Ahmed

Javvad Eissa Dar K1412010

Is D`ish a Salaf Group? A study of the

development and conception of the ideology of

ISIS.



Politics & International Relations

2016/17






















Abstract

The relationship between the Salafs and ISIS (D`ish) is one of two ends of a spectrum. The

religious fundamentalism of one has become the associated norm of the other. A confusion

arises when the two groups are labelled as one, and a greater dilemma is faced when the

media presents the enemy to the people. D`ish is essentially an extremist group that

subverts the core tenants of the Islmic faith and causes mayhem and mass destruction, to say

the least. Their brand of Takfrism has led to the assumption that they are in lieu with the

Salafs, due to their few shared doctrinal tenants. However, to say they are Salaf is the same

as labelling them standard-bearers for the Islmic faith. The differences between the two

come in many forms, from the ideological to the political; they are not the same and it can be

said with some certainty that D`ish are not Salafs. Rather, they are a cultish brand of

apocalyptic ideologues who have no say in the affairs of Muslims, nor are they

representatives of anyone, save themselves. The reality of the situation is, they are a creation

of political strife within the Middle East, as well as years of political instability and the

dissatisfaction of the populations of Iraq and Syria.

In the Name of Allh, the most Gracious, the most Merciful

All praise is due to God, most High, and may Peace and Blessings be upon His Final

Messenger. Id like to give thanks to my parents for their support and patience while I was

doing this thesis, their strengths are a blessing upon me. I would also like to thank my

dissertation supervisor, Dr Orna Almog, for her enthusiasm and encouragement in this

undertaking.

I love you both more than you love me, however I am weak, so forgive me

3
Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................ 2

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5

Literature Review ............................................................................................................ 7

Methodology .................................................................................................................. 10

Chapter 1: Understanding and Clarifying the Salaf School ......................................... 12

What is Salafism ..................................................................................................................... 12

History of Salafism .................................................................................................................. 14

Politics of Salafism .................................................................................................................. 18

Chapter 2: The Emergence of Islamic Fundamentalism: The Roots of Islmic Terrorism and

its Development .............................................................................................................. 20

Beginnings of Islmic Fundamentalism .................................................................................. 20

Al-Q`idah and the creation of D`ish .................................................................................... 22

The Declaration of Khilafah ................................................................................................... 24

Chapter 3: Discerning the Differences between the Salafs and D`ish ......................... 26

The D`ish Kill List ................................................................................................................. 26

Politics of Takfrism ................................................................................................................ 27

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 30

Bibliography .................................................................................................................. 33

4
Introduction

Since the Islmic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, declared themselves as a caliphate in 2014,

thousands have flocked to the self-proposed state under the assumption of the re-emergence

of the Islmic empire. The correct term for the group would be D`ish, a term used within

the Middle East to subvert their authority as an Islmic state, labelling it more so a false state.

The romantic gesture that D`ish presented, has led to the great threat of an increasingly

dangerous ideology, reaching globally and further enticing smaller terrorist factions into its

ever-growing worldwide campaign. It has become incumbent to identify the realities of this

destructive organisation in order to combat its ideology and not to victimise the vast majority

of Muslims who have come to feel increasingly scrutinized and associated with the terrorist

group. Living in a post 9/11 world has led to great difficulties for Muslims in the west,

making it increasingly important for those Muslims to be included in the conversation as

opposed to being made the target. The rise of Islmophobic hate attacks after 9/11 and the

racial profiling of Muslims as terror suspects, specifically D`ish affiliates, has created major

blockages to democratic principles such as freedom of religion, speech and association. This

halting of conversation leads to increasingly totalitarian principles, effectively engaging in

almost Orwellian caste systems, with Muslims becoming the bane of society. As well as this,

the anti-west sentiment within Muslim societies only naturally grows as the populous

becomes marginalised within their own societies. As one group blames another, it is only

natural each side would seek blame in its accuser. The idea that the west is at war with Islm

creates reactionary responses; it solidifies the ideas of rash individuals that they must take

direct action against their aggressor. Some of the main propaganda used by D`ish is that the

west is no place for Muslims and that it is against Muslims. This feeds the western enemies

of God narrative that terrorist organisations have classically used. Much like the Nazi and

5
communist rhetoric of the early 20th century, very few examples are needed to seduce a

population to the opinion of the government to fulfil government agenda. In a democratic

society, these concepts are supposedly extinct, in the most idyllic version of the ideology at

the least. However, it is incumbent upon the foreign policy of governments to counter

dangerous narratives, such as the danger of the alien, to quell such extremist tendencies.

Further studies of ideology must be undertaken to identify and distinguish between an enemy

and ally. The most horrendous war crimes committed by D`ish have been against Muslim

populations within the Middle East. The discussion should not start once people have been

targeted in civilian areas, the conversation should commence from the very beginning. In

identifying the Salaf orthodoxy, one establishes the root causes of its emergence and how it

developed into the contemporary Salafyyah of today. The same is done with ISIS and the

social issues that gave birth to a group so extreme, that al-Q`idah themselves distanced

themselves from the atrocities committed by ISIS (Dearden, 2017).

Realising such distinctions between the two groups leads to the understanding of the inner

workings of D`ish, leading on to a more feasible way to combat the group. Within the

conversation that is being had today, the rhetoric does not seek to vindicate the Muslims, and

more importantly, the Salafs from the unfair label they are given. It is within the standard of

a democratic society that they are given their fair say in the way D`ish must be opposed,

rather than vilified and accused of supplementing a terrorist organisation. With the inclusion

of the Salafs within the conversation, the war on terror that was started by George Bush

will be able to reach some sort of a conclusion. The only thing that must be done is the

distinguishing between the Salafs, and D`ish.

6
Literature Review

To investigate thoroughly the differences held between the Salafs and D`ish, one must

perform a great deal of research. The distinction between the two must be made to develop

clear ways to better combat the extremist group and their terrorism that is threatening, not

only to the western world, but to the entire world, as their crusade burns through the Middle

East in a cult-like fashion. The main topics covered in this literature review are the historical

beginnings of both groups, as well as the foundational elements of their politics and

differences. The literature that has been engaged with has been scrutinized per bias and

background. For example, works on Salaf history have been analysed to see whether they

were written by a Salaf and how that has affected their conclusions within the context of the

work. Another example is how well versed an author is on the various Islmic sciences and

the historical relationship between the Salafs and theology. Literature that has been found in

either English or Arabic have been included.

