Rise of ISIS Page 2
But it is a mistake to think of these groups as entirely separate. Indeed, they are motivated by the same hate, the same faith, and employ many of the same tactics. But they share something else in common, something strategically significant: they do not want to just spread terror; they want to establish terror-run nation-states, permanent bases from which to wage unrelenting jihad.7
In fact, the organizations are so similar in goals and tactics that one has only to look to the Christians of Iraq to see what would happen to the Jews of Israel if Hamas were ever to gain the upper hand in its war against Israel. The only difference between the experience of the Christians of Iraq and the Jews of Israel is that the Jews of Israel have the F-16s and tanks of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to protect them, while the Christians of Iraq are largely defenseless.
Yes, the Peshmerga militia in Kurdistan has done its best to defend Kurdistan (where tens of thousands of Christians have fled), but it has not been able to stand against the armored vehicles and artillery that ISIS captured from the Iraqi Army. Further, the small and limited American air strikes that defend Iraq pale in comparison to the Israeli bombardment of Gaza that helps protect Israel from Hamas.
In other words, without the means of self-defense, the Christians of Iraq and the Middle East may well be slaughtered. Without their self-defense, the people of Israel certainly would be.
When jihad is on the march, only overwhelming force can stop it.
· · · · ·
And that brings us to the next great challenge described in the book, the struggle against the jihadists’ allies in the U.N., Europe, and elsewhere—people who would argue that Israel and America must not be allowed to effectively fight jihad.
The U.N. and its leftist friends watch Hamas use human shields and blame Israel when civilians die.
The U.N. and its leftist friends discover that Hamas has been hiding rockets in U.N. facilities, and then applaud as U.N. officials hand those rockets back to Hamas.
The U.N. and its leftist friends watch as Hamas uses its facilities as bases for terror tunnels and then booby-traps U.N. facilities to kill Israeli soldiers, and find no fault.
The U.N. appoints obviously biased “scholars” to investigate alleged Israeli “war crimes,” and the international left uses the results of that biased investigation to deprive Israel of its most basic right of self-defense.
And lest you think this campaign to demonize and restrict Israel applies only to our closest Middle East ally and friend—and not to American forces—think again. By attacking Israel, the U.N. and the international left are trying to establish an entirely new “law of war” that would be used to try to tie America’s hands as it fights terror at home and abroad. These new rules and regulations would be used to brand our own soldiers as war criminals.
After all, when it comes to our own military tactics in the war against jihadist terrorists, our own military is far less restrained than Israel’s.
How do we know? One of my coauthors helped make key decisions in Iraq on when to drop bombs, fire artillery shells, or launch rockets. We know our American rules and practices, and we know Israeli rules and practices, and the Israelis are even more constrained than America.
Before they strike, the Israelis will often call or send text messages to warn citizens to evacuate. Before we strike, we give no warnings. Our drone strikes and air strikes come by surprise, deliberately designed to catch as many of the enemy in one place as possible.
And that’s our right, under the law of war. But if the international left has its way, we will lose that right. Israel will lose that right. And jihadist terrorists will be left free to fight as savagely as they please—immune from prosecution for war crimes by an indifferent, even sympathetic world.
In the aftermath of the Holocaust, the world vowed, “Never again.” Never again would the great powers sit on their hands while an entire people faced extinction. The world has since failed in that pledge, failing to protect the Cambodians from the killing fields, failing to protect the Tutsis of Rwanda even when minimal force could have stopped the killing of hundreds of thousands, and now we’re largely watching—once again—as genocide unfolds before our eyes.
* * *
But if the international left has its way, we will lose that right. Israel will lose that right. And jihadist terrorists will be left free to fight as savagely as they please—immune from prosecution for war crimes by an indifferent, even sympathetic world.
* * *
In the chapters that follow, you will first learn about ISIS—where it came from, its goals, and its capabilities. Then you will learn the same about Hamas, as well as the history of its war against Israel. You will learn about the law of war and war crimes, including who is guilty and who is innocent. You will hear stories about the incredible bravery of men and women in uniform who have confronted the horrors of jihad and laid down their lives to protect the innocent.
