that Mullah Omar was alive, and this may encourage more to do the same.

Importantly, the Islamic State says that the Caliph must be a Quraysh, the tribe of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed. Al-Baghdadi claims to be a Quraysh, while Mullah Mansour is open about his Pashtun heritage. For members of the Taliban who are currently on the fence about where their loyalty lies, al-Baghdadi’s claim (which is almost certainly false) to Mohammed’s tribe could be the deciding factor in switching allegiance to the Islamic State.

As for the second question, Al Qaeda always recognized Mullah Omar as the Emir of the Faithful. The organization renewed its pledge of allegiance to the Taliban as recently as last year, choosing to follow Mullah Omar rather than al-Baghdadi. Mullah Omar famously provided shelter to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda’s leadership while they planned the 9/11 attacks, and many Al Qaeda operatives fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda may have felt more loyalty to Mullah Omar as a leader than to the Taliban as a group, and the world must wait and see if they now choose to support Mullah Mansour.

It is important to understand that the Taliban is likely to undergo significant changes with the emergence of Mullah Mansour as its new leader. One of the few things holding the Taliban’s various factions together was their allegiance to Mullah Omar. His death could lead to an emergence of new, smaller offshoots or to the spread of the Islamic State into Afghanistan.  The Afghan government is already having difficulty controlling Taliban violence because the US is withdrawing its troops and US combat power is diminishing. It will be hard pressed to hold on against either an uptick in Taliban violence or an emboldened Islamic State entry into the region.

Islamic State Employs Sexual Violence Against Women to Further Their Caliphate

The House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing Wednesday, July 29th, on Islamic State’s targeted violence against women and girls. The hearing featured Institute for Strategic Dialogue CEO Sasha Havlicek; Virginia Tech Assistant Professor Ariel Ahram; Director and producer of Escaping ISIS, Edward Watts; and Kathleen Kuehnast for The United States Institute of Peace.

Ms. Havlicek’s opening statement focused on the increasing numbers of women voluntarily choosing to leave their homes and families to travel and join Islamic State forces. While these women are not necessarily “foreign fighters”, given that they are prohibited to enter the battlefield, they are indeed “proving to be agents of the groups as much as the men”. These women, many traveling from western countries, are “terrific online and great for propaganda”-they speak to individuals who are unable to act overseas on the battlefield about acting where they are at home.

Havlicek later elaborated on the women making the decision to leave home “on their own volition” and join IS. Many come from western countries and have converted to Islam. The women joining IS are increasingly younger, which is more appealing to IS fighters who desire “untarnished and pure women” to become their wives.

Dr. Kuehnast discussed the role on young children in the Islamic State’s ideology. Dr. Kuehnast indicated that both young boys and girls are utilized by IS, stating that, “Boys as young as 6 are recruited as cubs in the lions’ den of the caliphate” and young women are “kidnapped, enslaved, and sold as child brides”. Because sexual violence is such a key component and tactic of the Islamic State, forced marriages and rape are not uncommon. Those born as a result of these incidents are then brought up to augment Islamic State forces.

Dr. Kuehnast also broached the issue of refugee camps that are available, particularly for the victims of Islamic State crimes. She and Mr. Watt’s discussed the severe physical and emotional trauma that these individuals endure that often alters them for the rest of their lives, and consequently why it is imperative to support the refugee camps. Mr. Watts, who in his film Escaping ISIS portrays “first hand accounts of women who escaped the brutal reign of ISIS”, spoke to the immense strength and perseverance of these young women and girls to survive and have a chance at a normal life again. However, for many female victims of the Islamic State, this may never be possible.

As Dr. Ahram highlighted in his opening statement, the sexual violence that the Islamic State employs is not only “emphasized in the war it’s conducting, but also in the kind of state it is building”. The goal of IS is to establish a global caliphate in accordance with what it calls the “prophetic methodology”. Not only would sexual violence be used to establish said caliphate, but it serves as a key component of enforcing its ideology and everyday practice.

Women and young girls, both Muslim and non-Muslim, face severe danger and violence while living under the rule of the Islamic State. As Watts said in his opening statement, “Renewed action is not only necessary, but urgent”.

“Lone Wolf” or Jihadi?

14 years ago America sent its military heroes overseas to defend us from Jihad.

Today, local police officers and sheriff’s deputies are being tasked with protecting military personnel and installations here in the United States from Jihad.