The works discussed the ideas surrounding the relationship between the Salafs and D`ish.

Within them, core ideas of the fractionalisation of the Salafs was an important topic of

interest. Though some of the authors spoke about the more ideological concepts that

differentiate between the two, the main points came as more political, with tension being

caused by concepts of Shar`yah that the two groups do not agree upon. This acts as the cause

of the split, as it seems to be agreed that D`ish is a form of Takfrism, which finds some sort

of basis within the Salaf tradition.

Similar findings were held amongst Yasir Qadhi and Zaid Shakir. Their ideas that Salafism is

not the root cause of religious fundamentalism seemed to resonate with the idea that fanatical

Islm comes from a sense of exclusivism rather than the ideas that the Salafs uphold. Other

7
authors that could be seen as similar were Nuh Keller and Ahmed Ibn Muhammad, who both

offered a more critical position of the Salafs in general. That being said, they did not hold the

opinion that the Salafs were the sole causes of D`ish, simply that the Salafs are not held

within the orthodoxy of Islm. Rather they are from a misunderstanding between literalism

and literal interpretation.

With Qadhis work, the thesis was able to find a better solution as to where exactly the

Takfrism of D`ish came from. However, one of the issues with the work was that it did not

cover in depth the differences between the two groups. Rather it gave a general overview of

the different sects within the Salafs themselves and how these groups interacted with one

another. On the other hand, Shakirs work aimed to shift the blame onto other forms of

Islmic sectarianism, commenting on the fact that there had been other groups within Islmic

history that carried out acts of violence in order to establish an Islmic rule. As well as this

Shakir did not comment on the subtle differences between the two groups.

The main theological differences that Keller and Muhammad presented created an interesting

argument for the historical reasoning for the emergence of the Salafs as a literalist group.

However, a better book that engaged with a more political as well as theological refutation of

D`ish, was Muhammad al-Ya`qbs book, Refuting ISIS. In it, al-Ya`qb delivers an

important comparison between the Khawrij and the modern-day extremists. This

clarification gives a history of the evolution of the religious fundamentalist and how they

have become unique and apart from the vast majority of Islmic clerical rhetoric.

These texts have become fundamental in establishing the argument that Salafyyah is

something quite distinct from extremism. Though the thesis can find cases of hard-line Salaf

ideology, these do not become reasons of affiliation with D`ish, rather, many of these points

8
have helped to prove that the two are incompatible. Some of the texts include the approach

that Salaf/Jihdism is the root of radicalism. However, these texts rarely expand clearly on

these theories, basing their arguments on the similarities in theology that Salafs share with

extremists, but failing to mention the numerous differences that differ them. Even in terms of

theology, the differences far outweigh the similarities, once properly studied. It seems quite

irresponsible of some authors to claim that the two are somehow inked without giving a

balanced argument.

The readings that I have found, have proved to be immensely important to the study of the

two groups in question. Yasir Qadhis work on Salaf polemics has been paramount to

arriving at a conclusion as to whether the two groups have anything in common. The studies

of Zaid Shakir have also made clear the distinguishing aspects of the Salafs and D`ish, as he

compared them without the bias of either group with a background in both the Islmic

sciences, and political science. However, finding research that specifically defends the Salafs

against the accusation of group-wide extremism has been difficult. There seems to be a gap in

the research field concerning the relationship between the two and whether D`ish is from the

Salaf brand of Islm or not. The findings of most western based academia are that the two

are conclusively linked as one proclaims to be the other, though this is fallacious on the part

of the academics, as they have been goaded into accepting this extraordinary proclamation.

This has led to the same demonization of Salafs in the academic world, that the wider

Muslim population finds in the media and everyday life.

9
Methodology

The primary research behind the dissertation is based in Arabic texts as well as scholarly

works by Muslim academics. As the key theme is the various aspects of Salaf Islm, works

by Salaf scholars will be used to derive their understanding and reasoning behind their

variances. However, a balance of orthodox scholarship as well as western academic research

will be used in order to gain a well-rounded assessment of the key points of difference, and to

clarify who they are and what they believe. Primary texts were a big part of the dissertation;

however, journal articles and essays were also an important addition to the formulation of the

thesis.

There will be a few resources used that were originally in Arabic. These will be translated by

myself and referenced appropriately. The Arabic sources will be added to the text in English,

however where necessary, a transliteration accompanied by a translation will be provided.

This being said, much of references will be in English.

Primary sources used have been from official government websites as well as think-tanks

who maintain a collection of D`ishs own publications such as Dbiq. Also, classical texts

such as the collections of the transmissions if the Prophet Muammad (adth) have been

used to find the sources of Salaf and D`ish rhetoric and literature.

Most of the research behind the dissertation has been in the form of qualitative data research.

Books and journals that are concerned with politics, history and the relationship between

religion and politics are just some aspects of this qualitative research. However, other works

of theology, law and Islamic politics are also included in order to analyse the realities of the

10
Salafs and Dish and how they have been formulated over the last 1400 years. As the thesis

does not engage with any concepts that are dependent on statistics or any calculable data, the

dissertation will not include any quantitative data. The qualitative research used is focused on

the theological and political discussions surrounding D`ish and the Salafs, including their

numerous differences and similarities.

There are five chapters in total; the bulk of the thesis is contained within the middle three

chapters. The aim behind the layout is to give a clear background and history to the two

groups being discussed, while clarifying the assumptions and misinformation that has been

spread regarding the groups. The first chapter consists of the clarification of the Salafs an

essentially who they are. The second chapter discusses the rise of extremism and how D`ish

came to be in the position they are currently in. The third chapter acts as the real comparison

between the two groups and where the main argument of the thesis is culminated. In the

conclusion, the thesis presents the final findings of the research in order to clarify the

question, which is also the title of this thesis.

11
Chapter 1: Understanding and Clarifying the Salaf School

What is Salafism

The word Salaf is often mentioned in a negative light, especially with regards to identifying

the root of Islamic fundamentalism. Oftentimes, the term Salaf/Jihd is used to refer to the

ideology that acts as the key drive behind religious fanatics. However, the etymology of this

term and its historical context are far less explored. Thus, misconceptions are given grounds

as the layperson will only see two words with no explanation and forthwith explain the

violence of Islm via two very common and quite fundamental Arabic/Islmic terms. This

also leads to the widespread misconception that the Islm of the Prophet in the 7th century, is

the Islm that is purported by D`ish in the 21st century. In order to clear such misconceptions

one must delve into the origins of such terms and dispel the heavy-handed notions that these

definitions are exclusive to terrorist fundamentalism.