Finally, you’ll learn what you can do—what our nation can do—to stop an emerging genocide, defeat jihad, and protect Israel. This book is not long, but you’ll notice that it is full of footnotes to our sources. In other words, we’ve done our homework. When you read, you’ll be equipped to raise this issue at home, on social media, in our communities, and when you speak or write to your elected representatives. Ignorance is the enemy not just of our democratic system but also of our moral integrity as a nation, as the land of the free and home of the brave. Read this book and you will be informed.
Earlier in this chapter, I described the shock of hearing the siren warning of a rocket attack in Israel. Treat this book as your own siren, as your warning that jihad is on the march.
It has been thirteen years since September 11, 2001, when al-Qaeda (a less brutal organization than ISIS) flew passenger jets into the Pentagon and World Trade Center and hijacked Flight 93 before courageous Americans fought back, causing the plane to crash before its target. Nearly three thousand Americans died. Since September 11, thousands more Americans have died fighting jihad overseas, with tens of thousands wounded.
After all that loss, after all that expense, jihad is still spreading. Indeed, our own government threw away victory in Iraq and is on the verge of leaving Afghanistan to its fate. It is understandable if Americans are weary of thinking about war, of worrying about war. But enemies do not fight on our timetables.
* * *
Now is not the time to grow weary in the face of evil. Now is not the time to allow our hunger for peace to obscure our enemy’s desire for war. Innocent lives are at stake, and immense evil is on the march. Let’s call our nation to action again.
* * *
If Americans are war-weary, think about the Israelis. They’ve likely not had a year without combat since modern Israel was founded in 1948 and was immediately attacked by Arab armies bent on destroying the new nation and driving the Jews into the sea. To be an Israeli means being willing to fight for your life against jihad.
Now is not the time to grow weary in the face of evil. Now is not the time to allow our hunger for peace to obscure our enemy’s desire for war. Innocent lives are at stake, and immense evil is on the march. Let’s call our nation to action again, before Christians and Jews are slaughtered in the Middle East and before the smoke and flames of terror fill American skies once more.
CHAPTER TWO
THE RISE OF ISIS AND THE NEW CALIPHATE
Ask any combat veteran of the Iraq War—any veteran who spent serious time “outside the wire” (outside the American bases)—about our enemy there, and the stories will flow. In one small region in one year alone, jihadists in Iraq committed the following atrocities:
• Packed explosives in a small boy’s backpack (without his knowledge) and detonated the backpack while he was wearing it at a family wedding;
• Put explosives inside the tubing of a child’s bicycle and detonated it after the child rode it to a local market;
• Shot a seven-week-old baby in the face, in front of the b
aby’s mother, as a “warning” against collaborating with American forces;
• Raped women and then told them the only way to redeem their honor was to blow themselves up as suicide bombers;
• Used those female suicide bombers (who wouldn’t be stopped and frisked because of cultural and religious prohibitions against male police officers touching women) to blow up restaurants, hospitals, and open-air markets;
• Faked surrenders inside mosques and then used the cover of the mosque to ambush American soldiers;
• Put bombs on handicapped children, knowing that American soldiers showed particular compassion for mentally handicapped or physically impaired kids; and
• Killed entire villages for the crime of resisting Sharia law or allegedly cooperating with the Iraqi government.
That’s a partial list.
And the crimes didn’t stop with murder. When AQI—the forerunner to ISIS—took over a region, it would implement the most draconian Sharia law imaginable, requiring women to cover themselves from head to toe, prohibiting most forms of education for women, and even regulating the kinds of foods women were permitted to purchase. The repression was so intolerable, so violent, that even as far back as 2007 and the increase in U.S. troops in Iraq known as the Surge, the rift between AQI and al-Qaeda headquarters in Pakistan emerged. Yet AQI persisted, convinced that its killing spree would usher in the new Caliphate, a new government.
