MUSLIM IDENTITY in a post-ISIS world
1
CONTENTS Introduction The Identity Crisis
3 4-9
Where are the moderate Muslims?
10-15
Orlando & the ideology behind taking innocent lives
16-17
Islamism & Ignorance: How denial promotes terror
18-21
Playing with Fire: Pakistan & Turkey
22-25
This project was created for the Master of Arts Journalism Course JN4074: Standard Journalism Project at the University of Central Lancashire. 29/07/2016 Written & Designed by Muna Adil 2
Introduction Religion has always been a contentious topic when it comes to world events, and now more than ever it remains at the forefront of political dialogue. ‘Islam’ is a major rolling theme in current world events and there seem to be no signs that this may change anytime soon. The Islamic faith is highly significant and relevant in today’s times, and an unmissable undercurrent to news and politics in the 21st century. The purpose of this project is to identify, examine, and analyse the many different components of the ‘Muslim’ identity, especially where it exists in the West, and how it has changed over time as Islam and Islamism continue to be dominant themes in today’s dialogue. With this project, we hope to disassemble the various myths, misunderstandings, and misnomers that are prevalent in discussions pertinent to Islam and Muslims, and present a more honest discussion. Extremism is spreading faster than ever before, more and more Muslims are falling prey to radicalisation, and anti-Muslim bigotry is at an all-time high in Europe and around the world. This crisis of faith is an unpredictable, unstable, and truly multi-dimensional problem with no easy answers. The tendency in tackling such issues is that the public is generally given the restricted and limited view of a handful of prominent public figures while blatantly ignoring the voice of ideological minorities. Our aim is to break through the wall of scripted dialogue and repeated vocabularies to bring out an honest and authentic exploration of Muslim identity in the West. 3
The Ident
Mecca: Pilgrims walk around the Kaaba during Umrah 4
tity Crisis
5
Above: Bright lights illuminate Masjid Al-Nabawai, the mosque that houses the Prophet Muhammad’s tomb (December 2015) Below: The same mosque in flames following an attack by Islamist extremists (July 2016) (Source: The Guardian)
6
T
he annual Hajj is upon the Muslim world. According to the Islamic calendar, this year’s holy pilgrimage will fall from 9th14th September. Just like every year, Muslims from around the world will travel to Mecca, Saudi Arabia to circumambulate the ¬Kaaba (or, ‘The Cube’), the sacred site towards which the five daily prayers in Islam are offered. Last year, the Hajj was marred with tragedy when a crane fell upon pilgrims at the Majidal-Haram, the mosque that houses the Kaaba, killing 111 people and injuring a further 394. Then, on the 24th of September, a stampede at Mina saw 2,236 crushed in a disaster of historic magnitude. This year, the Hajj will be met with a different kind of heartbreak: an internal identity crisis of mammoth proportions. Though the tense pull and tug has, with the rise of Islamist groups like ISIS, been going on for some time now, the attack in Medina on the 4th of July has taken this conversation to an altogether deeper level. The assault on one of the holiest of mosques in the Islamic world was less lethal than most terror attacks, the total death toll adding up to 4 security guards, yet the damage it has dealt to the Muslim psyche is immeasurable. The overwhelming narrative that has followed the incident is that these attacks show once and for all that these terrorists have nothing to do with Islam. But is this renunciation and rejection really an effective narrative to push in order to tackle this crisis? People are saying the terror attacks in Medina proves that ISIS are not ‘true Muslims’ – and this worldview is exactly what’s leading to the hyper-radicalisation that is taking over the globe with unbelievable ferocity. The longer we close our eyes to the problem, the farther it spreads, and the more unstoppable it becomes. The attack in Medina is a strong wakeup call to deniers and apologists who believe volatile ideology is simply a result of ‘foreign policy’ and an issue that politics alone can solve.
It is exactly this kind of “It has nothing to do with me so I’m not going to bother dealing with this” approach that has now led to the day that we see the second holiest Islamic site in the world defaced by the same monsters who claim civilian lives in the West.
