The Russian passenger jet, the one that seems to have exploded in mid-air last week killing all 224 on board, may not have been downed by a bomb, but it is hard to avoid the thought that it could have been. And if you truly understand what ISIS is all about, you know that things will most likely get worse, a lot worse, before (and even if) they ever get better. (ISIS is also referred to as ISIL and the Islamic State. Each title refers to the same group of radical Islamists.)
Since it first became a force in the Middle East, ISIS has been a mystery. It may be comprised of as few as 100,000 fighters (some reports suggest even a smaller number), yet it has gained control of large geographic areas in Iraq and Syria and has even installed ruling governments in those regions. The organization is best known for its headline-making atrocities like the videotaped beheadings of captives and its wanton slaughter of Yazidis in northern Iraq. And now it may be responsible for the downing (either by bomb or ground-to-air missile) of that Russian passenger jet en route to St. Petersburg from Cairo.
As horrific as its actions have been, the organization appears to be attracting a sizeable number of young men (and, to a lesser extent, women) to join its cause. In many instances these young people are willingly being trained to sacrifice their lives as human bombs in terrorist attacks. Last summer two such young students in America were arrested before they could embark on a trek to ISIS where they were anxious to join in the fight (perhaps even to go on suicide missions in a terrorist attack).
The Obama administration has been seeking ways to defeat ISIS militarily (without putting U.S. troops on the ground). It is a difficult strategy, since local forces appear to be fighting a losing battle, while Syria, where much of the fighting takes place, is in the midst of a brutal civil war fought by a variety of anti-government groups, some of which are also opposed to ISIS, while others may be allied with it.
Many Americans, both in government and in the general populace, oppose sending U.S. troops into the fray, but most are also concerned enough about avoiding another 9/11-like attack to be anxious for more to be done to defeat this ultra-terrorist group. But in a new book, Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz speak of a far longer lasting and intractable threat that ISIS represents: the threat of the militant Islamist movement.
Sam Harris is a well-regarded secular commentator, who has gained fame for his strongly held atheist views. Maajid Nawaz is a reformed Islamist who formed and now heads Quilliam, a counter-terrorism think-tank dedicated to overcoming the threat the militant Islamist movement represented by the Islamic State. Their dialogue on the threat posed by ISIS is presented in “Islam and the Future of Tolerance.” It is an important book, one that should certainly be read by President Obama and his foreign policy advisers, but that should also be read by anyone who is concerned about the future of the Muslim religion and of modern civilization. In other words, it should really be read by everyone.
The book is being advertised as a triumph of understanding as the avowed atheist and the devout Muslim find common ground through a civilized and respectful dialogue. But don’t let the hype fool you. What the book is really about is the threat of Islamist terrorism, and the common ground the two learned men reach is on the nature and reality of that threat.
In a nutshell, here is what their dialogue reveals:
o Islamism is a form of religious fundamentalism that is based on a strict constructionist reading of the Koran. The actions of Islamist groups like ISIS and the Taliban in its most virulent form are taken in the firm belief that they represent the will of God (Allah) as revealed by the prophet Mohammed.
In this regard, Mr. Nawaz makes clear that the Taliban’s slaughter of 145 school children is viewed by Islamists as a blessing for those killed, as the slaughtered are being sent straight to paradise. Ditto those young suicide bombers and the Muslims they take with them (to paradise) in their terrorist assaults.
o As an ideology, groups like the Islamic State and the Taliban will not be eradicated solely by military means. Ideologies that are based on religious beliefs are much harder to defeat than those based on economic theories (e.g., communism) or nationalistic fervor (Nazi Germany and Hirohito’s Japan).
Islamists believe that only through the complete eradication of infidels (non-believers) will God’s plan be realized. They view their mission to be a world of one faith: their form of Islam. They are not interested in co-existence and do not fear death, especially death secured in a holy war, since they are then martyrs who gain special privileges in paradise.
o The vast majority of Muslims are not Islamists, but many Muslims accept the relatively strict readings of the Koran and interpret the teachings of the prophet seriously.
Thus they are less inclined to join in opposition to Islamist terrorist groups like ISIS and may even be sympathetic to the efforts of groups like the Taliban and ISIS to institute Sharia law (the law of the Book, which includes stoning adulterers and chopping off the hands of thieves, among other barbaric punishments).
Harris and Nawaz agree on these points and the threat to modern civilization that Islamism represents. They also agree that ISIS must be defeated. Where they may disagree is on the deeper question of how. Nawaz is committed to defeating the ideology of Islamism and to thereby preserving the religion. Harris is only moderately comforted by that goal. He fears, as perhaps we all should, that within the hearts of many devout Muslims the seeds of Islamist thinking may still fester, harboring therein the risk that the terrorism of tomorrow may make the bombing of a Russian jetliner last week look like child’s play.
This is a great column and superbly educational. The timing of your writing it (sadly) could not have been better, with the horrific attacks in Paris now having occurred.