Middle EastWorld News

ISIL, Al-Qaeda compete for supremacy in global terrorism

ISIL, Al-Qaeda compete for supremacy in global terrorism

Much media attention has recently focused on a statement issued by Al-Qaeda’s central command on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border under Ayman al-Zawahiri’s leadership, declaring that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) has no relationship with the central leadership of Al-Qaeda.
On the basis of this development, one might think that ISIL, which has hitherto been described in the media as an “Al-Qaeda affiliate,” may lose ground and standing in the eyes of terrorist groups and their supporters both inside and outside Syria. Indeed, in Jordan, the Salafi movement has come firmly on the side of al-Nusra Front against ISIL, maintaining strong links with al-Nusra in the southern Syrian border province of Daraa, which lacks an ISIL presence.
One should also note the extent to which tensions on the ground have grown between ISIL and al-Nusra. Beginning with infighting between al-Nusra and ISIL in the city of Raqqa, clashes have since spread further out east.
On Feb. 7, al-Nusra released a statement criticizing ISIL in Deir Ezzor province and the wider east of Syria, pointing to long-standing grievances like ISIL’ besieging the headquarters of al-Nusra in the Hasakah province locality of Ash Shaddadi, despite their cooperation against Kurdish and regime forces.
Indeed, now that Al-Qaeda’s central command has officially disavowed ISIL, al-Nusra’s leadership no longer has to consider ISIL a part of the same Al-Qaeda family and therefore, it may side with ISIL’ enemies.
These issues notwithstanding, it is unlikely that ISIL’ role in Syria and among militants and their supporters across the world will be diminished. First, the media’s constant descriptions of ISIL as an “Al-Qaeda affiliate” until this recent statement have been deeply misguided and reflect a misunderstanding of how ISIL has seen itself.
According to ISIL supporters and militant, ISIL and its predecessor, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), have been independent of Al-Qaeda since the inception of ISI in October 2006. This line of narrative — articulated by them long before this statement — argues that when ISI was formed, it absorbed what was then Al-Qaeda in Iraq (which was certainly the main component of the ISI umbrella coalition), as the pledge of allegiance was switched from Al-Qaeda to the emir of ISI.
ISIL’ supporters and fighters further point to Zawahiri’s statement in 2007 explicitly claiming that there is no “Al-Qaeda in Iraq” anymore, as it had joined other terrorist groups in the ISI.
Regardless of whether one wishes to accept this narrative of independence from Al-Qaeda from the very beginning, there is no doubt that the ISI quickly became an organization capable of supporting itself financially and supplying its own manpower.
Today, as has been the case for years, ISIL’ vast financial resources are in large part being driven through the extensive networks of extortion and other crimes it runs in Mosul and wider northern Iraq, making at least $1 million a month from the city alone. Despite its setbacks during the US troop surge and the Sahwa tribal revolt, ISI was never quite dislodged from Mosul.
More recently, ISIL has been able to acquire additional funding through controlling oil and gas resources in eastern Syria, constituting what we call a major “crime family” in opposition to two other major groupings: al-Nusra working with the Islamic Front, and the Democratic Union Party (PYD).
ISIL’ considerable financial clout — as well as the fact that members and supporters take offence to being described as a mere “group” or “faction” — has been a key factor behind the group’s vast territorial expansion, such that the group now has more strongholds than before the infighting.
Indeed, there has also been a misunderstanding of how ISIL organized itself prior to the large-scale conflict with other rebel groups. Rather than focusing on acquiring strongholds, ISIL previously tried to gain footholds in as many localities as possible, and as result became too thinly spread and vulnerable to a multi-pronged attack.
Since then, ISIL has regrouped, allowing it to seize exclusive control of the important Aleppo provincial towns of al-Bab and Manbij. In Raqqa province, the gains have been even more impressive: exclusive control of the provincial capital, the key border town of Tel Abyad and all other localities apart from a PYD stronghold just west of Tel Abyad and a couple of regime air bases — the Tabqa military airport and Brigade 17.
Such territorial control, along with a heavy, open emphasis on proto-state building and the goals of re-establishing the caliphate and achieving eventual world domination (goals also supported by al-Nusra, though hardly ever articulated openly except by foreign fighters in unofficial video footage), has meant that ISIL continues to be the number-one banner to which Takfiri foreign militants congregate.
On the wider international scene, Al-Qaeda’s disavowal of ISIL has only hardened pre-existing divisions among the global jihad movement that have long been apparent.
For example, over the last summer and in subsequent months, there were signs of support for ISIL from the Gaza/Sinai region. This trend has been reinforced by recent affirmations of support from two major terrorist groups in this area: Jamaat Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, which is behind attacks in Egypt beyond the Sinai, and the Majlis Shura al-Mujahideen, active in both Sinai and Gaza and at strong odds with Hamas. As for the Jordanian Salafi support for al-Nusra noted above, this trend can be traced back to the very beginning of the dispute.
The question of whether ISIL’ influence can be reduced ultimately depends on how well other militant groups can form a united front against it. So far, events on the ground still point to the obstacle of localization for such an effort to come about.
In short, the current situation suggests a cementing of current positions, similar to what happened in the wider militant-PYD conflict that broke out in mid-summer 2013, rather than a decisive victory for ISIL or its rivals.
In real terms, it is ISIL and not Al-Qaeda that is making headway in building a caliphate, with extensive advertising of its projects on social media. Combined with ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s projection of himself as a caliph, ISIL and Al-Qaeda are effectively in direct competition with each other over who gets to set up and rule an envisioned caliphate, the greatest challenge yet to Al-Qaeda’s status as the leading face of global jihad.
Despite sharing a virtually identical ideological program and being much younger than Al-Qaeda, ISIL looks set to retain the upper hand for the time being, so long as it does not incur substantial territorial losses and can showcase its caliphate-building better than Al-Qaeda and its official affiliates.

Back to top button
Close