“It hurts the concertgoers in Paris, the Sunday morning shoppers in Baghdad, the Kurdish boys in Kobani, the gays in Orlando, and the devout pilgrims in Medina.” This attack in Medina, more than anything else, should prove to those who wish to force their own sectarian agendas, that the plague of extremist ideology isn’t one that affects one singular population: it hurts us all. It hurts the concert-goers in Paris, the Sunday morning shoppers in Baghdad, the Kurdish boys in Kobani, the gays in Orlando, and the devout pilgrims in Medina. It’s time we stop seeing violent extremism as something that is alien, bizarre, and outlandish. Terrorists aren’t a strange, foreign people that are all equally disturbed and violent and simply waiting for an organisation like ISIS to come along to give their machinations a physical form and motive. These people are from within us. They’re in our cities, communities, and neighbourhoods. And where Islamist extremists are concerned, they’re from within the Muslim community itself. Of course, no one is saying that Islam alone leads to violent extremism. Those who end up with groups like ISIS don’t do so because they open the Qur’an one day, read a passage, and decide to travel to Syria to train in how to kill innocent civilians. 7
There is usually a long history of detrimental factors, such as political grievances, broken families, mental illness, lack of mentors, support systems, and educational checks. But this cannot mean that we simply turn a blind eye to the fact that religion does have a significant part to play in contributing to these radical narratives. Is it effective to uncritically disown an ideology? Or is it better to challenge, with reason and logic, alarming narratives and disprove them with rigour and surety? As a Muslim, it has disturbed me profoundly to see the scenes of fire, smoke, and charred bodies so close to the tomb of the Prophet Muhammad. Just six months ago, I walked those same streets, I entered the same mosque, yet my Islam, the faith that teaches me to be kind and compassionate, was much different than the one Medinians witnessed on Monday night. We can assume it is safe to say that these monsters have perverted all narrative avenues available to them, whether they be those of faith, history, or politics. What we do not need is another swarm of messaging that tells us that these attackers in Medina weren’t ‘proper’ Muslims. What we need now is intelligent, sensitive, and perceptive analysis to decode the narratives that groups like Islamic State have fed into the minds of vulnerable individuals. What we need now is to turn back perceptions of Islam from a faith that promotes and encourages violence, to one that declares the killer of one soul as the enemy of humanity itself. What we need now is to stop slumbering in ignorance and self-righteousness and wake up to the facts: our silence is allowing the murderers of our brothers and sisters to continue killing in our name.
8
Top: Prophet Muhammad’s final resting place Above: The Green Dome Right: Masjid Al-Nabawi
9
“Where moderate
It’s often said in the media that ‘modera Muslims need to reclaim their religion’. blanket statement, chooses to ignore the h are speaking out, both in th
Here, we give a platfor
10
e are the Muslims?”
ate Muslims need to speak out’ or ‘moderate . This declaration, besides being a blatant hundreds of thousands of Muslim voices that heir personal and public lives.
rm to some of those voices.
11
Tehmina Kazi 33 British-Pakistani Director of Media, British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD)
My voluntary work and belief in God – and previous experience of Sufi dhikr and meditation – make me feel the most connected to the Islamic faith. I have often been told that I am “not Muslim enough” because I have never covered my hair and publicly express my liberal views on social issues. It made me feel hurt and aggrieved. Muslim voices in the media tend to be Islamist or socially conservative Muslims in the main. These are probably more representative of British Muslims as a whole than liberal and progressive Muslims, but the voices of the latter are considerably under-represented in public debate. This is why BMSD was set up in the first place. What needs to be highlighted more is Muslim voices that reject Muslim exceptionalism and special demands on the one hand, and stand firm against anti-Muslim sentiment on the other. Whenever an Islamist terror attack occurs I am extremely sad for the victims, and feel anger not only at the perpetrators, but all those organisations and individuals who ONLY condemn specific incidents, yet do nothing to critique or challenge the ideology which sustains and propels them. I do not feel the government is doing enough at the grassroots level, although I am broadly supportive of Prevent. They are not doing enough to defend Prevent from the attacks 12
“Religious extremism and antiMuslim sentiment are two sides of the same coin” of the Preventing Prevent lobby, who level unfair criticisms at the policy in the left-wing media. Islamist preachers on university campuses should be robustly challenged by liberal and progressive Muslim speakers. The best way is to build a critical mass of voices – both Muslim and non-Muslim – who are willing to rebut and challenge extremist and Islamist ideology, and amplify these voices in the mainstream media. On top of this, equality and human rights law should be seen to be trumping fundamentalist Islamic values, with this explained to a wider audience. For instance, the Equality and Human Rights Commission put out guidance in 2014 to state that gender segregation in public universities was unlawful. Religious extremism and anti-Muslim sentiment are two sides of the same coin, and feed off each other. Organisations need to tackle both with equal vociferousness, but BMSD is one of the few who has done this consistently.