This new Caliphate is crucial to ISIS. Here’s why: Islam purports to be a universal religion. In other words, its teachings encompass all aspects of life and its ultimate goal is the establishment of a global Islamic state.1 This political idea of Islam is embodied in the concept of the ummah (community), which is the idea that all Muslims, wherever they reside, are bound together through a common faith that transcends all geographical, political, or national boundaries.2 This common bond is formed through Muslims’ allegiance to Allah and to the Prophet Muhammad.3 Because Muslims believe that Allah revealed all laws concerning religious and secular matters through the Prophet Muhammad, the entire ummah is governed by the divine law, or Sharia.4 Sharia is applicable at all times and places and, therefore, transcends geographical boundaries and supersedes all other laws.5
Traditionally, Islam divides the world into two spheres: the house of Islam (dar-al-Islam) and the house of war (dar-al-harb).6 The house of Islam includes nations and territories that are under the control of Muslims and where Sharia law is the highest authority.7 The house of war includes nations and territories that are under the control of non-Muslims and that do not submit to Sharia.8 Consequently, under the jihadist interpretation of Islam, there will be constant conflict between the house of Islam and the house of war until the house of war is transformed into the house of Islam.9 The conflict will not end until all land is conquered for Allah,10 thereby establishing a single, global, Islamic State, also known as the Caliphate.11
The Caliphate is envisioned to be a unified, transnational government ruling over the entire Muslim Community, ummah.12 It is to be governed pursuant to Sharia and enforced by a supreme leader, the caliph.13 Because Allah alone is the lawgiver, there is no place for a legislator; in Islam, human government exists only to enforce Allah’s law.14
The caliph’s position is to administer and enforce the divine law.15 The caliph is seen as the “vicegerent of Allah upon earth, charged with the duty of judging righteously, i.e., of applying [Sharia], between men.”16 Accordingly, the “caliphate is the highest type of political organization on earth” and its subjects can derive their highest welfare through “absolute obedience to its ordinances.”17
Going back to the founding of the Muslim faith, Muslims believed that Allah had delegated to the Prophet Muhammad authority to rule the people with justice.18 Yet, when Muhammad died, he had neither designated a successor nor provided guidance regarding how to choose a successor.19 The lack of explicit guidance on how to determine Muhammad’s successor has been a prime source of the long-standing, bloody divide between Sunni and Shia Muslims.20 Shias believe that the caliph must come from the bloodline of the Prophet Muhammad, whereas Sunnis maintain that any believer may qualify for the office of caliph, regardless of his lineage.21
The Sunnis had three caliphs before Ali (Muhammad’s son-in-law and cousin), who became the fourth caliph.22 Contending that Ali was the first legitimate successor, Shias dispute the first three Sunni caliphs.23 Most Shias “consider belief in Muhammad’s designation of Ali as his successor a religious duty alongside belief in the oneness of God.”24 Shias therefore believe that the imam, which is the Shia version of the caliph, must be a descendant of Ali.25 Most Shias are “twelver Shia,” who believe that there were twelve imams. The last one is supposed to come back as “Mahdi.”26 (In fact, a number of Shia leaders have claimed to be the Mahdi over the past ten centuries, igniting multiple bloody conflicts, including the Mahdist War against the Egyptians and British in the late nineteenth century.) “Until the Mahdi returns many Shia[s] believe that there will be just ayatollas (a more recent designation) and other levels of Shia scholars in hawzas (scholarly systems) to help explain the religion.”27
Beginning with the first Caliphate, the caliph would select a place to base the empire.28 And while the Shias looked for the Mahdi, the Sunnis were busy establishing their own caliphs, including Caliphates ruled from Damascus, Baghdad, and Istanbul.29 The last Sunni Caliphate was ruled by Ottoman sultans for five hundred years, during the Ottoman Empire.30
When the Ottoman Empire collapsed following World War I (the Ottoman Empire sided with Germany in the war, against Great Britain and France),31 the titles of sultan and caliph were rendered mere names with no real power.32 “On November 1, 1922, under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal (who later took the name of Atatürk), the newly formed Turkish Grand National Assembly abolished the sultanate, and the last sultan, Murad VI Vahdeddin, fled from Istanbul aboard a British battleship.”33 Atatürk ultimately persuaded the Turkish Assembly to abolish the Caliphate, which it did on March 24, 1924.34 Abolition of the Caliphate removed a significant symbol of universal Islamic authority, a symbol many Sunni groups wish to restore.