The term Salaf-Jihdism isn't a clear term. Its scholarship holds no definitive meaning for

the terms and seems to describe quite a large section of the Sunn Muslim population that

holds various ideals within of itself. Within Sunn Islm there seems to be large variations;

the idea of being of Ahl al-Sunnah, people of the Prophetic tradition, being an ideal that is the

backbone of the sect, though with varying definitions of what it means. It is no doubt that

D`ish ideology seems to have a derivation from what is considered Salafism, however, this

interpretation of the religion has itself become fragmented with various meanings and

standards upon which it is based and structured. Yasir Qadhi describes these varying factions

in his essay on defining Salafism (2014). It seems that the majority of Salaf opinion relates

to a more puritanical interpretation of Islam, one based in literalism. However, one can make

the clear distinction between two forms of the Salaf manhaj, or way. The two clear

distinctions lie in what is closer to the orthodoxy of the majority of the Muslims and what is
12
commonly identified as Salaf. One branch is based in the ideology of Muammad Ibn `Abd

al-Wahhb and Nsir al-Dn al-Albn. And the other, is that which is closer to the commonly

accepted approach to Sunnism, with the emphasis on following a madhab (a school of Islmic

legal thought), particularly the anbal school of jurisprudence, and the Athar `aqdah

(school of Islmic creedal belief).

The word Salaf, which is the root of the word Salaf, in the Arabic language means

predecessor, the antonym being Khalaf, or successor. These terms have been used throughout

Islamic scholarship to refer to the first three generations of Islmic scholarship, held as the

most trustworthy in their works. This is based upon the adth (orally recorded transmisssion)

of the Prophet that mentioned the first three generations as being the best of people (adth,

n.d.). Within these three generations, dating from AD 622, as the beginning of the Islamic

calendar, to the AD 900s, the foundational elements of Islamic creed, jurisprudence, politics

and other sciences were forged. The core of what is today known as Salafyyah finds its roots

in this time period. though not formulated as the methodology that it is today, its key

principles are found in the writings of the 8th century scholar, Amad Ibn anbal. The details

of the history behind the rise of the movement will be discussed in a later section.

Considering the actuality of the word Salaf, being someone who is attempting to adhere to

the origins of Islamic thought, we can begin to analyse the other key terms that are often

associated with the Salafs almost exclusively. That is, namely, the terms Jihd and Islamist.

Both of these terms are used to define Muslim fundemetalists, though these terms themselves

are quite problematic. In a paper by the Brookings Institute, the author describes Islamism as,

groups [who] believe Islamic law or Islamic values should play a central role in public life.

(Dar and Hamid, 2016) However this definition undermines the role Islm plays in the lives

of the average Muslim. Islm is not simply a religious belief that is a part of the internal

13
Church and State of a Muslim, rather it forms the quintessential unification of the religious,

the social and the political. Therefore, religio-politics, just becomes religion, when spoken of

in terms of Islm. This is because the Muslim is someone who submits to the Will of God

as well as seeks to imitate the Prophet of Islm in every way, and abide by the law that

Muslims believe to be sacred and predicated by the Prophet Muammad.

Though it is quite certain that the Salaf ideology is not from traditional Islm itself, it is quite

accepted as a legitimate alternative. Of course, someone who may adhere to the Salaf school

may disagree, however the majority of Islmic scholarship from the Sunn sect have

conclusively agreed that the Ahl al-Sunnah is defined by one who adheres to one of the four

schools of jurisprudence (anaf, Mlik, Shfi`, anbal) and one of the two creedal schools

(Ash`ar, Mturd) (Muammad, 2014). The state of the Salaf school is one of being in a

grey zone. Though not accepted by the majority as a part of the Ahl al-Sunnah, it still is one

that is considered as part of the accepted ideas amongst the Muslims, albeit disagreed with.

As there are Salafs who will adhere to one of the four schools of jurisprudence, mostly to the

anbal or Mlik school, one can accept them under orthodoxy to an extent. Many of the

accepted scholarship of the Salafs, such as Ibn Taymyyah and Muammad Ibn Abd al-

Wahhab adhered to the anbal madhhab, and even though this is questioned by later

scholars such as al-Albn, they are held as true bearers of the puritan belief system of the

Salafs.

History of Salafism

To understand the Salafyyah that we have being practiced today, one must look at the history

of the group and how it became a fractionated ideology that has a multitude of theological,

political and social differences. The core of the Salafs lies in the theological variances that

they hold. A point to note about the Salafs is that throughout their development to until the
14
modern times, they have a very short list of scholarship that they take from. Compare this to

the 1400-year history of Islmic scholarship and development; it is no wonder that the group

has come under this banner of exclusionism and exclusivism. Though their chain of scholars

is short, the Salafyyah have a history with roots in more traditionally accepted

methodologies of Islamic jurisprudence, theology and scholarship. The scholars that they

have taken from in the past and in the present day, are scholars that are accepted as genuine

scholars, who have verifiable chains of transmission to the Prophet, otherwise known as

isnd. This is an important concept in the Islmic educational system, as it delivers

verification of ones learning, with a traceable lineage back to a source.

The theological background that the Salafs take inspiration, and to an extent originate from,

are the works of Amad Ibn anbal, who was the last of the founders of the four agreed upon

schools of jurisprudence. The Salafs have taken special preference with the school of Ibn

anbal (the anbal school) and derived much of their legal rhetoric, as well as their

theological differences from him. An interesting point to note is that Ibn anbal was also, to

a degree, a literalist. However, as Nuh Keller states, the reality of Ibn anbals methodology

was not that he was a literalist in the same way that the current day Salafs are (1995). His

ideas of literalism were unlike the complete literalism which of scholars such as Ibn azm,

who based his works on his expansion and analogy based on literal interpretation. Ibn anbal

instead held the same creed as the other three founders; though, instead of developing an idea

based solely on what the text said, he chose to let what the text said, i.e the Qurn explain

itself were appropriate, and explain where necessary (Keller, 1995). However, this literalism

of Ibn anbal was developed further into the Athar school of Islamic theology that is the

main creed of the Salafs of the current day, via the later anbalite, Ibn Taymyyah. This

version of the Athar creed resembles Ibn azm and al-hir and their expansions on

literalism.

