Beyond ISIS: Will the Terror survive?

Before any discussions of the future of terrorism, we must first agree to come to a consensus on the reasons that led to the rise of the extremism and the motives of terrorism in the Arab and Islamic world and in the world as a whole.

Many hypotheses and approaches exist regarding the causes of the rise of extremism and the motives of terrorism. Some are attributed to the religious reasons, which accuse Islam, saying it calls for violence, especially that of the concepts of jihad and the promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, and atonement and dealing with infidels and apostates and people of different faiths.

Then there is the problem of the Salafist ideology, especially of the radical Wahhabi school, with its emphasis on the apparent nature of the Prophet’s Hadith, the rejection of the interpretation of the Qur’an and the Hadith, and the rejection of the realization of reason and diligence in the new issues. There are those who bear the responsibility of propagating extremism to political Islam, especially Sayyed Qutb and the integration of this Takfiri thought with the Salafist doctrine, which produced Salafi Jihadism.

Then there are still others  who attribute the causes of extremism and terrorism to external factors as a reaction to Western colonialism, the American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israeli occupation of Palestine, etc., or as a reaction to the political and social tyranny and oppression of the Arab and Islamic regimes, and the killing, imprisonment, torture, and persecution of dissidents or corruption, and the policies of these regimes that have led to poverty, unemployment, poor development, corruption and dependence on colonialism.

There are researchers, among them the French researcher Olivier Roy, who consider that the Islamization of extremism is a consequence of modernism and globalization; they consider this to be a generation of rebellion, and that what al-Qaeda and ISIS are doing is an act of rebellion against the generation of their fathers and grandfathers, similar to the Cultural Revolution instigated by Mao Zedong in China. For instance, the extremist insurgency, which includes the phenomenon of suicide bombings was initiated by the Tamil, and now borrowed by jihadists.

Roy believes that the systematic association with death is one of the approaches to understanding current extremism. The nihilistic dimension is central here, and violence is not a means but an end, a violence without a future. Instead of adopting a vertical approach starting from the Koran to reach ISIS, through Ibn Taymiyyah, Hasan al-Banna, Sayyed Qutb, and Ussama bin Laden, assuming that there is a constant “Islamic violence” appearing regularly, Roy preferred to resort to an approach that tries to understand violence of contemporary Islamism in parallel with other forms of violence and extremism which are very close to it (like the generational rebellion, radical rupture with society, the aesthetics of death, etc.). Suicide terrorism, al-Qaeda, and ISIS phenomena are recent in the history of the Muslim world and cannot be explained by the rise of fundamentalism. “Terrorism does not come from the extremism of Islam, but from the Islamization of extremism,” he said.

The French writer acknowledges the existence of Islamic fundamentalism that has existed for 40 years, but that was not sufficient enough to produce violence. This approach was criticized by many of his colleagues, including the French researcher Francois Bourga, who stated that he did not notice the political reasons for the rebellion: the colonial legacy, Western military interventions against the peoples of the Middle East, and the social marginalization of migrants and their children. Roy was also accused by French researcher Gilles Kipple of ignoring the relationship between terrorist violence and religious extremism of Islam, manifested in Salafism.

Though Roy says he does not ignore any of these dimensions,  they are by themselves not enough to explain the phenomena he studies, because no causal link emerges from the empirical data that he has. The researcher rejects the question of “religious extremism” because the phrase “extremism” in religion is bad, as it follows that we determine a moderate state of religion, while there are no moderate religions. Are Calvin and Luther moderates? Certainly, for example, in the theological concept, Calvanism is “extremist”. His hypothesis is that violent extremism is not the result of religious extremism, and that he quotes methods and models, which he calls Islamization of extremism. Religious fundamentalism, of course, poses important social problems, because it rejects values based on individual centrality and freedom in all areas, but this fundamentalism does not necessarily lead to political violence.

Critics of Francois Bourga argue that extremists are motivated by the suffering of former colonialists, victims of racism and discrimination, US bombing, etc., and that the insurgency is first and foremost the rebellion of the victims. But Roy believes that the link between extremists and victims is more imaginary than realistic, and those who carry out bombings in Europe are not the ones who suffer in Gaza Strip, or the Libyans or the Afghans, and they are not necessarily the poorest, least integrated. The researcher points out that 25 per cent of those in the ranks of “jihadists” are recent converts to Islam, that the link between extremists and “their people” is also imaginary. Few militants belong to this virtual proletariat, which is ready to die for it. The rebels suffer from the suffering of others. They are not the victims of injustice, the Israeli occupation, the invasion or the American bombing in Afghanistan or Iraq, but they have witnessed and been affected by this suffering.

There is no doubt that the conclusions of the researcher cannot be generalized to all “jihadists,” especially in the Arab and Islamic countries. Their motivation is different from the motives of their Western counterparts. The political, economic, social and religious factors, as well as the media and sectarian incitement have all played a role in nurturing this extremism and its savagery, where the Arab and Muslim “jihadists” are victims of this extremist ideology, and which further drives political recruitment and sectarian incitement.

The other issue that I would like to discuss is the future of terrorism after a defeat and a rebound in Iraq and Syria.

First, I think that the rise of a supporter, despite his reliance on a Sunni popular incubator in Iraq and then in Syria, feeds on the political and sectarian injustice that the Sunni were complaining about from the central government in Baghdad, the consequences of the US invasion, the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, that led the former Military and security officers and soldiers to engage in the leadership and membership of ISIS. In addition to the adoption of leaders and advocates of elements of the Salafist Wahhabi jihadist ideology, and exploitation of the chaos of the Arab revolutions, but what would not have been successful without regional support in terms of fund and weapons as well as through the recruitment of foreign fighters from Arabs and Muslims.

It must be acknowledged that there has been a US-Turkish-Arab regional recruitment for a defiant confrontation with Iran and its allies in Iraq and Syria. A quick check with the Toyota company as to where these convoys of Toyota vehicles came from, driven by convoys in the invasion of Mosul and the Sunni provinces of Iraq, as well as investigation into sources of the arms and funds, and how the Gulf and Arab media mostly used the fall of Mosul to instigate a Sunni revolt against the sectarian Shiite government of Baghdad and Iran.

Today, after ISIS defeat in Iraq and Syria, the US-led international coalition against ISIS is not completing its mission in the final elimination of the group, but leaves it in the face of the Syrian army and its allies.

In order to eliminate the terrorist groups, we should find out the reasons that led to this birth AND THE RISE of this extremism and find solutions to eliminate all these motivations that led to the terrorism: the sectarian conflict, the political tyranny, and the socio-economic injustice, all of which should be removed by reforming the regimes, Political and economic deprivation should be countered by creating and providing employment opportunities for young people; the educational curricula should be reformed, especially religious education, and the education of imams to make them modern and tolerant formation; sources of terrorist financing – from both governments and individuals – should be drained, and the cessation of media and political support and justification  for this Takfiri terrorist ideology. The most important measure should be to arrive at an international and regional consensus to solve the crises of the region, particularly the Arab-Israeli conflict and resolution of the question of Palestine in an equitable manner, as well as bring to an end the Syrian, Libyan, and Yemeni wars.

(The author is head, Beirut Center for Middle East Studeis. An edited version of the paper was presented at the West Asia Conference in New Delhi). 

Aditi Bhaduri

See author's posts