While the Islamic State continues to lose territory on the ground in Iraq and Syria, the appeal of its apocalyptic ideas has proven more enduring. Since 2014, the group, also known as ISIS, has managed to attract as many as 30,000 recruits from around the world, including several thousand men and women from Europe and North America.
A significant number of these individuals are believed to have been recruited online using social media.
A new project focused on interviews with individuals who joined and later defected from ISIS might offer a way of stifling the appeal of the group. The ISIS Defectors Interview Project, conducted by the International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism, compiles video and written testimony from former members of the group. Between September 2015 and May 2016, Anne Speckhard, a research psychologist at Georgetown University, and Ahmet Yayla, a former counterterrorism head of the Turkish National Police, met with 32 former ISIS members who escaped the group and have since fled to Turkey.
The reality described by these defectors bears little resemblance to the utopian conditions described by the Islamic State in its propaganda. While their paths to joining the group may have been different, they ultimately rejected the militant organization after seeing firsthand what its practices were like. Instead of finding defenders of besieged Sunni Muslim communities, defectors often found the Islamic State to be merciless with anyone who opposed its rule. Appalled by the cruelty, injustice, and oppression they witnessed, they fled ISIS in disillusionment.
“There is a difference between Syrians and Iraqis who join the group and foreigners. For locals, they may be facing a war where ISIS has taken over the territory where they live, or they are scared of the government or other groups,” says Speckhard. “For foreign volunteers, the appeal may be due to a sense of discrimination, or it may be to find an element of adventure or meaning. But often, when they see the reality — the corruption, the brutality, the horrible, ugly things — it makes them run away.”
The excruciating violence that accompanied the collapse of the state in Iraq and Syria, footage of which is disseminated daily around the world through social media, has added to a sense that Sunni Muslims are oppressed in these countries. The Islamic State claims to be the only credible protector of Sunnis in these countries and around the world, but testimony from ISIS defectors demonstrates that, in practice, the group’s violence does not differentiate among Sunni and other religious groups.
Indeed, ISIS violence targets with particular ferocity Sunni members of the Free Syrian Army and their families.
“One day, I was about to leave on my motorcycle. There were three older men in their 50s brought in. They didn’t even look like they could carry a rifle. They were being punished,” one defector said. “I asked the other [ISIS] guys why they were there. They trusted me so they told me that these men’s sons were fighting with the Free Syrian Army. Later on, they beheaded and hung them in the town square. They took photos and spread them around — just because their sons were serving in the Free Syrian Army.”
According to several other defectors, sexual slavery, one of the group’s most abhorrent practices, also does not differentiate between minorities or Sunni Muslims who opposed the Islamic State’s political ambitions. As one defector said: “The thing that affected me the most was that they would take a Muslim woman, for instance a [Syrian] Muslim woman whose husband was with [the Free Syrian Army] and they take her children away from her.”
After taking her away from her children, ISIS members might sell the woman, the defector said, but if they decided “she is pretty and good-looking, then they will take her for themselves.”
Another defector recalled seeing dozens of women from all religious backgrounds being held as sexual captives by ISIS fighters at an abandoned oil refinery. “There were 475 women captives, Yazidis and Iraqis. Some were wives of Iraqi army soldiers. Some were Syrian,” he said. “They were mixed. Anyone whose husband worked with the Syrian regime — some from Raqqa, Shaddadi — any province under ISIS control.”
Hassan Hassan, a resident fellow at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, says the Islamic State’s use of extreme violence against Sunni Muslims isn’t necessarily at odds with the group’s ideology. “The ideology of ISIS was founded on a sectarian basis and targeted Shia Muslims. But it also focused with particular ferocity on Sunnis who worked in institutions that are part of the regional or international order, as it deems them traitors.”
ISIS members consider Sunni Muslims who oppose them “their worst enemies,” Hassan says. When ISIS burned alive the Jordanian pilot Muath al-Kassasbeh, it was “because he was a Sunni and they wanted to make an example of him.”
While Islamic State propaganda directed toward Western audiences focuses on the ferocious violence of the group, its message to potential supporters tends to be significantly different. Through videos and social media outreach, ISIS portrays an idyllic life in the territories under its control, including housing, health care, and security.
For people who are aggrieved by scenes of bloodshed and tyranny in the Middle East, ISIS also offers a chance for revenge and “justice,” in part through the creation of a radically new regional order.
“Many of the people fighting and dying against ISIS are themselves pious Sunni Muslims, and in countering ISIS messaging, it’s important to emphasize that this is a genuine popular war against an extremist organization,” says Hassan. “If all we hear in the media is that Marxist Kurds or Shia groups are the only ones fighting ISIS, it feeds into their sectarian narrative.”
