Beyond the frontline: watching ISIS

[davidbfpo]

From a long, mainly historical explanation, by Alistair Crooke: 'You Can't Understand ISIS If You Don't Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia':http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alasta..._5717157.html?

ISIS is a "post-Medina" movement: it looks to the actions of the first two Caliphs, rather than the Prophet Muhammad himself, as a source of emulation, and it forcefully denies the Saudis' claim of authority to rule.

His last paragraph is rather savage:

Why should we be surprised then, that from Prince Bandar's Saudi-Western mandate to manage the insurgency in Syria against President Assad should have emerged a neo-Ikhwan type of violent, fear-inducing vanguard movement: ISIS? And why should we be surprised -- knowing a little about Wahhabism -- that "moderate" insurgents in Syria would become rarer than a mythical unicorn? Why should we have imagined that radical Wahhabism would create moderates? Or why could we imagine that a doctrine of "One leader, One authority, One mosque: submit to it, or be killed" could ever ultimately lead to moderation or tolerance?

[davidbfpo]

I have just copied over twentyseven posts from the current Iraq thread, back to pg.30 so approx. a month's review.

Our resident SME Joel Wing no doubt has commentaries on ISIS on his own website:http://musingsoniraq.blogspot.co.uk/

For those who want to look back before Mosul fell and a more strategic assessment I commend Clint Watts writing on FPRI:http://www.fpri.org/contributors/clint-watts and his own website:http://selectedwisdom.com/

I am sure there are other SME and ones outside the USA. If you know of any please post a link.

[davidbfpo]

Two of the better articles seen today. First 'How to Beat the Islamic State' by Jeff Stein in Newsweek, which relies on those with experience, citing a number:http://www.newsweek.com/how-beat-islamic-state-267273

The second 'Let’s Keep ISIS in Perspective' is from a blogsite, the author Wayne White is a former INR officer and sounds caution:http://www.lobelog.com/lets-keep-isis-in-perspective/

[davidbfpo]

Brian Jenkins of RAND has a short column:

The threat al-Baghdadi poses shouldn’t be dismissed, of course. But before the U.S. engages in what could be another messy military intervention in Iraq, one that may well extend into Syria, it’s worth taking a closer look at Islamic State and its internal dynamics. Contrary to the rhetoric, Islamic State does not surpass every threat the U.S. has seen.

Link:http://www.businessweek.com/articles...lnerability#p1

[ganulv]

Brian Jenkins of RAND has a short column:

[…] Contrary to the rhetoric, Islamic State does not surpass every threat the U.S. has seen.

Link:http://www.businessweek.com/articles...lnerability#p1

Duffel Blog scooped ’em on this one.

[slapout9]

CNBC Interview from Montgomery,Al. Of retired USAF Colonel John Warden. "We have badly underestimated their capabilities"



http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000300411#.

[davidbfpo]

Two real SME on the situation. One, Dr. Omar Ashour, now @ Exeter University, I always listen to. Here he is interviewed by Voice of Russia Today, with two others from UK Muslim groups, and provides the context for what we see today. There is a podcast and transcript:http://voiceofrussia.com/uk/news/201...ic-jihad-2074/

Here is one passage:

In terms of ideology it’s sort of interesting because the Islamic State is a fringe of a fringe. So, al-Qaeda is a fringe and it took even more extreme twist in a sense that they are using excommunication declaring others as infidels and apostates in a much wider way than al-Qaeda does.

On intervention in Iraq, with some poignant pre-conditions:

The problem is very complex. There is ISIS and there is a threat, but ISIS are there because of certain reasons and some of them have to do with how the Arab Sunni population was treated in the last few years mainly by the al-Maliki government in the aftermath of the US withdrawal and the US invasion in 2003 as well. Unless these core issues are resolved and unless you find an Iraqi elite that is willing on one hand to unite against this threat, and on the other hand, is willing to accept intervention to end it, and you have a population that is revolting against the Islamic State […] Unless you have these conditions then I don’t think an intervention would be quite successful. Maybe it will undermine it or set it back a bit but then the environment, if you have this level of oppression and this level of brutality and lack of freedom, ethnic groups and religious groups who are marginalised and repressed, then you create an environment where the Islamic State or other groups will emerge just as violent and extreme.

Secondly there's Clint Watts (CWOT on SWC) in a long interview on CSPAN's Washington Journal, which I have yet to listen to:http://www.c-span.org/video/?321100-...-response-isis