What is the Islamic State? Where did it come from, and what are its intentions? The simplicity
of these questions can be deceiving, and few Western leaders seem to
know the answers.
Our ignorance of the Islamic State is in some ways understandable: It
is a hermit kingdom; few have gone there and returned. Baghdadi has
spoken on camera only once. But his address, and the Islamic State’s
countless other propaganda videos and encyclicals, are online, and the
caliphate’s supporters have toiled mightily to make their project
knowable. We can gather that their state rejects peace as a matter of
principle; that it hungers for genocide; that its religious views make
it constitutionally incapable of certain types of change, even if that
change might ensure its survival; and that it considers itself a
harbinger of—and headline player in—the imminent end of the world.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS),
follows a distinctive variety of Islam whose beliefs about the path to
the Day of Judgment matter to its strategy, and can help the West know
its enemy and predict its behavior.
We have misunderstood the nature of the Islamic State in at least two
ways. First, we tend to see jihadism as monolithic, and to apply the
logic of al‑Qaeda to an organization that has decisively eclipsed it.
The Islamic State supporters I spoke with still refer to Osama bin Laden
as “Sheikh Osama,” a title of honor. But jihadism has evolved since
al-Qaeda’s heyday, from about 1998 to 2003, and many jihadists disdain
the group’s priorities and current leadership.
Bin Laden viewed his terrorism as a prologue to a caliphate he did
not expect to see in his lifetime. His organization was flexible,
operating as a geographically diffuse network of autonomous cells. The
Islamic State, by contrast, requires territory to remain legitimate, and
a top-down structure to rule it. (Its bureaucracy is divided into civil
and military arms, and its territory into provinces.)
We are misled in a second way, by a well-intentioned but dishonest
campaign to deny the Islamic State’s medieval religious nature.
There is a temptation to rehearse this observation—that jihadists are
modern secular people, with modern political concerns, wearing medieval
religious disguise—and make it fit the Islamic State. In fact, much of
what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere,
carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a
seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the
apocalypse.
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very
Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn
largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe.
But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from
coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic
State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on
its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic
methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of
Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State;
nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious,
millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be
combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and
back foolish schemes to counter it.
Denying the holiness of the Koran or the prophecies of Muhammad is
straightforward apostasy. But Zarqawi and the state he spawned take the
position that many other acts can remove a Muslim from Islam. These
include, in certain cases, selling alcohol or drugs, wearing Western
clothes or shaving one’s beard, voting in an election—even for a Muslim
candidate—and being lax about calling other people apostates. Being a
Shiite, as most Iraqi Arabs are, meets the standard as well, because the
Islamic State regards Shiism as innovation, and to innovate on the
Koran is to deny its initial perfection. . . . That means roughly 200 million Shia are marked for death. So too are
the heads of state of every Muslim country, who have elevated man-made
law above Sharia by running for office or enforcing laws not made by
God.
Following takfiri doctrine, the Islamic State is committed to
purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people. The lack of
objective reporting from its territory makes the true extent of the
slaughter unknowable, but social-media posts from the region suggest
that individual executions happen more or less continually, and mass
executions every few weeks. Muslim “apostates” are the most common
victims.
Centuries have passed since the wars of
religion ceased in Europe, and since men stopped dying in large numbers
because of arcane theological disputes. Hence, perhaps, the incredulity
and denial with which Westerners have greeted news of the theology and
practices of the Islamic State. Many refuse to believe that this group
is as devout as it claims to be, or as backward-looking or apocalyptic
as its actions and statements suggest.
[T]he exclusion of ideology reflects another kind of Western bias: that
if religious ideology doesn’t matter much in Washington or Berlin,
surely it must be equally irrelevant in Raqqa or Mosul. When a masked
executioner says Allahu akbar while beheading an apostate, sometimes he’s doing so for religious reasons.
Many mainstream Muslim organizations have gone so far as to say the Islamic State is, in fact, un-Islamic.
It is, of course, reassuring to know that the vast majority of Muslims
have zero interest in replacing Hollywood movies with public executions
as evening entertainment. But Muslims who call the Islamic State
un-Islamic are typically, as the Princeton scholar Bernard Haykel, the
leading expert on the group’s theology, told me, “embarrassed and
politically correct, with a cotton-candy view of their own religion”
that neglects “what their religion has historically and legally
required.” Many denials of the Islamic State’s religious nature, he
said, are rooted in an “interfaith-Christian-nonsense tradition.”
According to Haykel, the ranks of the Islamic State are deeply infused
with religious vigor. Koranic quotations are ubiquitous. “Even the foot
soldiers spout this stuff constantly,” Haykel said. “They mug for their
cameras and repeat their basic doctrines in formulaic fashion, and they
do it all the time.” He regards the claim that the Islamic State
has distorted the texts of Islam as preposterous, sustainable only
through willful ignorance.
In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic
throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of
war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims
tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts.
“Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings are not something that freakish
[jihadists] are cherry-picking from the medieval tradition,” Haykel
said. Islamic State fighters “are smack in the middle of the medieval
tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day.”
The Islamic State differs from nearly every other current jihadist
movement in believing that it is written into God’s script as a central
character. It is in this casting that the Islamic State is most boldly
distinctive from its predecessors, and clearest in the religious nature
of its mission.
The biggest proponent of an American invasion is the Islamic State
itself. The provocative videos, in which a black-hooded executioner
addresses President Obama by name, are clearly made to draw America into
the fight. An invasion would be a huge propaganda victory for jihadists
worldwide: irrespective of whether they have given baya’a to the
caliph, they all believe that the United States wants to embark on a
modern-day Crusade and kill Muslims. Yet another invasion and occupation
would confirm that suspicion, and bolster recruitment.
There is much more and none of it encouraging. ISIS underscores the dangers of fundamentalist belief based on myths and fairy tales or the writings of someone - i.e., the "Prophet" - who nowadays would be permanently residing in a mental ward. Fundamentalist religion whether Christian or Muslim is evil. It needs to be eradicated from the Earth.