The stories of cruelty related by Islamic State defectors help deconstruct this narrative. In one video included in the report, a 15-year-old Syrian who managed to escape from the group described the brutal violence he witnessed during his time in its territory, including public executions. “They pretend to be Muslim, but they just teach people to blow themselves up and tell you you’re going to paradise — but none of it is true,” the boy says, his voice choking with emotion.
Although ISIS has sought to downplay or rationalize its violence against Sunni Muslims, in recent months this facade has become more difficult to maintain. Deadly attacks linked to ISIS in Istanbul and even Medina have highlighted the group’s capacity for indiscriminate violence on a global scale.
In a hearing on ISIS ideology held by the House Homeland Security Committee last month, Dr. Tarek Elgawhary, director of religious studies at the World Organization for Resource Development and Education, testified about the unhinged nature of the group’s ideology. Describing ISIS fighters as “unlettered warmongers,” Elghawary told lawmakers that they had in essence “created a parallel religion and called it Islam.”
During fighting over the past year, ISIS has lost almost 50 percent of the territory it once held in Iraq and Syria. While the physical infrastructure of the group in time may be wiped out, a different type of battle still needs to be waged against the “brand” it has created and disseminated around the world. Doing so will require undermining its claims to be defending the oppressed while putting an end to the chaos and injustice in the Middle East that has created a market for apocalyptic, millenarian ideas.
“Something that Americans really miss about terrorism these days is that every good lie contains a bit of truth,” says Speckhard. “The truth in Islamic State’s propaganda is the suffering and grievances that they can point to in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere.”
Top photo: A member of Iraqi counterterrorism forces stands guard near Islamic State militant graffiti in Fallujah, Iraq.
The US and its allies are creating and supporting ISIS in the Middle East and North Africa. Some of this support is more or less direct. Some of it comes from policies that many people in those regions rightly find very objectionable. Many writers from many publications have documented this.
Attack the root of the problem. We should stop all of our foreign meddling and take care of our numerous and huge problems here at home.
Thank you Murtaza Hussain for covering our work. In the US the FBI has 1000 ISIS related cases open, all of them including an online recruitment element. ISIS is currently dominating in the online and social media space. at ICSVE we are challenging that. Our two new ISIS defector videos speaking out are here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCumpEsozixbl-PyKw12hmnw and are rapidly being subtitled in multiple languages via crowd sourcing. Please tweet them, post them and use them for prevention, counter-radicalization and to confront the lies of ISIS. Our Internet memes of ISIS defectors speaking out are being made and loaded to our website and also being tweeted out. We have 36 more ISIS defector videos to process into edit clips and working with volunteers primarily. Please visit http://www.ICSVE.org to donate and help this project break the ISIS brand!
Agree or disagree, but this is what Dr. Juan Cole has to say:
Is Religion really Driving Middle East Violence?, at http://www.juancole.com/2016/07/religion-driving-violence.html
If people make a decision to go to a foreign country to get killed or suffer the consequences of what ever the foreign cultural norms are whether it’s a business person doing business or a person participating in an armed conflict, I believe that’s their problem. We, our government, are to involved in the affairs of our citizens actions outside of the US proper. Too much energy is spent on shit like trade agreements and such. It’s all bullshit!
All I needed to know that ISIS was evil when I figured out the second letter stands for “state”. Hate the State and all its Evil Works, as Murray Rothbard taught us. Government/state is simply an organization that claims a monopoly on violence in a given geographic territory.
The Islamic State is a lot like it’s predecessors- Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Islamic State of Iraq – in that while they can fight and recruit, they are political imbeciles. Lucky for all of us…
One thing I’d like to see more of, is a greater willingness for the media to mock and make a joke of the Islamic State and its stupidity and hypocrisies. It is tough to laugh in the face of their atrocities but by doing so, it can remove some of the fear that they work so hard to instill as part of their grand strategy (Following “The Management of Savagery.” Yes, such a manifesto exists…). I find it funny that Baghdadi, the self proclaimed “Caliph Ibrahim” has basically been hiding like a coward (if he’s even alive) for well over a year, and that recently their soldiers have been facing salary cuts. Their well-polished, idyllic propaganda with kids holding onto plastic guns and riding ferris wheels with the obnoxious, non-stop nasheeds playing in the background lends itself to some nice mockery.