Haydar Zaki 23 British-Arab Quilliam Outreach & Right2Debate Activist
Being a Muslim is very important to my identity, as I am a believer of the Islamic faith. However other aspects that make me feel Muslim is my strong cultural IraqiShia heritage that immersed both faith and lifestyle into my upbringing. I believe the Quran to be a guide with the prescriptions of principles and the values of humanism above any form of literal dogma. We are a very youthful demographic, yet “Muslim commentators” are always grey bearded old men. Issues such as extremism, integration and etc. are predominately faced by today’s youth. Whenever these attacks occur, it is just another painful reminder of the troubles we as a community face. Tears from the tragedy of an event, fears of the unknown, and finally anger that so little has been done to uproot the real issues at hand. I need not publicly denounce such behaviour each time as they are not associated to my faith identity. What we do need to do is denounce any dehumanising idea wherever it exists, and this means not apologising for it just because it may come from something I associate with (for example Islam). I remember a few days after 9/11 I attended a football training camp where I was verbally abused by the other players and even the coach. They rightly assumed I was Muslim (but was presumptuous itself just on my
“We are a very youthful demographic, yet ‘Muslim commentators’ are always grey bearded men” appearance) then proceeded to compare me to Bin Laden and other school-yard style bigotry. Counter-extremism is getting better, and it’s good to see strategies diversify and incorporate organisations that tackle racism, homophobia and etc. but I do believe more needs to be done to fund outreach activities instead of reports and conferences. The best way to tackle extremism is by uprooting the dehumanising ideas it employs through debate, dialogue and discussion. By allowing free conversation to take place, the opportunity to isolate extremist narratives and compromising their intellectual relevance is presented. This will also require a process that goes directly against every extremist thinking – that of dividing “us” and “them”. Instead civil society must be a partnership of multiple identities against the extremist ideas – not peoples – that call for a supra-state political system based on bigotry to non-adherents. 13
Nani Fazlur Rahman 22 Malaysian Student at Warwick University, studying Economics, Politics, and I.R.
I used to think of myself as Muslim first, before I am human. Now, I see that the two are inseparable from each other, even necessary for each other. As such, while being Muslim is one part of my identity, it is only one part of me – in addition to my many, sometimes seemingly contradictory identities. The Qur’an I believe to be a guiding text for all peoples, all times, all places. As such, it must be a text that is able to be interpreted in as many ways as there are people. It is a metaphorical text, which is rooted in both reason and compassion. Even if one does not believe in any higher power, I believe that there are many lessons to be gleaned from the Qur’an, especially when reason and compassion are used. I suppose my faith in a certain set of beliefs, and to God, and that being a good human, a moral human, makes me a Muslim.. Though I also understand that I am also culturally Muslim, as I was born Muslim and grew up in a Muslim country. Though I came into belief and faith independently, I grew up in an environment that allowed that in the direction of Islam. As a queer, I do have my doubts, and sometimes I do think that I am not ‘Muslim enough’, and think that my belief and practice in my faith is inappropriate (though I know that this is not true). I have never 14
“As a queer, I do have my doubts, and sometimes I do think that I am not ‘Muslim enough’” been told these things to my face though. Even so, the fact that my doubts still linger, have resulted in several moments of extreme internal conflict, feelings of guilt and loneliness. That said, both sources of information (formal and informal, mainstream and independent) still largely see Muslims as a homogenous group; either white-washing or ‘black-washing’ the entire Muslim population. I feel that while portraying Muslims in a positive light is important, it is also necessary to tackle heterogeneity in the Muslim world. This is so that more important conversations may be had to promote pluralism and acceptance. Ultimately however, people should be made aware of the dangers of exclusionary groups, the dangers of simply living and interacting with members of their own social groups. I feel that many believe that sticking in a group is a beneficial thing, as it provides stability and familiarity. People need to understand that stability and familiarity can also be achieved through pluralism.
