Jamal Khashoggi has an interesting article translated on today’s Al Arabiya TV website and in Arabic at Al-Hayat newspaper. He takes a look at ISIS and sees it as a “third-generation” takfirist/salfist movement. He sees its origins in Egypt of the 1990s. I’d put it earlier, if not with the 1979 takeover of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, then at least in the 1980s, with the conflict between Muslim Brotherhood associates and the Syrian government in Hama. There, the Syrian government succeeded in (bloodily) suppressing the group. This time around, it’s not being terribly successful.
Khashoggi is right in pointing out that you don’t fix a problem or cure a disease until you have a correct diagnosis and understand the cause. There is far too much refusing to look for, look at, or otherwise identify the causes, but they are known. Treating the symptoms may make things look or feel better for a time, but that does not solve the problem. Nor do $100 million dollar donations to talk about the problem.
How can we defeat ISIS if we don’t understand it?
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has been digging its own grave, just as it has irrationally led many to their graves. It did not disappoint all those who followed its rise and predicted the inevitability of its end, as it carried the seeds of its own destruction within itself.
Last year, I published an article entitled “What history teaches us about Syria’s extremists.” At the time, ISIS was emerging in Syria and rebelling against those involved in the revolution. It was like an uninvited guest. I wrote about a story that took place in the Indian continent in the 18th century; the story of a young fighter who became the Emir of Peshawar after the success of the Islamist corrective movement to liberate the city from the rule of the “Maharajah” in just two months.
After the imposition of hardline provisions by the new emir on the tribal population of the region, they rebelled against him and brought back the Sikhs and their army to rule again. They did not rebel against the emir alone but against the whole movement, and its spiritual leader.