In the event of the death of the Islamic State’s self-styled
caliph, Amaq, a news agency affiliated with the Islamic State, reported on 7
August 2019 that the terrorist organization’s chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi had
appointed Abdullah Qardash as his successor.
Abdullah Qardash is from Tal Afar, a predominantly Sunni
Muslim city in northwestern Iraq, and has served as an army officer during
Saddam Hussein’s regime. Besides Qardash, two other close aides who have
emerged as al-Baghdadi’s likely successors over the years are Iyad al-Obaidi,
his defense minister, and Ayad al-Jumaili, the in charge of security.
Al-Jumaili has already reportedly been killed in an
airstrike in April 2017 in al-Qaim region on Iraq’s border with Syria, while
the whereabouts of al-Obaidi are unknown. Both al-Jumaili and al-Obaidi have
also previously served as security officers in Iraq’s Baathist army under
Saddam Hussein.
Regarding the creation and composition of the Islamic State
in Iraq and Syria, apart from training and arms which were provided to Syrian
militants in the training camps located in the Turkish and Jordanian border
regions adjacent to Syria by the CIA in collaboration with Turkish, Jordanian
and Saudi intelligence agencies, another factor that contributed to the success
of the Islamic State in early 2014 when it overran Raqqa in Syria and Mosul and
Anbar in Iraq was that its top cadres were comprised of former Baathist
military and intelligence officers from the Saddam era.
Reportedly, hundreds of ex-Baathists constituted the top and
mid-tier command structure of the Islamic State who planned all the operations
and directed its military strategy. The only feature that differentiated the
Islamic State from all other insurgent groups was its command structure which
was comprised of professional ex-Baathists and its state-of-the-art weaponry
that was provided to all militant outfits fighting in Syria by the intelligence
agencies of the Western powers, Turkey, Jordan and the Gulf states.
Recently, the Islamic State’s purported “terror franchises”
in Afghanistan and Pakistan have claimed a spate of bombings against the Shi’a
and Barelvi Muslims who are regarded as heretics by Takfiri jihadists. But to
contend that the Islamic State is responsible for suicide blasts in Pakistan
and Afghanistan is to declare that the Taliban are responsible for the
sectarian war in Syria and Iraq.
Both are localized militant outfits and the Islamic State
without its Baathist command structure and superior weaponry is just another
ragtag, regional militant outfit. The distinction between the Taliban and the
Islamic State lies in the fact that the Taliban follow Deobandi sect of Sunni
Islam which is a sect native to South Asia, whereas the jihadists of the
Islamic State mostly belong to Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi-Salafi denomination.
Secondly, and more importantly, the insurgency in
Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan is an indigenous Pashtun
uprising which is an ethnic group native to Afghanistan and northwestern
Pakistan, whereas the bulk of the Islamic State’s jihadists in Syria and Iraq
was comprised of Arab militants and included foreign fighters from the
neighboring Middle Eastern countries, North Africa, the Central Asian states,
Russia, China and even radicalized Muslims from as far away as Europe and the
United States.
The so-called “Khorasan Province” of the Islamic State in
the Af-Pak region is nothing more than a coalition of several breakaway
factions of the Taliban and a few other inconsequential local militant outfits
that have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State’s late chief Abu Bakr
al-Baghdadi in order to enhance their prestige, and draw funds and followers,
but which doesn’t have any organizational and operational association with the
Islamic State proper in Syria and Iraq.
The total strength of the Islamic State-Khorasan is
estimated to be between 3,000 to 5,000 fighters. By comparison, the strength of
the Taliban is estimated to be between 60,000 to 80,000 militants. The Islamic
State-Khorasan was formed as a merger between several breakaway factions of the
Afghan and Pakistani Taliban in early 2015. Later, the Islamic Movement of
Uzbekistan (IMU), a Pakistani terrorist group Jundullah and Chinese Uyghur
militants pledged allegiance to it.
In 2017, the Islamic State-Khorasan split into two factions.
One faction, based in Afghanistan’s eastern Nangarhar province, is led by a
Pakistani militant commander Aslam Farooqi, and the other faction, based in the
northern provinces of Afghanistan, is led by a former Islamic Movement of
Uzbekistan (IMU) commander Moawiya. The latter faction also includes Uzbek,
Tajik, Uyghur and Baloch militants.
In Pakistan, there are three distinct categories of
militants: the Afghanistan-focused Pashtun militants; the Kashmir-focused
Punjabi militants; and foreign transnational terrorists, including the Arab
militants of al-Qaeda, the Uzbek insurgents of Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
(IMU) and the Chinese Uyghur jihadists of the East Turkistan Islamic Movement
(ETIM). Compared to tens of thousands of native Pashtun and Punjabi militants,
the foreign transnational terrorists number only in a few hundred and are hence
inconsequential.
Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which is mainly comprised
of Pashtun militants, carries out bombings against Pakistan’s state apparatus.
The ethnic factor is critical here. Although the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) like
to couch their rhetoric in religious terms, it is the difference of ethnicity and
language that enables them to recruit Pashtun tribesmen who are willing to
carry out subversive activities against the Punjabi-dominated state apparatus,
while the Kashmir-focused Punjabi militants have by and large remained loyal to
their patrons in the security agencies of Pakistan.
Although Pakistan’s security establishment has been willing
to conduct military operations against the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), which are
regarded as a security threat to Pakistan’s state apparatus, as far as the
Kashmir-focused Punjabi militants, including the Lashkar-e-Taiba and
Jaish-e-Mohammad, and the Afghanistan-focused Quetta Shura Taliban, including
the Haqqani network, are concerned, they are still enjoying impunity because
such militant groups are regarded as “strategic assets” by Pakistan’s security
agencies.
Therefore, recent allegations by regional power-brokers that
Washington has provided material support to the Islamic State-affiliate in
Afghanistan and the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) as a tit-for-tat response to
Pakistan’s security agencies double game of providing support to the Afghan
Taliban to mount attacks against the Afghan security forces and their American
backers cannot be ruled out.
In November last year, for instance, infighting between the
main faction of the Afghan Taliban led by Mullah Haibatullah Akhunzada and a
breakaway faction led by Mullah Mohammad Rasul left scores of fighters dead in
Afghanistan’s western Herat province.
Mullah Rasul was close to Taliban founder Mullah Mohammad
Omar, and served as the governor of southwestern Nimroz province during the
Taliban's rule in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. After the news of the death of
Mullah Omar was made public in 2015, Mullah Rasul broke ranks with the Taliban
and formed his own faction.
Mullah Rasul's group is active in the provinces of Herat,
Farah, Nimroz and Helmand, and is known to have received arms and support from
the Afghan intelligence, as he has expressed willingness to recognize the
Washington-backed Kabul government.
Regarding Washington’s motives for providing covert support
to breakaway factions of the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban and the
Islamic State’s affiliate in Afghanistan, the US invaded Afghanistan in October
2001, in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack, and toppled the Taliban
regime with the help of the Northern Alliance comprised of ethnic Tajik and
Uzbek warlords.
The leadership and fighters of the Pashtun-majority Taliban
resistance movement found sanctuary in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas
bordering Afghanistan, and mounted an insurgency against the Washington-backed
Kabul government. Throughout the occupation years, Washington kept pressuring
Islamabad to mount military operations in the tribal areas in order to deny
safe havens to the Taliban.
However, Islamabad was reluctant to conduct military
operations, which is a euphemism for all-out war, for the fear of alienating
the Pashtun population of the tribal areas. After Pakistan’s military’s raid in
July 2007 on a mosque (Laal Masjid) in the heart of Islamabad, which also
contained a religious seminary, scores of civilians, including students of the
seminary, died.
The Pakistani Taliban made the incident a rallying call for
waging a jihad against Pakistan’s military. Thereafter, terror attacks and
suicide bombings against Pakistan’s state apparatus peaked after the July 2007
Laal Masjid incident. Eventually, under pressure from the Obama administration,
Pakistan’s military decided in 2009 to conduct military operations against
militants based in Pakistan’s tribal areas.
The first military operation was mounted in the Swat valley
in April 2009, the second in South Waziristan tribal agency in October the same
year, and the third military operation was launched in North Waziristan and
Khyber tribal agencies in June 2014. In the ensuing violence, tens of thousands
of civilians, security personnel and militants lost their lives.
Although Pakistani political commentators often point
fingers at the Washington-backed Kabul government in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s
arch-foe India for providing money and arms to the Pakistani Taliban for waging
a guerrilla war against Pakistan’s state establishment, reportedly Washington
has provided covert support to the Pakistani Taliban in order to force
Pakistan’s military to conduct military operations against militants based in
Pakistan’s tribal areas.
Keeping this background of Washington’s covert support to
breakaway factions of the Afghan Taliban that have waged an insurgency against
the US-backed Kabul government and to the Pakistani Taliban that has mounted a
guerrilla war against Pakistan’s state establishment in mind, the allegations that
Washington has provided material support to the Islamic State’s affiliate in
the Af-Pak region in order to divide and weaken the Taliban resistance against American
occupation of Afghanistan are not unfounded.
No comments:
Post a Comment