15
Though the Salaf school can find its origins in the methodological differences that Ibn

anbal had with his counterparts, the real crux of the Salaf theology and identity was greatly

developed and promoted by the medieval anbalite scholar, Taq al-Dn Amad Ibn

Taymyyah. The real foundations of the Salaf school are within the writings of Ibn

Taymyyah, most prominently in his magnum opus, Majm` Fatw. The scholarly opinion

of the Salafs follows closely, the methodology laid down in the works of Ibn Taymyyah.

These theological differences do not vary to a great degree with the orthodoxy of the

Muslims, however it does come from a tradition of political persecution, which may be one

of the influences behind the Salaf approach to being firm upon its methodology, even in the

face of animosity. Ibn anbal also found himself in the same situation; when confronted with

political persecution under the Minah of the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mamn, his refusal to

submit was championed by the Sunn orthodoxy as a testament to his legitimacy (Brill, 1965,

p3).

The coining of the term I am Salaf came from the Albanian 20th century scholar,

Muammad Nasir al-Dn al-Albn (SP Editorial, 2017). The ideal behind the coining of the

term was to encourage a form of reformism within the general congregation of Muslims. The

main points of difference with the clear majority of the Muslims was not, however, a political

ideal. Rather, the differences lay in ideological and methodological nuances. However due to

the rigidness of the developed Salaf understanding, the political implications became more

apparent. The relationship between Muslims and Non-Muslims specifically, was put into

question. The Salaf understanding of the relationship is more literal in interpretation with

verses that are often used to justify a distanced relationship with non-Muslims being used.

16
Muammad Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab acted as a key influencer within the Saudi trend of

Salafyyah. His unification between the newly created state in the early 20th century and the

religious revivalism that he brought, culminated in the rise of Salafism in the Middle East.

His ideas were heavily supported by Muammad Ibn Sa`d who would become the founder

of modern day Saudi Arabia after forcibly uniting the Arab tribes of the ijz, Najd and al-

As'. The formulation of the idea of identifying as a Salaf became predominate amongst the

Saudi scholarship and diaspora. This was because of the original anbal leanings of the

region being closer to the ideas of the Salafs. Their similar ideas of literalism made them

compatible in some respects. However, this soon developed into the unified association with

Salafyyah alone as it took dominance in the region. The relative ease of the ideology and its

very literal approaches to Islamic text and theological debates made it easy to spread,

especially amongst laypeople.

The current age of Salaf thought sees many polemical variances that have led to the

movement oftentimes being painted with a very broad brush. The varying differences within

the Salaf ideology follow a unified methodology in their approach to the religion. Islm is

made simple by the idea of bi-l kayf, or literally, without how, which acts as the core tenant

of their literalism. The words within the agreed upon transmissions of the Prophet, as well as

the Qurn are used literally and not figuratively or metaphorically due to the belief that the

human cannot comprehend the word of God into any abstract meaning and that God would

only deliver His Message in a plain form (Wiktorowicz, 2006). This, however, does not mean

that the variances do not provide stark differences amongst the Salafs. Differences in

theological belief, adherence to the orthodoxy of the four Madhib, or schools, and whether

adherence to the Salaf tradition is necessary or not, all play major roles in identifying one

from the other (Qadhi, 2014). The quietist methodology of al-Albn, for example, is not

reiterated amongst all Salafs. Most notably, the tradition of Osmah Ibn Ldin, who was a

17
self-proclaimed Salaf/Wahbb, yet his approach was completely different from the

proponents of his school. This is where the Takfr ideology comes into fashion, the ideology

of D`ish and their ilk.

Politics of Salafism

Political identity amongst the Salafs is one that is deeply rooted in their own tradition of non-

alignment. Once a group engages with politics, a distrust emerges very quickly amongst the

diaspora in regards to the validity of a persons claim to Salafyyah. This can be seen with the

Muslim Brotherhood and their rocky relationship with the Salaf scholarship. Al-Albn being

arguably the most influential Salaf scholar, showed his distaste for the politics of Sayyid

Qutb and the Brotherhood. Though Qutbs ideas can clearly be seen as a predecessor to the

modern strain of Salafism, his ideas of Jahlyyah, or pre-Islmic ignorance, were causes of

contention. That being said, when examining the wider picture, these ideas are not so far from

the ideas or reformation that the Salafs hold. The same notion of renewal by returning to the

origins of the Islmic faith are found within the two groups. Theologically, they hold little

difference. The difference comes when the approach to leadership is examined. The

development of the Muslim Brotherhood as a group outside of the framework of Islm is

problematic to the Salafs. The identification with anything other than the previous generation

of the Muslims is regarded as creating splits within the Muslim diaspora, or al-Fitnah wa al-

Azb.

The political aspects of the Salafs varies as per the sect they fall under. The Salafs that

identify under the quietist approach of al-Albn take a backseat when it comes to the

discussion of politics. However, this does not mean that the Salafs whom take from al-

Albn fall into this bracket (Qadhi, 2014). The politics of the Salafs is not as simple as it

may seem. The mainstay of their ideology are the transmissions of the Prophet; however,
18
these are numerous and at times in abrogation of one another. Not to mention the Islmic

science that deals with the authenticity of the transmission and the limitations of a narration

in terms of its ability to be used in law or legal theory. The relationship between the

explanation and the explained is lost amongst many of the laymen of the Salafs. The

scholarship behind them choose to opt for the wording as it is transmitted within the actual

source. This leads to an issue of confusion amongst the laymen as to how to implement the

given laws through the context of the current day and age. One can see how this would cause

seemingly hard-line stances to be taken by many of the Salafs with regards to the

understanding of social interaction and reacting to the laws of a land that is not under the

Shar`yah.

19
Chapter 2: The Emergence of Islamic Fundamentalism: The Roots of
Islmic Terrorism and its Development

Beginnings of Islmic Fundamentalism

The introduction of Islamic fundamentalism comes from the Khawrij of the 7th century. The

Khawrij were known as the deviant sect, the origins of which arose during the time of the

fourth caliph of the al-Khulaf al-Rshidn, or the four rightly guided caliphs, who are

considered the only four legitimate rulers in Islamic history, save the Prophet. The extremism

exhibited by the Khawrij is reminiscent of the type of modern Takfrism that has emerged

(al-Ya`qb, 2014). The same ideas of excommunication were encouraged by the Khawrij.