This is a profound shift in the nature of the war which is, unfortunately, lost on the vast majority of Americans, including our elected and appointed officials.

The global Jihadist insurgency has clearly become embedded in America and it is likely to get worse before it gets better. And the tip of the spear in this phase of the war is not our military. It’s not even the FBI or the bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus known as the Department of Homeland Security. The tip of the spear is now state and local law enforcement.

Who took down the Chattanooga shooter? It wasn’t the FBI or the Marine Corps. It was the Chattanooga PD.

Who apprehended the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston? It was the Boston police.

Who defended the Draw Mohammad Cartoon event in Garland, Texas by shooting and killing the two heavily armed Jihadis? A traffic cop.

The war has clearly changed and I’m not at all sure that Americans are prepared to deal with it.

The term “lone wolf” has become popular in US counterterrorism vernacular over the past few years in the wake of the repeated acts of Jihad perpetrated inside the United States.

But as counterterrorism expert John Guandolo points out, the term lone wolf does not exist in Islamic doctrine, but individual jihad does:

https://www.understandingthethreat.com/jihad-in-wichita-highlights-the-massive-threat-and-the-ignorance-of-american-leadership/

Much of the media and even our elected officials seem to take comfort when a Jihadi turns out not to have a formal affiliation with a known terrorist organization.

There is no reason for comfort. In fact, the fact that individuals are carrying out acts of jihad is indicative of a “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” in at least a segment of the Islamic community here in the US. This is a very dangerous situation. It is much more difficult to anticipate and prevent terrorist acts being carried out by individuals on their own initiative, as opposed to attacks carried out by terrorist cells at the direction of leaders of known organizations.

This revolutionary jihadist climate is borne out by the results of the recent poll conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy:

  • 29% of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”
  • 25% believe that violence against Americans here in the United States can be justified as part of the global jihad.
  • 19% of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

One reason we are seeing the types of attacks we are seeing in the West, such as Chattanooga, Garland, Paris, Ottawa and Sydney is because of specific calls from the Islamic State for such attacks.

Below is an excerpt from a communication released by the Islamic State in September of 2014:

You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawāghīt [those who do not rule by that which Allah has revealed]. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers. Both of them are considered to be waging war (the civilian by belonging to a state waging war against the Muslims). Both of their blood and wealth is legal for you to destroy, for blood does not become illegal or legal to spill by the clothes being worn.

The best thing you can do is to strive to your best and kill any disbeliever, whether he be French, American, or from any of their allies.

If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him. Do not lack. Do not be contemptible. Let your slogan be, “May I not be saved if the cross worshipper and taghūt (ruler ruling by manmade laws) patron survives.”

If you are unable to do so, then burn his home, car, or business. Or destroy his crops.

If you are unable to do so, then spit in his face. If your self refuses to do so, while your brothers are being bombarded and killed, and while their blood and wealth everywhere is deemed lawful by their enemies, then review your religion.

Unfortunately, individual Muslims are now acting on these types of calls.

It is important to realize, however, that this is not a new phenomenon. Jihadi ideologues have instructed their followers in Jihad as an individual obligation for all Muslims extensively for many years. Here are some examples (after reviewing these quotes, can there be any doubt as to why we are seeing more frequent Jihadi attacks here in the US?):

And ulema [Muslim legal scholars] have throughout history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty…On that basis, and in compliance with Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies—civilians and military—is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it…We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

                                    Osama Bin Laden

                                    Ayman al-Zawahiri, Amir of the Jihad Group, Egypt

                                    Abu-Yasir Rifa’I Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group

                                    Mir Hamzah, Jamiat ul Ulema-e-Pakistan

                                    Fazlur Rahman, Jihad Movement in Bangladesh

                                    23 February 1998

 

Indeed, every person should according to Islam prepare himself/herself for jihad, and every person should eagerly and patiently wait for the day when Allah will call them to show their willingness to sacrifice their lives. We should ask ourselves, is there a quicker way to heaven? Only Islam can save mankind from itself. And jihad on the individual and international scale will be a necessary part of this process of change.

Dr. A.M.A. Fahmy

International Islamic Forum

1949

Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored or evaded.