I’m an Ex-Muslim, and my journey out of Islam certainly wasn’t easy. I was born to conservative Egyptian Muslim parents, and we moved to Saudi Arabia when I was four. I was fairly practicing growing up, as far as fasting and praying go; I had to go the mosque every Friday, and I started fasting in Ramadan at the age of eight. Growing up in Saudi Arabia also meant that Quran and Islam classes at school were compulsory, and segregation took place in my school from a very early stage. Despite my exposure to a version of Islam that was a lot more conservative than what my parents had grown up with, I always followed my parents’ relatively more liberal interpretation of Islam, as opposed to Wahhabi Islam, and I always opposed any form of political Islam whatsoever, as did my parents. My teens marked a decline in my faith as I became less practicing as the years went by, and I developed a passion for science, which was one of the main reasons why I abandoned the faith at the age of 17. When it comes to Muslim identity, perhaps the most confusing aspect of it is how intertwined my ethnicity (Arab) is with Islam. In the public eye, those two identities seem to be inseparable because of how entrenched Muslim identity has become in Arabic culture. I don’t consider myself Muslim at all – however, since Islam was a part of my life, in a way, the Muslim-ness never really wears off completely, despite the lack of faith. I can relate to some aspects of Muslim culture because of the inevitable overlap between Middle Eastern and Muslim cultures and the fact that I grew up in an Egyptian Muslim household, and even as an atheist I find myself interested in the evolution of the religion as well as other Abrahamic faiths. As someone who grew up in the Middle East I don’t think the current representation of Muslims in public discussion is nuanced.
Talal Zein* 19 Egyptian Student at University College London, studying Electrical Engineering
“Muslims are very diverse, and understanding this diversity is essential when discussing Islam or the Muslim world” Several left leaning outlets seem to be in denial about the link between Islam (and interpretations thereof) and groups like ISIS, suggesting that said groups have nothing to do with Islam. Moreover, having an open and frank discussion about the rise of Islamism and how to defeat/combat it have also thwarted by the common narrative that extremism and fundamentalism in Muslim communities are few and far between. On the other hand, anti-Muslim bigotry in the West is an issue that should not be overlooked, and I believe it is necessary to tackle this issue as well, without turning a blind eye to the ongoing problem of Islamic fundamentalism. Muslims are very diverse, and hold different beliefs and belong to different sects, and understanding this diversity is essential when discussing Islam and/or the Muslim world. *Name has been changed to protect the anonymity of this person 15
Orlando & t behind taking O
n Sunday morning on the 13th of June, at least 50 people were killed and up to 56 were injured in Orlando, Florida, as a gunman opened fire at Pulse, a gay nightclub, in what was hailed as one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. The attacker was named as Omar Saddiqui Mateen, a 29-year-old American citizen with Afghani parents, from Fort Pierce, Florida. Mateen was motivated by religiously-driven ideology and Islamist propaganda, and probably encouraged by other enabling factors such as lax gun control. According to reports, the suspect called 911 and swore allegiance to ISIS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi seconds before carrying out the attack. The suspect’s father has reported that his son grew very angry when he saw two gay men kissing in Miami a couple of months ago, and believed this to be a significant motivator in the attack. The relatively newfound liberation and establishment of equal rights of the LGBT community is one of the greatest achievements of the Western world in recent history, and one that would naturally irk the likes of Islamist movements such as ISIS, who wish to advance the ongoing global jihadist insurgency. Omar Mateen was acting as part of a larger, violent Islamist movement, and brutal
16
Orlando: Mourners embrace in the aftermath of the attack attacks against the LGBT community are a trademark of groups like ISIS and the Taliban. Attacks on a random group of people from a minority community are typical of the long-term Islamist strategy of creating an ‘us vs. them’ and supremacism narrative. Unfortunately, ISIS’ continuous encouragement of lone-wolf and self-starter attacks means that there are few to zero operational links to be found, rendering authorities less capable of detecting, locating, and terminating these plots. Surveillance no longer remains an effective tool to combat radicalised individuals as there are fewer traces of how the individual got access to resources, funding, training, equipment, etc.
the ideology innocent lives The fact that this attack occurred in the Muslim holy month of Ramadan is not to be ignored. Traditionally, groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda have always intensified the number of Islamist attacks carried out during this month. ISIS spokesman Abu Mohammed al-Adnani has publicly stated in his pre-Ramadan speech inciting violence in the West that killing during the month will bring greater rewards for martyrs. In his speech, al-Adnani encouraged lonewolves and self-starters by suggesting that they could join the jihad even if they are unable to reach military targets or do not have the means to travel to Syria by carrying out terror attacks in “the land of the infidel.”
Further, al-Adnani reassured those who are “embarrassed to target what are called civilian targets” by removing the protection from any and all civilians and stating that “in the heartland of the Crusaders there’s no protection for that blood and there is no presence of what we call innocents.” In this way, groups like ISIS have opened the floodgates for radicalised individuals residing in the West to indiscriminately endanger the lives of innocent civilians. The prevalence of one-off self-starter attacks makes it absolutely vital that more is done to counter extremist narratives that appear especially enticing to vulnerable individuals in the West. In the face of terrorism and extremism, all civil rights groups and campaigners must unite, regardless of their differences, to provide constructive counter messaging that not only attempts to deradicalise individuals on the path to extremism, but to “I love you, nip fundamentalist babe,” Mateen thought patterns texted his in the bud before wife moments they even begin to before he materialise in the began the form of blind and assault violent terrorism. 17
Islamism & How denial pr
Amidst the confusion and chaos, it becomes undeniably easy to stick to those that spark discussion and challenge jaded ways of solving global p identities and how to reconci
18
& Ignorance: romotes terror
o traditional narratives that provide comfort and security, rather than problems. One British Muslim woman shares her story of living with two ile Islam with British values.
19
M
uslims can no longer afford to throw their hands in the air and claim “it’s not our fault.”
Of course, it’s not as simple as that. The causes of extremism are complex and the solutions need to be equally sophisticated if we are to have any hope of returning to moderation. But downright denying that a crisis exists in the first place instantly aborts the process of problem-solving, compelling the vicious cycle of extremism and bigotry to persist unhindered. The outrage at the Channel 4 survey earlier this year titled “What do British Muslims really think?” shows just how acutely a large section of Western society has fallen into the habit of covering up and side-lining critical information in the name of being politically correct. The survey questioned a sample of 1000 Muslims and found that, though for the most part British Muslim attitudes aligned with those of the wider British public, there was a worrying chasm between the two groups, especially on attitudes towards social issues like women’s rights and homosexuality. Though this information was a direct result of a scientific study with clear quantitative and numerical data, protesters were quick to judge the study as “Islamophobic.” This section of society, described by Maajid Nawaz, founder of the Quilliam Foundation, as the ‘Regressive Left’, in addition to denying that a problem exists, encourages others to do
20
the same, and threatens to label those who oppose this blinkered vision as ‘Islamophobic’. In an increasingly unstable world, where urgent problems need quick solutions, this mindless suppression of discussion can only lead to further exaggerating the crisis. Former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Trevor Phillips put it best when he stated: “We are more nervous about Muslims because we feel people will be offended. But my view is […] that we have gone beyond the situation where we can say, ‘OK, don’t worry; they will come round in time,’ because that is not going to happen. We have to make things change now.” As a British Muslim, I couldn’t agree more with Phillips. Unfortunately, even this responsible and, frankly, honest statement was met with outrage by naysayers who maintain that any criticism of Islam or Muslims is beyond the sphere of acceptable public dialogue. The results of this imposed intellectual bankruptcy are clear to see around the world,