This is a very positive development for the whole world and promises to bring about some peace. Muslims have to forget their religious and territorial animosities, and instead resort to mutual assistance if they have to survive the current tragedy that has befallen them due to their own idiotic and corrupt behavior. This is a big problem that they need to solve. Else, expect President Trump to make some really nasty deals that they won’t like at all.
” International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism,”
(I wonder what their goals look like)
Yeah, it’s the glory of an after-life that persuades people to join up.
Of course Speckhard must know just how big a “bit of truth” really is.
Which regrettably only leaves president Obama room for a couple of choices: Fool or Hypocrite?
Really? And then what? Some of us remember a time when “terrorists” by todays definition did not exist. Sovereign respected and respectful nations do not produce terrorists. Of course, like your neighbor down the stree, he may just want you to go back to your own house?
This is a vital point, that the “terrorists” themselves may provide the most powerful voice against terrorism, powerful for dissuading others from following in their footsteps. If we can just treat them as human beings, we will afford them the chance to rediscover their own humanity. And if they have found their humanity, treating them as humans gives them the chance to be heard.
The whole approach of the “War on Terror” — dehumanising the people on the other end of the gun barrel and turning them into caricatures of evil — can only prolong this violence. By seeing them as real people with real grievances and real difficulties, making bad choices under pressure, we have a chance at picking the problem apart.
It’s not a state, and it’s certainly not Islamic, Murtaza.
I think Fawaz Gerges says it best:
Later:
Finally, as an author stated a couple years back:
Well, if ISIS is not Islamic, then the Inquisition was not Catholic. The fact is that there are no defensible criteria for whether a faith is “true,” since all faiths are man-made and accrete doctrine—said to come from God, but itself man-made—that becomes integral to those faiths. Whatever “true faith” means, it doesn’t mean “the right religion: the one whose God exists and whose doctrines are correct.” If that were so, we wouldn’t see Westerners trying to tell us what “true Islam” is.
There’s enough evidence in Islam’s primary and secondary sources for me to consider Daesh utterly un-Islamic.
I usually do not need to consult Islam’s secondary sources since its primary, and most authentic, source, the Quran, sets Islam’s parameters and outline, and Daesh doesn’t fit within those parameters.
But the evidence against terrorism in the secondary sources is also overwhelming, as described in this 600+ page fatwa:
http://www.minhajbooks.com/images-books/Edict-Terrorism-Fitna-Khawarij/Edict-Terrorism-Fitna-Khawarij_1.pdf
Many other Muslim groups also do not consider them Islamic, e.g., a year ago, more than 1,000 Muslim leaders in India endorsed a religious ruling, or fatwa, condemning Daesh militant group as antithetical to the teachings of Islam and inhumane.
One is free to consider them Islamic, that is, according to the teachings of Islam, but there’s a lot of evidence that their actions are utterly in violation of the Quran and Islam’s secondary sources.
So, to consider them Islamic is a contradiction.
If a group of people called themselves The Vatican, took a small territory somewhere in South America, and engaged in violent acts claiming to be sanctioned by The Vatican, I doubt it if the world media would refer to them as “The Vatican”.
Similarly, if someone whose ideology is just the opposite of The Intercept, set up a news website and called it “The Intercept” and started to publish articles that go against what this Intercept adheres to, this Intercept would not recognize the other Intercept as the true The Intercept.
So, while some may consider Daesh to be Islamic, we do not, and we are sticking to it, as we see Daesh in violation of the Quran.
Focus on the “state” and not “Islamic” part of the name and you will see what organization-type world wide is the common purveyor of mass violence. Of course people percent all types of creeds and cultures to acquire state power.
“Pervert” not “percent”
But there is no arbiter to say who or what groups is or is not “Islamic.” To do so would require establishment of criteria that doesn’t exist. If you were able to establish such criteria that rendered ISIL non-Islamic, how would it characterize other extremist groups such as al Qaeda, the Afghani Taliban, Pakistani Taliban (TTP), JAN, Boko Haram, et al? What if you determine a group follows the Quran in certain respects, while not in others?
Such parameters do not exist because religious texts are not comprised of indisputable facts. They are obviously dependent on interpretation and hence the existence of different denominations and branches.
I took a cursory glance at the book’s preface and while it appears to be an interesting read, it’s a document created by one person. He admits it himself in the Introduction: “Moreover, some scholars have strangely equivocated on such issues. That is, they have developed confusing and occasionally inconsistent arguments relating to the motivations of the perpetrators that could, by not closing the door completely, unintentionally allow would-be terrorists to slip through the gap into sinful action”
Who is to say which scholars are right or wrong?