Hasan al-Banna

Founder of the Muslim Brotherhood

1949

 

The establishment of an Islamic State is obligatory. If that state cannot be established without war, then that becomes an obligation also. So it is obligatory for every Muslim to seriously strive for the return of the caliphate.

Jihad becomes an individual duty in three situations:

  1. First, when two armies meet.
  2. Second, when the infidels descend upon a country.
  3. Third, when the Imam calls upon people to fight.

Know that when jihad is an individual duty, there is no requirement to ask permission of parents to wage jihad.

The Neglected Obligation

Muhammad Al-Salam Faraj

Leader of Jamaat al-Jihad, Egypt

1981

 

The Book commands Muslims to wage their war with the spirit of a religious duty and obligation. This Quranic injunction adds new facets and depths to the concept of a total war. It makes a Muslim citizen answerable both to the state and to Allah in the fulfillment of this divine obligation.

The Quranic Concept of War

Brigadier General S.K. Malik, Pakistani Army

1979

                                   

There is agreement among scholars that when the enemy enters an Islamic land or a land that was once part of the Islamic lands, it is obligatory on the inhabitants of that place to go forth to face the enemy. But if they sit back, or are incapable, lazy, or insufficient in number, the individual obligation spreads to those around them. Then if they also fall short, it goes to those around them, and so on and so on, until the individually obligatory nature of jihad encompasses the whole world. The individually obligatory nature of jihad remains in effect until the lands are purified from the pollution of the disbelievers.

The obligation of jihad today remains an individual obligation on all until the liberation of the last piece of land that was in the hands of Muslims but has been occupied by the disbelievers.

Join the Caravan

Abdullah Yusuf Azzam

“Father of Global Jihad”

Founding member of Al Qaeda

1987

 

Individual jihad has recurred throughout Islamic history. In the time of the Crusades…groups of mujahideen responded to the crisis. Many isolated expeditions and groups carried out the obligation of jihad.

Individual jihad using the method of urban or rural guerilla warfare is the foundation for sapping the enemy and bringing him to a state of collapse and withdrawal. It will pave the way for the desired strategic goal.

What mandates these methods as a strategic opinion is the imbalance of forces between the resistance and the large invading alliance of unbelievers, apostates and hypocrites.

We fight them for the sake of incidents to cause political pressure and psychological collapse, so that they leave our lands. Carrying out a small operation every month against the enemy will have more of an impact on him than a big operation every year or two.

Toward a New Strategy in Resisting the Occupier

Muhammad Khalil al-Hakaymah

Al Qaeda Chief of External Operations

Killed by US air strike in Pakistan in 2008

 

Successful jihad will only happen within an ummah [Islamic nation or community] in which the fighting creed is firmly established and clarified. This must happen in order to attain the “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” that will spontaneously give rise to instruments of resistance.

Violent jihad is as an individual duty obligatory upon every Muslim. All the ulema have said this…”

The Call to Global Islamic Resistance

Abu Musab al-Suri

Al Qaeda propagandist

Captured in Pakistan 2005

Al Qaeda-Affiliated Nusra Front Attacks US-Trained Syrian Rebel Group…Again

On Wednesday, Al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front captured the leader, Colonel Nadim al-Hassan, and various other members of the US-trained Syrian rebel group operating in northern Syria, Division 30. Reports on the total number of members captured have not officially been confirmed. Most are indicating 7 other fighters were captured, where as various social media sources are claiming up to 18 could have been captured.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that the Division 30 members were captured while returning from a meeting near the city of Azaz where they were discussing beginning “a military operation against the [Islamic State] in the northeastern Aleppo countryside with the support of the international coalition”.

This is not the first instance of Nusra Front squashing US-backed rebel forces. The Syria Revolutionaries Front and the Hazzm Movement were both terminated at the hands of the Nusra Front; the first group eliminated last year and the second early this year.

The Division 30 group was part of the US program launched in May in Jordan and Turkey to train and arm moderate rebel forces “capable of taking on IS forces”. These forces would be more familiar with the geographic regions and would possess cultural and linguistic skills that could be utilized in the fight against IS. Additionally, they would provide the US with on-the-ground forces who possess the “technical ability to direct coalition airstrikes”.

However, the US is far from reaching the program’s initial goal of training approximately 5,000 fighters a year. US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced earlier this month that, “the US military has trained ‘an awfully small number’ of 60 Syrian rebels to fight Islamic State militants”. The significant deficit of fighters, combined with recent event such as yesterday’s abductions, have left many doubting the potential success of the rebel-training program.