“We are more nervous about Muslims because we feel people will be offended. But my view is that we have gone beyond the situation where we canW say, ‘OK, don’t worry; they will come round in time,’ because that is not going to happen. We have to make things change now.” both in the East and West. In Bangladesh, for example, the recent string of religiouslydriven attacks on student activists, university professors, and members of the LGBTQ community is a stark reminder of the effect that Islamist-apologist governments can have on their nations. Responding to the brutal killing of secular activist and blogger Nazimuddin Samad, the sixth such killing in a span of a mere fourteen months, the Bangladeshi Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan had this to say: “The bloggers, they should control their writing. Our country is a secular state. [...] I want to say that people should be careful not to hurt anyone by writing anything – hurt any religion, any people's beliefs, any religious leaders.” Perhaps the one statement that aptly summarises the unrelenting ignorance of the regressive left was said by Sajeeb Wazed Joy, son of the Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, as he explained: “Given that our opposition party plays that religion card against us relentlessly, we can't come out strongly [against these attacks]. It's about perception, not about reality.” As more killings took place over the next several months, the Prime Minister herself declined to defend the right to free expression, and instead blamed the victims: "You can't attack someone else's religion. You'll have to stop doing this. It won't be tolerated if someone else's religious sentiment is hurt."
Is it any wonder then that the speed with which extremism thought is taking root in Muslim minds around the world has shown no signs of slowing down? Is it exceptionally difficult to see how such statements and denial may infuriate the liberal and freethinking world? Why then does it surprise us to learn that anti-Muslim bigotry has reached alarming levels in the West? An ideological stance that preaches the righteousness of silence and denial has no hopes of producing a free and fair society. Living in a constant state of denial is not just unhealthy for the individual psyche, but an immense handicap to the future growth and development of the world at large. Ignorance isn’t bliss, it’s a plague that seems to be affecting much of the West’s left. We may criticize controversial Western foreign policy, we may point fingers at failed attempts at multiculturalism, and we may poke holes in half-baked counter-extremist strategies. But we cannot deny that today’s Islam is facing an inner turmoil of mammoth proportions in an effort to resist the pull of extremist narratives. Self-awareness and the courage to accept your own shortcomings are imperative first steps to any improvement we can hope for in ridding British society of the plague that is extremism — be it social or political. We cannot make any progress until we first accept and define, in no uncertain terms, the values we stand for and the vices we stand against.
21
Playing w Pakistan
While it is essential that extremism is de deny that politics, foreign policy in particul overall thought patterns of entire commun foreign policy is discussed, we most often equally, if not more imperative, to analyse heart of the problem 22
with Fire: & Turkey
efeated at its ideological root, we cannot lar, can have serious repercussions on the nities and populations. When problematic n talk about Western countries, yet it is e both the over and covert policies at the m: The Middle East. 23
T
he deadly attack on Istanbul’s Ataturk airport in June earlier this year left 41 dead and more than 239 injured after three suicide bombers opened fire before blowing themselves up in what appears to be an attempt to target as many foreign nationals as possible. Though no one has claimed responsibility for the attack so far, all indications point to the incident being orchestrated by the Islamic State, who, along with Kurdish separatists, have been involved in a string of recent attacks on Turkish soil. The horrific attack has opened a can of worms for Turkey, putting its bizarre foreign policy front and centre on the world’s stage. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has long attempted to play a balancing act between aligning Turkey with the international community in condemning the atrocities carried out by ISIS and simultaneously supporting their violent campaign to suppress the Kurds. Earlier this year, Turkish MP Selma Irmak from the Peace and Democracy Party told Russian media: “Erdogan uses ISIS against the Kurds. He can’t send the Turkish Army directly to Syrian Kurdistan, but he can use ISIS as an instrument against the Kurds. He has a greater Ottoman Empire in his mind, that’s his dream, while ISIS is one the instruments [to achieve it],” Irmak went on to give specific details about how Erdogan was assisting ISIS’ cause: “Wounded militants are given medical treatment in Turkey. For ISIS, Turkey is a very important supply channel. They are allowed to pass through the Turkish border, being given IDs [and other documents]. ISIS has training camps in Turkey.” Other signs of Turkey’s covert support of ISIS include, among other things, the unhindered trafficking of Yazidi and Assyrian female slaves across the Turkey-Syria border,
