Taliban and al Qaeda were creations of the United States, what about ISIS?

How is it that just as the US army leaves Iraq, a militant Islamic group from Syria is able to swoop in and takeover?

Ashish Chandra October 12, 2015
After chasing the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) out of Tikrit, Saddam Hussein’s hometown just about 100 miles from Baghdad, ISIS was supposed to be on its way out. The Iraqi forces held their own, as their prime minister famously claimed having won the ‘psychological battle’ against the jihadist group.

But if events over the past few weeks have indicated something, it is that the ISIS is no ordinary foe. For its sheer, brutal efficiency and an unnerving desire for the creation of the caliphate, it is scarier and more strategically organised than any terrorist group that has ever come before it. It has been recruiting people from all over the world, and the lightening quick speed with which it has established its stronghold over the ever-expanding region of Eastern Syria and Northern Iraq, goes on to show that the problem in the Middle East is here to stay.

Merely weeks after losing Tikrit, the ISIS has been able to take over Ramadi, the capital of the Anbar region of upper Iraq. This comes as a massive victory for the group, as they now effectively control both the Tigris and Euphrates, and also the roads that link central Iraq with central Syria. Control of water is critical in deciding the fate of this war, and ISIS now holds a major strategic edge as it can stall everyday life in Iraq at any time it wishes to do so.

In more recent news, just a couple of days ago, ISIS seized the Syrian city of Palmyra with apparent ease. Though not as strategically important as Ramadi, Palmyra is a world heritage site and was an important cultural centre of the ancient world. Sadly, it is bound to suffer the same fate as the ancient cities of Aleppo and Nineveh.

The attacks on these ancient sites are motivated by the group’s hostility to non-Islamic and pre-Islamic cultures. Also, the proceeds from the selling of the looted artefacts on the black market help the ISIS fund its campaign across Syria and Iraq. Making matters worse, trade among these Middle-Eastern countries has dwindled as violence has mounted, posing a fundamental dilemma for policymakers as commerce is the foundation on which peaceful relations could have been re-established.

ISIS’s advance through the Middle-East. Photo: The Economist

So, how do you stop these people?

Unfortunately, the more important questions that need to be answered are prior ones.

How is it that just as the US army leaves Iraq, a militant Islamic group from Syria is able to swoop in and takeover a large chunk of the country?

How is it that people from all over the world are voluntarily leaving their homes and joining the ranks of the ISIS?

Have we (and by ‘we’, I mean the United States) ever really wanted to stop them?

These are some of the questions that need to be answered.

On May 18thJudicial Watch published a selection of formerly classified documents obtained from the US Department of Defence that all but established that the US, as early as August 2012, knew about the rise of the ISIS. However, instead of clearly delineating it as a threat, ISIS was envisioned as an asset which would help destabilise Assad’s regime in Syria.

But weren’t the Taliban and al Qaeda also creations of the United States?

What makes the threats posed by ISIS any bit more dangerous than those posed by them in the past?

Well, the answer to that lies in the Saudi teachings and ISIS’s ultimate aim of taking over Makkah. Over the last few years, there has been ceaseless debate over whether the Islamic world poses a threat to the ideological West.

Political commentator and TV Host Bill Maher caused a great deal of controversy when he, on his show, Real Time with Bill Maher, claimed that the fundamental ideologies of terrorist groups like al Qaeda and ISIS were shared by the rest of the Muslim world. Though Maher can be xenophobic on occasions (including this one), his facile generalisation of the Muslim world is precisely what the ISIS wants to achieve.

Yaroslav Trofimov in his book, The Siege of Mecca, accounts how in 1979, a bunch of Wahhabis took over Makkah during Hajj and the royal family couldn’t capture them as it was illegal to carry any sort of weapons inside the holy site of Makkah. So, they had to go to the clerics and ask for a special fatwa so they could fight them and get them out of Makkah. But the clerics placed a condition that the fatwa would only be granted if the royal family would give them money to set up mosques around the world where Saudi teachings (which is basically fundamentalist in nature) would be taught.

This is where we answer the ISIS question – how can these guys recruit more than 25,000 foreign fighters in such a short span of time?

It doesn’t make any sense.

As long as the funding continues, people from all around the world (who are being taught these fundamentalist doctrines) will continue to rise and fight for ISIS. If Wahhabism is promoted and portrayed to be good, it won’t be long before these Saudi teachings will become the dominant Muslim thought, in the process turning Maher’s idiotic claims into reality.

Now, just imagine if these people get their hands on nuclear arsenal.


“The Islamic State has claimed that it is ‘infinitely’ closer to buying a nuclear bomb from Pakistan.”

Well... there we go!

The original post appeared here.

Ashish Chandra The author is a law student from India.
The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necassarily reflect the views and policies of the Express Tribune.


khan | 8 years ago | Reply what a boring, useless and biased blog.. and you wouldnt be an indian if you dont mention pakistan in each and every mess... gay hind
DudeFromDC | 8 years ago | Reply Ashish Chandra, dude... how much did you get to write this prop piece?
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