The idea that they were the only saved people was also a form of extremism that is

formulated by the fundamentalists of today. Though one can see a similarity in that regard

with the Salafs who, though it is debated amongst their intra-Salaf sects, that they are the so-

called saved sect. The argument that this links the Salafs to the classic fundamentalism of

the Khawrij, however, is quite far-fetched. To claim as much is to say all Muslims are like

the Khawrij simply for believing in Islm. A closer resemblance, seen between D`ish and

the Khawrij, is more accurate. Both groups have tendencies to invite to violence and

excommunicate anyone who doesnt agree with them. These problematic tendencies have

clearly evolved from the earliest form of extremism exhibited by the Khawrij. Similar to the

fundamentalists of today, the Khawrij were widely condemned, though due to the nature of

that time, they were unable to recruit the same membership that contemporary groups find.

The Takfrist element of the Salafs is something that is quite distinct from the actuality of the

Salafs, although it admittedly does draw similarities. Both the Takfrs and the Salafs

evolved from the same literalist understanding of Ibn anbal, and are founded on the same
20
ideals of puritanism and individual interpretation of the core texts, or ijtihd in Arabic.

However, where they differ from the traditional Salafs, is on points of excommunication and

the former having an almost cult-like following. In fact, this cult-like ideal is encouraged by

the Takfrs as they encourage the idea that with them is the reality of the true Islam as

communicated by the Prophet and codified by the companions of the Prophet. This

rejectionist mentality is created by the idea that the Muslim world has degraded into the state

of jahilyyah, or ignorance. This is famously acknowledged by Sayyid Qutb, who acted as an

integral part of the Muslim Brotherhood, in his book, Milestones (2015, p21). It should be

noted that Qutb was no Islmic scholar however; rather he was closer to being scientist who

based his theories on Islmic discourse. His ideas were the first real conceptualization of

Salaf rhetoric on a large scale. His works also made the link between the political and social

aspects of Islm. The significance of his works was the widespread exposure to Political

Islm, leading to the question of Islms compatibility with the modern world of politics.

The real beginnings of modern Islmic fundamentalism came from the disintegration of the

Mujhidn after the success of the Soviet-Afghan war. The US allowing the Mujhidn to

evolve into the libn is what caused ramifications for eastern extremism. Groups such as

the Haqqani network contributed to al-Q`idah, launching attacks that were not contained

within the Middle East. This evolution of warfare brought about the realization that battles do

not have to be fought on the frontlines anymore. The dynamic of warfare led to include

coordinated attacks that are seemingly random. Though the libn and other groups of

Afghan origin maintained a presence in Afghanistan exclusively, the idea of the militant

group was becoming much more far spread. However, this would give leeway to the rise of

groups who were not confined by borders. The idea of establishing the sacred Islmic law

within the nation, allowed the idea of creating a nation for the Islmic law itself.

21
Al-Q`idah and the creation of D`ish

The formation of Ab Mu`ab al-Zarqws al-Q`idah in Iraq (AQI) evolved into the

modern day D`ish. D`ish owes its conception to the extreme violence of Zarqw, who was

a contemporary of Ibn Ldin. The pair spent time amongst the Mujhidn during the war in

Afghanistan, fighting against the soviets during the early 1980s. From looking at the

personalities of the two fundamentalist leaders, it is clear to see how these two groups split

and became so different, yet similar in their approach to extremism. one thing that must be

understood is that the extreme religious identification of D`ish was not a creation of

Zarqw, nor from its al-Q`idah background. Rather the severe religious backbone was the

combination of current D`ish leader, Ab Bakr al-Baghdds religious rhetoric and

extreme violence that influenced the creation of a pseudo-Islamic state.

With the establishment of al-Q`idah in Iraq, Zarqw was able to rope in a great deal of

support, especially from the remnants of Saddam Husseins army, who following the collapse

of the Sunn-secular leadership, had nowhere to go. The inspiration behind the growth of

AQIs membership was the majority Muslim population in Iraq being Sh`ah. After decades

under Saddams rule as a secular Sunn government, the paradigm shift meant that those who

had enjoyed the security of Saddams government, were now in the limelight for having

supported him during his various campaigns against Sh`ah Muslims. This issue would cause

mounting tensions that were easily exploitable by Zarqw and his group.

After the death of Zarqw in an American drone strike, the group formally known as AQI

found a new leader and a new purpose. The Islmic State of Iraq is what rose out of the ideals

Zarqw had laid down during his reign as AQI commander. The unification of Zarqws

22
fanaticism with Bin Ldins more religious orientation, was opportune for Baghdd, as it

was just enough for him to have members flock to him for Jihd, and for the opportunity to

be a part of a group that seemingly offered a better standard of living. However, the group

was still seen as an al-Q`idah affiliate. 2011 saw a shifting tide in the Middle East however;

the arab spring gave birth to the Syrian civil war, leading Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad to

take counter measures. In order to quell any foreign support for rebel groups, he released

radical prisoners, who immediately took to fighting against him and undermining the

legitimacy of the rebel fighters. Baghdd sent a group of fighters into Syria to create a new

group, known as the Nurah front. This group was a strong al- Q`idah affiliate, though it

held the same religious inklings as D`ish.

The natural result of the rapid rise in power for Baghdadis group was the formulation of an

entirely new organization that sought to establish a caliphate, not only in the middle east, but

rather in the whole world. This was in direct contradiction with the aims of al-Q`idah who

wanted to establish a Shar`yah state that they felt was the most authentic. This brought

D`ish and the Nurah front at odds, with D`ish effectively calling them apostates and

declaring them as enemies as well. With the rise of D`ish being supplemented by the

inaction of Assad, D`ish were allowed to gain further control, and effectively solidify its

power as the only acceptable Islmic State. The result of this was al-Q`idah and its

affiliates refuting D`ish for being too extreme, aiming to improve its own image by

seemingly being moderate compared to the extremism of D`ish. This would make al-

Q`idah seem as though it is a viable alternative within the Middle East, and a more

legitimate force to join in the liberation of the Middle East.