24
Istanbul: The afttermath of the deadly attack at Istanbul Airport the continued trade of all ISIS-owned oil via Turkey, and perhaps most damning of all, the curious absence of any substantial physical retaliation by the Turkish military. This is not dissimilar from another such recent attempt to manipulate a volatile body of jihadists in the interest of personal gain. For decades, Pakistan’s establishment has used terror groups as assets against rival nations, grounded in the jaded belief that the enemy’s foe is a friend. The parallels are unmissable. As Saed Shah wrote in The Economist in 2011 (http://www.economist.com/ node/21531042), Pakistan found itself at the centre of the tempest of radical Islam and needed to show its capabilities to effectively deal with the task at hand. “Except we have no money. All we have are the crazies. So the crazies it is.” Pakistan’s list of “crazies” was by no means limited to the Taliban, and included several other groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (who were behind the 2008 Mumbai attacks) and the Haqqani network (orchestrators of the 2011 bombing at the Indian embassy in Kabul).
making their claims in the region, Pakistan’s strategy was two-pronged: outwardly advance traditional means to power with the world’s sixth-largest army and fastest growing nuclear arsenal, and covertly sponsor militant groups to harass its rivals while maintaining a thin façade of denial. On 16 December 2014, the deaths of 148 schoolchildren at the hands of the Pakistani Taliban, the country’s apparent tactical allies, brought to the forefront the impotency of this failed policy.
In many ways, however, Turkey entertaining the likes of ISIS is vastly different, and perhaps much worse, than Pakistan toying with the Taliban. The Pakistani Taliban, though equally ruthless and dangerous in terms of their violent Islamist ideology, have nowhere near ISIS’ level of reach and potential for damage. The extent of the Taliban’s power is largely restricted within the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. ISIS, on the other hand, is shaping up to be a global threat with unprecedented influence. Turkey’s support of ISIS is essentially a construct of Erdogan’s, arguably dangerous, vision of a revived Ottoman Empire, whereas Pakistan’s attempts to court the Taliban fundamentally emerged from a deep-rooted sense of insecurity regarding Afghanistan’s growing proximity with both state and nonstate actors in India. While Erdogan sees the growth of radical Islam as a means to pursue his own machinations, for Pakistan, this shift in security strategy was much more about repositioning itself as a major global player. With Indian money flowing into Afghanistan, and Iran, Russia, and the United States all
“Pakistan needs to get out of denial that there are any jihadi groups that can be trusted or considered allies of the state. However useful they might be for external purposes, they will always be dangerous internally,” said Husain Haqqani, director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C., former Pakistani ambassador to the United States, and author of Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military. In the wake of the tragic terror attack in Istanbul, one can effectively replace ‘Pakistan’ in Haqqani’s quote with ‘Turkey’ and the substance of his words rings as true as it did in December 2014. While initial reactions from the establishment, be that of Turkey or Pakistan, might be of shock and horror, the continued negotiations with jihadists behind the scenes reduces all retaliation to mere words in the wind. Countries that are historically, geographically, and politically positioned to be at the crucial frontline in the fight against groups like ISIS and the Taliban must now seriously reconsider their security choices in recent times. Is it really, if at all, beneficial in the longterm to fuel Islamic radicalism for a few inconsequential regional wins? Does it make political and strategic sense to continue to harvest an uncontainable, volatile ideology in your own backyard? And how many of their own people need to die before countries like Turkey and Pakistan realise that playing with fire will inevitably burn your own fingers? 25