Reestablishment of the Caliphate has been a long-standing goal of Sunni Muslims.35 The Muslim Brotherhood, for example, was founded in Egypt in 1928 with the goal of reestablishing the traditional Caliphate.36 Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other jihadist groups also seek to reestablish a new Caliphate.37 ISIS has gone further than any other to make that radical dream a present reality.
The new Caliphate in Iraq and Syria is not the first Caliphate proclaimed by jihadists. In 2007, they tried to launch a Caliphate in Diyala Province, Iraq. Calling their new “nation” the Islamic State of Iraq, AQI controlled a vast section of the province and maintained that control until they were finally crushed in 2008.
Why bring this up? Why speak of years past?
Because America has seen this enemy. We have fought this enemy. And we know it can be defeated.
On July 4, 2014, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, newly proclaimed “Caliph Ibrahim” and leader of the so-called Islamic State (also known as ISIS38 or ISIL39), delivered a sermon at the Grand Mosque in Mosul, Iraq. In his sermon, al-Baghdadi claimed the mantle of caliph—Allah’s vicegerent on earth—and called on fellow Muslims to obey him as they would Allah and Muhammad. Here is the key section of his sermon. It makes for chilling reading:
Verily your brothers the Mujahidin, Allah Blessed and High be He, has favored them with victory and conquest. And he established for them after long years of jihad and patience, and meeting in combat with the enemies of Allah, he granted them success, empowered them in order to fulfill their purpose. Verily they hastened to announce the Caliphate and appointing [sic] a leader, and this is an obligation upon Muslims. An obligation which has been made lost for centuries and was absent upon earth’s existence, and so many Muslims were ignorant of it. And those who commit sin; where Muslims are sinning by abandoning and neglecting it, for verily they have to always strive
to establish it and here now they have established it, praise and favor is due to Allah.
Verily I am in a trial by this great matter. I am in trial by this trust, a heavy-weighted trust. And so I was put in authority over you, and I am not the best of you nor am I better than you. If you see me upon truth, then support me; and if you see me upon falsehood, then advise me and guide me and obey me as long as I obey Allah in you. Verily if I disobey Him, then obey me not. I am not to promise you as how the kings and rulers promise their followers and their citizens from luxury, prosperity, security and wealth; but instead, I promise you by what Allah, Blessed and High be He, has promised His believing servants: Allah has promised those who have believed among you and done righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession upon the earth just as He granted it to those before them. Just as He granted it to those before them and that He will surely substitute for them, after their fear, security, they worship Me, not associating anything with Me. But whoever disbelieves after that—then those are the defiantly disobedient.40 (Emphasis added.)
Who is this man? Who is making such grandiose proclamations, using the language of a crazed, self-proclaimed prophet?
“Caliph Ibrahim” was born Abu Du’a in 1971.41 His most recent nom de guerre (many jihadists take on a “war name” to build their legend and strike fear in the hearts of their enemies) is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. He grew up in “a religious family in Samarra. . . . He studied Islamic history as a student and . . . gained a doctorate from Baghdad University in the late 1990s.”42 In other words, like many jihadists, he was hardly the desperate, poverty-stricken warrior that the media imagines. “It is likely al-Baghdadi held a religious position in the Sunni community when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.”43 Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq, al-Baghdadi joined the armed resistance to coalition troops in Iraq, but he was captured and detained in a U.S.-run Iraqi prison in 2006.44 Following al-Baghdadi’s release in the late 2000s, he joined the predecessor to ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI).45 In 2010, al-Baghdadi became the leader of ISI.46 He changed the name of the organization to ISIS in 2013.