The propaganda that both groups spill about one another have created an issue for terrorist

groups around the world. The idea that D`ish have taken the supposed legitimacy from al-

23
Q`idah is something that is quite unprecedented. The struggle between the two factions has

reached a point where the recruitment of foreign fighters is the determining factor for

dominance. The war between the two groups is not a war of ideals, it is a war for power. The

usage of religious terminology to delegitimize one another is a classic form of political

rhetoric. The culmination of the extremist mentality is the attempt to take over the world. It is

not an attempt to spread an ideology, rather it is to assert dominance. Religion is merely used

as the legitimizing factor for the group to base its actions on.

The Declaration of Khilafah

The declaration of the Khilfah, or Islmic statehood, by D`ish in 2014 was a turning point

in the evolution of terrorist organizations. The idealism of an Islmic state is an idea shared

by many extremist groups, the supposedly perfect state which would embody the entirety of

the Islmic way of life is quite a romanticised ideal. However, the actuality of solidifying this

notion is one that many terrorist groups, and even general Muslims, hold to be too

challenging in the current age. The conditions set by D`ish for the establishment of the

Islmic state create a problematic situation where most of the Muslim community is outcast.

The main elements of the declaration by D`ish spokesman, Ab Muammad al-`Adnn,

included the labelling of Ab Bakr al-Baghdd as the sole legitimate caliph, and what was

formerly ISIS to be known as IS. Further requirements stated by al-`Adnn on behalf of al-

Baghdd stipulated that any terrorist organisation must liquidate and become a part of D`ish

(2014). In essence, the group staged a coup on a global scale, absorbing terrorist groups such

as al-Shabb from Somalia and Boko Haram in Nigeria. This caused other terrorist

organisations such as al-Q`idah and the libn to disavow them as the power struggle were

threats to their territorial based organizations. al-Q`idah has seen substantial loss of might,

and the libn have also had their fair share of trouble combatting the rising trend of Afghan

24
D`ish in the western parts of Afghanistan. As the organization has continually grown, their

membership has made them a magnet for terrorist organizations, unified under one banner.

The pinnacle of the terrorist organization has been finally realized. Within the evolutionary

process of terror groups, the ultimate goal is to establish the caliphate that would span the

globe. This acts as the reason for smaller terrorist groups to latch onto D`ish and join what

they believe to be the ultimate proclamation of their Islm.

This rhetoric is so problematic, that it declares that anyone who does not join the group as an

apostate. The majority of Muslims are not within this state. If the majority Muslims have

disavowed the state, then it holds no legal weight. D`ish claiming that the worlds Muslims

are in fact, not Muslim, means that they have no one to actually join them. There is a logical

fallacy in the idea of the caliphate that D`ish proclaim. The population of D`ish, compared

to the Muslim populations of various other countries such as India and Malaysia, is

miniscule. The reality of the claim to a caliphate is that it is not accepted under the basic

tenants of Islmic law. To claim that it holds any legitimacy is to gravely misunderstand the

objectives of Islmic law (Maqsid al-Shar`yah). The conception of the state is instead, a

rash decision to make. Many people have called for the establishment of the Islmic state,

however very few have actually attempted to conceive such a state, due to the immense

difficulties of maintaining a state, within the current world order. One can look clearly

towards the ottoman empire as an example of an empire that failed to balance the secular and

the religious. D`ishs solution to this is to completely isolate itself from the world in order to

gain a complete control. However, this is also ironic, due to the fact that during the time of

the Prophet and the accepted Caliphates, trade ties were maintained with non-Muslim

countries. Treaties were also established, such as the treaties with the Jews of Madnah during

the time of the Prophet.

25
Chapter 3: Discerning the Differences between the Salafs and D`ish

The D`ish Kill List

Historically, D`ish has come into conflict with the Salafs on many occasions. The number

of religious verdicts (fatw) that have been issued by the Salaf scholars are numerous. It is

quite evident that there is a conflict between the two groups, even before it is viewed from a

western perspective. The verdicts that are delivered have centred on the extreme lengths

D`ish go to when delivering their own Fatw. Prominent Salaf scholars have spoken about

D`ish, such as `Abd al-Musin al-`Abbd who writes in multiple verdicts regarding the

impermissibility of joining the false state and to steer clear of their rhetoric (al-`Abbd,

2015). The D`ish narrative also comes into conflict with the Salaf view that revolting

against a ruler is impermissible. However, it should be noted that though this is the majority

opinion amongst the Salafs, there is another opinion that it is permissible to revolt if the ruler

is unfit for his position. Though that revolt should not entail a war, rather with affirmative

action (Ibn Taymyyah, 2003). As the Salafs have had a clear history of being against the

revolt of a people against a leader, it is clear that this would be an aspect of legal difference.

Amongst the orthodoxy of the Muslims, legal differences are met with mutual disagreement,

with acceptance of the position of one another. However, within the context of D`ishs legal

methodology, there is no room for Ikhtilf, an important concept within the Islmic legal

framework.

Within this rhetoric we can begin to analyse the hit-list that D`ish has built from the names

of prominent scholars, and people of influence. Within the list are names of scholars from the

orthodoxy of the religion, however, D`ish have also included the names of Salaf scholars

26
and speakers, many of which have spoken out against the extremists, either in the past, or

after the declaration of a caliphate in 2014. Speakers like Bilal Philips and Pierre Vogel have

been mentioned as apostates from the religion, other notable scholars have also been

mentioned for not supporting the false Islmic state in their propaganda campaigns (Dbiq,

2016). This is a problematic issue as these scholars, as well as bigger faces amongst the

Salafs such as Grand Muft of Saudi Arabia, `Abd al-`Azz Ibn `Abd Allh al-Shaykh, are

renowned by the Salafs around the world. These notables are held as the standard bearers for

what is Salaf Islm. The fact that they have appeared in Dbiq and other videos as being

considered apostates shows the conflict that D`ish has with Salafyyah. In the Salaf

tradition, the ranks of the scholars are held highly. The scholarship of the Salafs is minimal

compared to the scholarship of the majority of the Muslim orthodoxy. This acts as a reason

why the Salafs consider the few who are upon the same path or Manhaj as them, as being

some of the most reliable sources of Islm. In many cases, this becomes the distinguisher

between extremism and moderation.

Politics of Takfrism

The politics of takfr play an important role in understanding the context behind the strange

abrogation of Salaf concepts that D`ish engage with. D`ish seek to legitimise themselves

while de-legitimising any form of opposition as an opposition to God. Their rhetoric follows

the classic Takfr principle of excommunication based on disagreement. As mentioned

earlier, this is a core principal of Islmic discourse, thus giving leeway to the various

traditions within Islm, and yet considering them all within orthodoxy. However, the

understanding of takfr is that there is only one central tradition, and to deviate from that

tradition is to fall into excommunication. This concept, from the outside, seems to be a

clearly religiously motivated idea, that looks at itself as the one true branch of belief;

27
however, it seems to be more so a political power grasp that is based on the ignorance, and

possibly the innocence, of people.

There are two elements to the hypocrisy of extremists when it comes to allegiance to said

group. One is the understanding that they are the only legitimate rulers and so they are

without a doubt the only authority, and the second is the dismissal of any other form of rule

as being apostasy. What is fundamental about extremists is that they justify their rationale as

being based upon what is ordained by God. This puts the average person in conflict, not with

an organisation, but with God. This is based on the principle of Fardh Kifyah, or communal

obligation (Ibn Taymyyah, 2006). As discussed by Ibn Taymyyah, it becomes the obligation

of the community to join an Islmic state once it has been formed (2006). Using this, a tool

for propaganda is conceived in order to legitimise the reasoning for people to join D`ish. By

basing their rhetoric on sound legal ruling, D`ish legitimise their claims and expand their

membership, which is an expansion of their military power. This is because the communal

membership includes the duty to fight in their wars as well (Ibn Taymyyah, 2006, p179).

It is known that the Salaf tradition frowns upon breaking ties with the ruler. However, D`ish

have continually preached violence, not only against states, but against every major head of

state as well. D`ish encourage bloodshed on a mass scale, even though this is a concept that

the Salafs in their entirety do not agree with. D`ish reasons that the rulers of any state is

illegitimate as they do not rule according to their interpretation of the Shar`yah, and

therefore do not fall into that idea that revolution is illegitimate. To further justify their

actions, they condemn any ruler that deals with foreign leaders. Their stance against the

Saudi government is quite clear, as well as their reinforcement that they are the only true

practitioners of the Shar`yah. Their problematic, to say the least, application of Divine law

28
puts them at odds with the Salafs. Not to mention the entirety of the Muslim population,

most of whom disavow D`ish, and live in what are considered by D`ish, apostate nations.

In analyzing the differences between the majority Salafs and the minority Takfrs, one must

understand that there is a connection between the two. It would be impertinent to consider

that the Salafs and D`ish have absolutely nothing in common at all. The Salafs have been

considered to largely be comprised of excommunicators; however, as we have seen in

previous chapters, this does not seem to be the case. The actuality of the Salaf Manhaj is that

is has a variety of opinions, some more dominant and universal, others more extreme and in

the minority. The strand of Salafism that D`ish claim to follow is the Takfr route, though it

would not be admitted by them in their own rhetoric, it is clear to see when we compare the

terrorist group with other sects of Islam. The mass rhetoric of D`ish comes from its ideas of

excommunication. It thrives on the idea that they are the only saved group and therefore

create a cult-like state. Exclusivism is the backbone of the Takfr tenants. The members of

D`ish all believe that they follow the purest form of Islam that is supposedly reminiscent of

the early generations. However, their ideas fall more in line with the Khawrij group, a sect

established in the early stages of the caliphate of Ali, who assassinated him and ended the

accepted caliphate system. saying that the Salafs and D`ish are the same is a convenient

excuse for the wider issues at hand. As Zaid Shakir notes, there are many other groups who

would claim violence in the name of Islm, and yet they are the furthest from the Salafs

(2015).

29
Conclusion

It is clear to see that within the rhetoric that has been delivered to the public by the mass

media, that the conversation surrounding Islmic fundamentalism is far from concrete. The

common misconceptions surrounding the principles of D`ish and their relationship to Salaf

Islm have led to a group being ostracised in the media, as well as in academia. Many things

within the literature on D`ish must change; for example, the mentioning of the name D`ish

as opposed to the name acronym ISIS or ISIL, or simply IS, has a great effect within the

conversation. The usage of terminology has had a phenomenal impact on the way we discuss

terrorism. Using the term Islmic State associates the group with the Muslims, leading to

cases of misinformation, and even Islamophobia. The entire diaspora of Muslims become

guilty by association. The same can be said about how the ideology of D`ish is presented to

the general public, students and academics alike. By titling them as Salaf/Jihds, the same

accusations are thrown upon the overwhelming majority of Salafs who have nothing to do

with D`ish and their rhetoric. As seen within this thesis, the Salafs have an approach that is

looked at as heresy amongst D`ish, as are the ideologies of all others who do not fit in with

their fanatical and cult-like approach to Islm. What must be understood is that Islm is not a

religion that is a personal religion, nor is it one that is based in spirituality exclusively; it is

the combination of sacred law and doctrine, and the application of it in ones personal and

social life. This does not mean that the Shar`yah is a legal system that is incompatible with

the legal systems of the west, rather it gives room to accommodate those laws, and in reality,

many of the laws are the same. Furthermore, the Shar`yah is much more complex than a

simple day to day code of conduct. It is a codified legal system with varying jurisprudential

schools and practices,

30
The reality of D`ish, is that is derived from social tension and decades of political upheaval

in the Middle East. The science of social/political movements is a far stronger explanation of

the rise of the group. The rise of such religious/political groups can be explained by the likes

of Ibn Khaldn in his Muqaddimah (the Introduction) where he explains that it is the

religious identity that does away with pluralism and unites the people under a single doctrine.

Within this system it is the `asabyyah that breaks down governmental barriers and produces

real change. The people engaged in this idea of group feeling, notes Ibn Khaldn, are

involved to such a degree that they are willing to sacrifice their lives for their endeavour, as it

is the most important aspect of their identity (2014). The strength of religious reconciliation

is such, that D`ish have clearly exploited it to recruit fighters from abroad based on the

concept. Rather than on ideas of Salafism or any real shared theological rationale, D`ish

focus on abusing the idea of brotherhood that Muslims share, and persuade people that they

are fighting to free oppressed people (Dbiq, 2016). They focus on the suffering that Muslims

in the Middle East experience, and use it to justify their actions. This plays well on the

emotions of many people who share the same sentiment towards the people of their own faith

who suffer. This does not necessitate the belief in the same ideology, though D`ish do

reinforce their ideology as the legal reasoning behind their actions. These reasons, however,

are merely seen as lexical semantics and a means to an end.

One cannot conclude on the case of the Salafs without saying that though there are clear

differences between them and D`ish, D`ish can be classified as an offshoot of the Salaf

school. The Takfr sect is not one that defines the Salafs, and cannot be considered the

essence of Salaf Islm; that being said, it is clear to see that the Takfrs have taken their

literalism from the Salafs and allowed it to fester into an extremist stance. The strictness of

the Salafs has been turned into the extremism of D`ish, to the point where the group has

31
completely abandoned all reason and evolved into a hate group that preaches violence and

Aryan dominance.

The emergence and rationale behind cannot be concluded as being a fault of Salafyyah, even

though one can link the two. Rather, it is the result of fanaticism driven by political instability

and countless vacuums that have plagued the Middle East. One can be bold and say that had

the history of the western empires led to the same situations seen within the Middle East,

some from of fundamental Protestantism might have emerged to take as much power as

possible within the region and call its brothers to a fight for dominance. Though this is

highly theoretical, the chances of something of that nature occurring are not so far-fetched.

Religious extremism is found amongst all creeds, but especially amongst those who find

themselves to be the Aryan group. The ideology of D`ish is not so dissimilar to the far-

right fascism of Hitler in the 40s.

The allure of the brotherhood that D`ish presents is the draw that brings in the number of

foreign fighters that they employ. It is no wonder that the same emigration has not been seen

during the reign of al-Q`idah where the idea of a caliphate was only played with, not

actually realised. The same concept is seen amongst the Muslim Brotherhood who, though

they are Salaf in nature, did not declare a caliphate, only aiming to build towards a state that

resembled one, with the Shar`yah as state law. The boldness of D`ish to declare the

romanticised Islmic state, led to the great influence upon non-Arab Muslims who sought

what would seem more comfortable to them.

32
Bibliography

1. Al-`Abbd, A.M. (2015). al-Khulafah al-D`ishyah al-Maz`mah Taqtulu al-

Mualln wa Tadhbau al-damyn bil-Sakkn [The Self-Proclaimed Caliphate of

ISIS Who Kill Worshippers and Slaughter People by Knife]. Available: http://al-

abbaad.com/articles/125-1435-09-28. Last accessed 30th April 2017.

2. al-`Adnn, A.M. (2014). Indeed Your Lord Is Ever Watchful. Available:

https://scholarship.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/bitstream/handle/10066/16495/ADN201409

22.pdf?sequence=1. Last accessed 4th Feb 2017.

3. al-Ya`qb, M (2016). Refuting ISIS. 2nd ed. Virginia: Sacred Knowledge. p13-14.

4. Brill, E.J (1965). Encyclopedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Netherlands: Brill. p3.

5. Bunzel, C. (2015). From Paper State to Caliphate: The Ideology of the Islamic

State. Available: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/The-

ideology-of-the-Islamic-State.pdf. Last accessed 1st May 2017.

6. Dar, A and Hamid, S. (2016). Islamism, Salafism, and jihadism: A primer. Available:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2016/07/15/islamism-salafism-and-jihadism-

a-primer/. Last accessed 16 March 2017.

7. Dearden, L (2017) Al-Qaeda leader denounces Isis 'madness and lies' as two terrorist

groups compete for dominance Independent. 13th January [Online] Available at:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/al-qaeda-leader-ayman-al-

zawahiri-isis-madness-lies-extremism-islamic-state-terrorist-groups-compete-

a7526271.html (Accessed: 30th April 2017)

8. Ibn Khaldn, M (2014) Muqaddimah li-Kitb al-Ibar [Introduction to the Book of

Lessons]. 1st ed. Great Britain: JiaHu Books. p.72.

33
9. Ibn Taymyyah, M (2003). Minhj al-Sunnah al-Nabawyyah f Naq Kalm al-

Sh'ah wa al-Qadaryyah [The Way of the Prophetic Tradition in Denouncing the

Shiites and the Qadrites]. Cairo: Dr al-Falah. Vol.5 p.527.

10. Ibn Taymyyah, M. (2006). The Political Shar`yah on Reforming the Ruler and the

Ruled (U. Farrukh, Trans.). Beirut: Dr al-Fiqh. p.127.

11. Islmic State. (2016) A Selection of Military Operations by the Islamic State. Dbiq,

[online] (12), p28. Available at: http://clarionproject.org/wp-content/uploads/islamic-

state-isis-isil-dabiq-magazine-issue-12-just-terror.pdf Last Accessed: 30th April 2017

12. Islmic State. (2016) Kill the Imms of Kufr in the West. Dbiq, [online] (14), p8-17.

Available at: http://clarionproject.org/wp-content/uploads/Dabiq-Issue-14.pdf Last

Accessed: 30th April 2017

13. Keller, N. (1995). Literalism and the Attributes of Allh. Available:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/littlk.htm. Last accessed 28th April 2017.

14. Muammad, A. (2014). Who are the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jamaah? Available:

http://masud.co.uk/who-are-the-ahl-as-sunnah-wal-jamaah/. Last accessed 25th Apr

2017.

15. a al-Bukhr (846). Muammad al-Bukhr, Vol. 8, Book 76, Hadith 437

16. Shakir, Z. (2015). Do Not Blame the Salafis. Available:

https://www.newislamicdirections.com/nid/articles/do_not_blame_the_salafis. Last

accessed 14th April 2017.

17. SP Editorial. (2017). Answers to Common Misconceptions on Naming With

Salafiyyah. Available:

http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=slf01&articleID=SLF01000

7&articlePages=1. Last accessed 29th April 2017.

34
18. Qadhi, Yasir. (2014). On Salaf Islam. Available: http://cdn.muslimmatters.org/wp-

content/uploads/On-Salafi-Islam_Dr.-Yasir-Qadhi.pdf. Last accessed: 11th April

2017.

19. Qutb, S (2015). Milestones. 14th ed. New Delhi: Islamic Book Service. p21.

20. Wiktorowicz, Q. (2006). Anatomy of the Salafi Movement. Studies in Conflict &

Terrorism. 29 (3), p207-239.

35