ISIS is notable in that it has not established many alliances, instead often displaying a ruthless attitude towards other jihadist groups in Syria that has led frequently to bloody violence. In addition to fighters in Iraq, this suggests a military force of around 10-12,000, though given the reliance on foreign fighters and their usually brief stays of combat, the number is likely to fluctuate and be potentially lower in terms of seasoned, permanent fighters. Estimates from 5000 to 11000 foreign fighters have been put forward, with 7000 being a frequently cited figure. However, as ISIS is the main group making use of foreign fighters in Syria, we can use those figures as a rough outline of their numbers. It is hard to accurately estimate the number of fighters directly under ISIS control. As surprising as the swift advance in northern Iraq was, it does not represent an adequate baseline for realistic appraisal of their overall capacity.Ī better metric for assessment is that of their membership, their alliances, their arms and training and their economic resources. The question is whether ISIS has the resources to achieve their stated objectives, in order to accurately assess the threat potential from this group. Grand aims and pronouncements are nothing new from terrorist and insurgent organisations. ISIS have made significant territorial gains in Syria and Iraq, but they have also planned terrorist attacks in Lebanon and make frequent reference to Yemen, the Arabian Peninsula and Iran as potential “fronts” in their war on Shi’ite Muslims. ISIS are also focused on a larger regional theatre than the Al-Qaeda franchises, as a natural outcome of this territorial focus. In particular, the abolition of Sykes-Picot has become something of a rallying cry for ISIS supporters. While part of this can be seen as a consequence of their superior resources, they also consciously refer to territorial advances and territorial change in their propaganda. ISIS is far more concentrated on territorial gains than Al-Qaeda franchises in other countries. However, their ideology also differs from Al-Qaeda in two critical ways. Additionally, they have inherited the strongly sectarian ideology of al-Zarqawi, declaring Shi’ite Muslims an even greater threat than the USA to the Islamic state. In particular, they are hostile to America and its allies, seeing them as preventing the emergence of a pure Islamic state. Nevertheless, ISIS still shares certain core beliefs with Al-Qaeda and is in accordance with many of its aims. Since February 2014, ISIS has been disavowed by Al-Qaeda’s leader Ayman al-Zawahiri for refusing to recognise his authority, end their fighting with the al-Nusra Front and not take part in hostilities in Syria. Before taking its current name in 2013, it was known as the “Islamic State of Iraq”, “Al-Qaeda in Iraq” and “The Organisation for Monotheism and Jihad”, formerly led by Abu Abdullah al-Rashid al-Baghdadi and previously by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.Īlthough frequently thought of as an “Al-Qaeda” group, it would be more accurate to note its previous leaders swore loyalty to Al-Qaeda while maintaining a significant amount of autonomy. 6.ĭespite a fairly new name, ISIS has a considerable pedigree as a terrorist and insurgent organisation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |