What the Paris attacks should now teach us
H.A. Hellyer/Al Arabiya/November 24/15/
The attacks in Paris remind us all again of the specter of terrorism and vigilante violence on a massive scale – but whether or not we will take heed of the lessons in that regard is another question. The signs are not altogether encouraging in that regard – not in Europe, not in the region, and not in the broader international community. The day of the Paris attacks, I was in Tunisia – a country that had seen its own terrorist atrocities a few months ago in the attack on the Bardo Museum in March this year, and near Sousse in June. It’s a country that almost precisely five years ago saw the beginning of the Arab revolutionary uprisings – and out of all of them, the Tunisian uprising delivered the greatest prize thus far. A consensus-based, progressive constitution, and a political arena where no-one thinks that zero-sum games work. As a result, one hopes, Tunisia will be resilient against militant threats by groups like ISIS – and thus far, Tunisians have shown their mettle. Libya is in the midst of a great conflict; Syria far worse; and Egypt, while having been spared the sort of internecine warfare of Syria or Libya, is facing a dire set of security problems that far too many in the international community worry Cairo is handling badly.
But if Paris teaches us anything, it is the repetition of the reminder that vigilante violence can strike anywhere. It was true in London in 2005, when July 7 happened; it was true in Madrid, in March of 2004; and there were other incidents, and will likely be many more. Much of the world in 2015 – be it the Western world, or Muslim majority states – cannot be under any illusion. Vigilante action by radical groups is not a threat that can be avoided – that is the reality. The task now is to ensure that societies remain resilient when such actions do take place – and take steps to minimize their occurrences.
Politicians and political actors have, unfortunately, the malaise of reacting to crises as they happen, and seldom looking a year or two down the road. There is no single headquarters that the international community can remove or demolish that will result in the end of violent extremism. That is not to say that engaging the problem of ISIS has no military component – on the contrary, there will have to be a hard security solution aspect in order to address the phenomenon of ISIS. But even if Raqqa were conquered by anti-ISIS forces tomorrow, and the entire territory currently held by ISIS in Iraq and Syria were released by ISIS forces, the threat of violence from their supporters would continue. The world needs to recognize that the campaign is a long one indeed. As that campaign is waged, however, we have to consider our response to incidents as they occur. That is true for us in the West, as well as within the heartlands of the Muslim world.
Anti-Muslim sentiment
Within fairly short order, we’ve seen the rise of anti-Muslim sentiment intensify. That was expressed in actual physical attacks, which a noted watch-dog in the UK reported in the aftermath of the French tragedy – it was also made clearly evident by the calls in the U.S. Republican camp, where it seemed presidential candidates were competing in their race to the bottom. Jeb Bush, one of the leading candidates, declared that Syrian refugees ought to be subjected to a religious test – and that Christians Syrians should be the ones allowed in. Donald Trump, the front-runner for the Republican nomination, calling for some kind of ‘register’ for Muslim Americans. These are not terribly isolated political statements – and the sentiment is mainstreaming on a regular basis. In the aftermath of Paris, two CNN anchors almost doggedly accused an anti-Islamophobia campaigner in Paris of denying collective French Muslim responsibility for the attacks – to his credit, he stood his ground, pointing out that French Muslims en masse rejected these attacked. But it was deeply concerning to see such a discourse being promulgated on a respectable television channel of that nature. Within Muslim majority states, many of them do not need to be taught the lessons of Paris, but merely reminded of them. Before Paris, there was Beirut, and there was Baghdad – to name but two examples. Resilience in those countries is paramount – but resilience in other countries is being called into question. What will happen if what took place in Paris, God forbid, takes place in Cairo, or Bahrain, or Kuwait, or elsewhere in the region? What will the response be, beyond the predictable security retort? Is there a recognition of the legitimate social and political grievances that exist – not simply in Syria, but far beyond it, across the Arab world? That these grievances are key elements in any recruitment strategy for ISIS? Is there a realization that the ideological underpinnings of ISIS-style ideology continues to find inspiration in a reading of an interpretation of Salafi thought? Or are we to continue thinking that ISIS essentially came out of a vacuum?Politicians and political actors have, unfortunately, the malaise of reacting to crises as they happen, and seldom looking a year or two down the road. But the road ahead is of deep concern to any who examine the region closely –and we ought to try to pre-empt if we can, and minimize damage if we cannot, from any problems that are on the way. Make no mistake: they are on the way.
Why has our planet become savage?
Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor/Al Arabiya/November 24/15
These days I find myself in a permanent state of shock, horror and confusion. We live in a world where human life is devalued, where barbarism, racism and bigotry are the new norm. Watching the news is depressing. Desperate people fleeing conflicts finding all doors barred. Women enslaved and abused and children’s bodies seen mangled by shrapnel. And who would have thought that Paris, the City of Lights, would ever go dark, the army would be deployed in the streets or that a government decree would be issued silencing anyone who disseminates theories at odds with the government line as “a conspiracy theorist”. I won’t be surprised if an Orwellian-type ‘thought police force’ is established. People have questions, but aren’t getting answers and that’s the problem. I’m angry too that so many fingers in western capitals are pointing at Islam as the cause of all evils when my faith, one of peace and tolerance, has been hijacked by creatures without souls. When I listen to statements from the mouths of American politicians I can hardly believe what I’m hearing. Donald Trump has vowed to close all mosques and force Muslim Americans to carry special identity cards. What next? Will they be told to pin green crescents on their lapels in the same way the Jews of Germany had to sport yellow stars? Many of his Republican rivals are using the vilification of Muslims as a vote-getting ploy. Likewise Britain, France and Belgium are planning the closure of certain mosques and community centres. Muslims are being asked to disassociate themselves from terror although they are the ones who’ve suffered most from terrorism over the years. Also, Syrian refugees risking their lives to reach Europe have become pariahs overnight. Rather than falsely blame Muslims for the rise of ISIS, there may be other shoulders on which at least some of the blame should fall.A Rhode Island state senator, Elaine Morgan, is calling for Syrian refugees to be placed in camps “segregated from our populace”. “The Muslim religion and philosophy is to murder, rape, and decapitate anyone who is non-Muslim”, she says. Presidential hopeful Ben Carson compares the refugees to “rabid dogs”. All of this hate on the part of politicians merely because fake Syrian passports were deliberately planted close to the bodies of suicide bombers in Paris.
A few questions
In all honesty, I don’t know what to believe any more. Like so many others, I need answers to these perplexing and very troubling questions:
• Why was ISIS permitted to expand over great swathes of Syria and Iraq? According to Fox News, declassified Pentagon documents dated 2012 obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act “predicts the rise of ISIS and the establishment of a caliphate”. In this case, why did Obama say in September 2014 that its rise took the U.S. by surprise? • Is there any truth to statements from the President of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov and NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden to the effect that the self-ascribed ISIS Caliph Baghdadi, alleged to be formerly known as Simon Elliot , was trained by the Mossad? It wouldn’t be the first time. Morten Storm, a convert to Islam, reveals in a book that he was formerly undercover agent for western intelligence agencies tasked with infiltrating Islamist organisations.
• Why was ISIS’s de facto capital Raqqa permitted to carry on business as usual under U.S.-led coalition airstrikes? And as was quoted in the Washington Free Beacon and elsewhere, Rep. Ed Royce, the Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee complained that “the pilots come back to talk to us, they say ‘three-quarters of their ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us’?” Is he right?
• Why did it take so long for the U.S. to bomb convoys transporting ISIS stolen oil? And when they were following Russia’s intervention, why, according to the Wall Street Journal, were fliers dropped alerting the drivers to abandon their trucks before they were hit? Which states are buying that oil via third parties? Are there banks laundering the group’s income from oil, gold and stolen artefacts?
• When the British terrorist “Jihadi John” and the head of ISIS in Libya, Wissam Najm Abd Zayd Al-Zubaydi, were so easily pinpointed by surveillance satellites and assassinated, why is it that Baghdadi is so hard to locate and why weren’t highly visible convoys of the terrorists’ SUVs struck?
• Which country or countries are supplying ISIS with heavy weapons? And why are the Kurds and the recognized Libyan government battling ISIS being deprived of such weapons?
• There is a video of President Putin telling journalists at the recent G20 summit that ISIS is being financed by businessmen from 40 countries including those from G20 member states, adding that he provided examples “based on our data”. If he’s correct then, why aren’t those concerned being tracked down and arrested?
• Why did Israel open its hospitals to treat injured Al-Qaeda and Nusra Front fighters, as revealed by the Wall Street Journal? Similarly, the Turkish newspaper Sunday’s Zaman quotes a nurse working in a hospital in Mersin saying she’s sick of treating ISIS fighters. The Washington Post asserted it was told by ISIS commander, “We used to have some fighters – even high level members of ISIS – getting treated in Turkish hospitals.” If that’s so, what was the reason for treating monsters, who execute children, bury women alive and place men in a wire cage to be drowned, with such compassion?
• Who are the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ the Obama administration is backing after they’ve been grouped together under the new banner “Victory Army” and are reports that they are fighting alongside Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat Al-Nusra accurate?
Why is it that President Obama and David Cameron shirk from branding the Muslim Brotherhood – the ideological forerunner of all Takfiri groups – as terrorist?
Early last year, an alleged British lobbyist for the Muslim Brotherhood was invited to meet President Obama at the White House. In February this year, a Muslim Brotherhood Judge was pictured making the four-fingered Rabaa sign at the State Department following his meeting with officials and when White House spokeswoman Jan Psaki was questioned by reporters she appeared to show that she had no issue with the photograph – a poke in the eye to the Egyptian government.
This month, however, lawmakers in both the House and the Senate are pushing for a bill to be passed that would declare the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
I don’t have access to insider intelligence but let me put it this way. When the pieces of the jigsaw are fitted together something doesn’t smell right. After Paris, the world is gung ho to exterminate ISIS. France is cooperating with Russia to bomb them mercilessly. Yet Obama says they are contained and his strategy is working even as they threaten to turn the White House black, announce New York and Washington are next and are believed to be developing chemical weapons. You couldn’t make this up!Charles Krauthammer writes in The Telegraph that while France is creating a coalition to destroy ISIS, Obama “responded to Paris with weariness and annoyance. His news conference in Turkey was marked by a stunning tone of passivity, detachment and lassitude, compounded by impatience and irritability at the very suggestion that his Syria strategy might be failing.” Rather than falsely blame Muslims for the rise of ISIS, there may be other shoulders on which at least some of the blame should fall. It’s time they were exposed.
ISIS’s arrogance will accelerate its demise
Raghida Dergham/Al Arabiya/November 24/15