As discussed previously on Free Fire, Jabhat al-Nusra (Nusra) is an Al Qaeda affiliate. According to US intelligence, Nusra members report directly to Al Qaeda’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri and nearly two dozen Al Qaeda members traveled from Pakistan and Afghanistan to Syria in 2012. In an interview with Al Jazeera in May, Nusra leader Abu Muhammed al-Joulani claimed that the group does not “receive much international support or any state sponsorship, because it prefers to remain autonomous”. However, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar have worked closely with Nusra in efforts against the Islamic State and Assad.

As opposed to the oppressive and terror-based tactic of other Islamic terrorist organizations, Nusra takes more of a “buddy-buddy” approach in order to garner support from Syrian civilians. They work to portray themselves as a “local group with a local cause”. Given this support as well as a complex network of alliances with other rebel militias operating inside Syria, Nusra has proved to be a very connected and capable group.

Nusra has made strides in fighting back against Islamic State forces, as well as the Syrian Assad regime. And while the US is also invested in ending the atrocities of IS and Assad, we must take great care to not become involved in actions that could result in a perceived alliance with Nusra. Although Nusra has smaller and more local goals, it ultimately wants to establish Islamic regimes worldwide. Even if training Syrian rebels proves not to be the best counter-measure to the Islamic State, the answer must not be looking to Nusra for assistance.

Turks Continue Assault on Kurds As US Watches From Sidelines

The ongoing Turkish campaign against the Kurds and the Islamic State continued on Thursday, when thirty planes bombed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) targets. The bombings were in retaliation for the killing of three Turkish soldiers by PKK militants during an attack on an army battalion in the province of Sirnak. According to reports, five PKK-associated locations were hit in Northern Iraq. The most recent attacks and bombings are part of a wider back-and-forth retaliatory conflict.

The most recent surge in violence first erupted in Turkey on July 20 when Islamic State militants carried out a suicide bombing in Suruc, Turkey. The Kurds blamed Turkey for supporting the Islamic State, and in retaliation, the PKK shot two Turkish police officers. With that said however, the Turks have been fighting the Kurds for decades.

Adding fuel to the fire is the Turkish governments claim their campaign is a two-pronged war on terror against both the Kurds and the Islamc State, but it has been increasingly focused on defeating the Kurdish forces. The PKK has claimed that Turkey’s campaign is not a fight against terror, and that it is instead an attempt to crush the Kurds’ political movement to “cement authoritarian rule in Turkey.” Furthermore, Selahattin Deirtas, the leader of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), has accused the Turkish government of being involved in the violence as an attempt to improve its performance in upcoming elections.

According to Turkish intelligence figures, 190 PKK fighters have been killed and 300 have been wounded in Turkey’s counterterrorism campaign. Additionally, Turkish police have arrested more than 1,300 individuals; 847 were arrested on allegations of being connected to the PKK.

Turkey and the US recently agreed to a “safe-zone” along the Turkey-Syria border in order for the US to utilize the Turkish Incirlik Air Base to carry out airstrikes against Islamic State. Although this could be viewed as the two nations collaborating in the fight against terror, the US and Turkey are fighting two very different battles. The safe-zone will be used by Turkish forces to train what they believe to be “moderate” forces to fight Assad’s forces. However, these “moderate” trainees are likely to be al-Nursa or al-Qaeda linked.

By partnering with Turkey, the US is allowing the Kurds, a group the US protected from Saddam Hussein in the 1990s with no-fly zones, to be pummeled by Turkish bombings and ground assaults. On July 27, the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) claimed they were attacked by Turkish tanks in Syria, a claim Turkey denied.

The US has yet to grasp that Turkey’s true political goals in the region do not align with the US goal to defeat Islamic State. Overall, Turkey is generally apprehensive about taking on IS, as they fear more attacks on their homeland. Instead, they are using their so-called war on terror as propaganda in order to turn it into a campaign to eradicate the Kurdish population. As has been proven time and time again, the Kurds are a legitimate force when it comes to defeating IS. However, the Turks fear that if the Kurds are effective enough against IS, they will successfully establish their own Kurdish state. Rather than teaming up with a nation who seeks to eradicate the Kurds, the US needs to team up with the Kurds who also seek to destroy IS.