This is a false equivalence because: (1) you are narrowing the focus from religion in general – where there is no monolithic belief – to religious institutions. The Vatican could disappear overnight and Catholicism would endure. And while the Vatican may aspire to represent the beliefs of all Catholics, it does not. (2) Unless I’m mistaken, Islam does not have a Vatican equivalent.
Another false equivalence because “The Intercept” is a singular media entity, not a cultural system of behaviors and practices.
Thank you for taking the time to post a detailed and thoughtful response. I’m unable to write a detailed and thoughtful response at this time. I’m now resting with my iPad and just shut down my MacBook for the day. It’s awkward for me to write a detailed post on the iPad.
You have a valid point.
It used to be that the Muslim scholars with large followings, and the rulers and their advisors (religious and otherwise) would be the natural arbiters, but that changed as things deteriorated and then when Muslims’ structures and hierarchies were pretty much destroyed by the colonial powers.
That said, there is now enough consensus amongst the Muslim scholars that Daesh is not Islamic and they base it on their reading of Islam’s primary and secondary sources.
Most Muslims appear to have accepted their decree.
For me, the criterion is the Quran, which is Islam’s primary, and the most authentic, source, and sets Islam’s framework.
There’s enough evidence from the Quran and other sources to consider Daesh un-Islamic, and I am satisfied with it.
Terrorist groups are cancerous tumors within the body of Islam. As such they need to be removed, that is, thrown out of the fold of Islam, even if they carry out certain acts, like praying and fasting, that are according to the teachings of Islam.
Not throwing them outside the fold of Islam was, and is, a huge mistake. Since Islam doesn’t have a religious hierarchy like Catholicism, it makes it harder to come up with such a decree and implement it. But if they could do it to the Ahmadi Muslims, which, in my opinion, was unjust, they should’ve, and should, do it for these terrorist groups, and do so loudly.
It’s simply a matter of Muslim political and religious leaders gathering and decreeing it.
This does not mean that individual Muslim groups and individual Muslims do not consider them un-Islamic. They do. However, it needs to be done at a much larger scale and more formally.
Sure, but there’s 1400+ years of traditional scholarship of these texts in Islam and one can examine their interpretations to come up with a reasonable understanding.
That said, there are certain things in the Quran that appear to be quite clear. It’s obviously a matter of reading the Quran in a certain way and one can argue about it. Often certain groups read it without textual and historical contexts. So we know why their interpretations differ from others’.
Yes, it is a compilation of Islamic sources by a single person.
What is important to understand is that he lists Prophetic traditions to make his case. One is free to examine those traditions and analyze them for oneself.
But he is not alone in his assessment. Many other scholars have written similar things.
There have been many decrees against terrorism in general, and against Daesh in particular.
In my understanding the argument that these groups are like the Kharijites of yesteryears is overwhelming. They are in fact cancerous tumors within Islam, and must be removed.
The Quran does, which speaks for Islam.
It’s not that difficult to recognize the circle the Quran draws.
The biggest mistake traditional Sunni Muslims make is that they don’t start with the Quran. They start with Islam’s secondary sources and examine the Quran in light of them, instead of the other way around.
But I recognize what you are trying to say, and it’s true that it becomes a matter of people accepting certain scholars and rejecting others.
Nevertheless, we know the mistakes these fringe groups make in examining Islam’s sources.
You are looking at the outer forms of the two examples I gave. The inner reality of them is that a fringe group hijacks something that is well established and is guilty of misappropriation, and working in the name of something they are not authorized to do so, which is determined by the 1400 years of scholarship and consensus.
In the end, I’d repeat what I have stated often: When someone says, “Islam is…”, or “Islam says…”, or “Islam does…”, what they are saying in reality is: “Islam, as I understand, is…” or “Islam, as I understand, says…”, or “Islam, as I understand, does…”
So when I say these things, I am essentially presenting my own person understanding of what Islam is, says, and does.
And so do others, whether they are Muslims or not.
So when we discuss Islam, we are merely exchanging our own understandings of it, though we may point out that our understanding is shared by others.
But it is not a futile exercise to see exactly what Islam’s primary source says. This way we can determine if certain acts committed by some Muslims fit the Quranic framework or are in conflict them it, something I have often done here.
So perhaps the US should just leave the region and stop creating nightmares for the rest of us to deal with.
The “cleaning up our mess” lie needs to be shouted down next time the US uses it, they are no more able to clean up their messes than a small kitten is able to clean up the Legos it knocked off the table.
you’d think their inevitable loss of all their territory, their state, would make them realize they failed and have no reason to go on. they will become more like wasps or bees enraged at losing their nest or hive and will sting far and wide in futility.