Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Global Jihadist Movement

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Byman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade Center ◽  
Northwest China ◽  
The United States ◽  
Muslim World ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
The World ◽  
Osama Bin Laden

On the morning of September 11, 2001, the entire world was introduced to Al Qaeda and its enigmatic leader, Osama bin Laden. But the organization that changed the face of terrorism forever and unleashed a whirlwind of counterterrorism activity and two major wars had been on the scene long before that eventful morning. In Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Global Jihadist Movement: What Everyone Needs to Know, Daniel L. Byman, an eminent scholar of Middle East terrorism and international security who served on the 9/11 Commission, provides a sharp and concise overview of Al Qaeda, from its humble origins in the mountains of Afghanistan to the present, explaining its perseverance and adaptation since 9/11 and the limits of U.S. and allied counterterrorism efforts. The organization that would come to be known as Al Qaeda traces its roots to the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Founded as the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, Al Qaeda achieved a degree of international notoriety with a series of spectacular attacks in the 1990s; however, it was the dramatic assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11 that truly launched Al Qaeda onto the global stage. The attacks endowed the organization with world-historical importance and provoked an overwhelming counterattack by the United States and other western countries. Within a year of 9/11, the core of Al Qaeda had been chased out of Afghanistan and into a variety of refuges across the Muslim world. Splinter groups and franchised offshoots were active in the 2000s in countries like Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen, but by early 2011, after more than a decade of relentless counterterrorism efforts by the United States and other Western military and intelligence services, most felt that Al Qaeda's moment had passed. With the death of Osama bin Laden in May of that year, many predicted that Al Qaeda was in its death throes. Shockingly, Al Qaeda has staged a remarkable comeback in the last few years. In almost every conflict in the Muslim world, from portions of the Xanjing region in northwest China to the African subcontinent, Al Qaeda franchises or like-minded groups have played a role. Al Qaeda's extreme Salafist ideology continues to appeal to radicalized Sunni Muslims throughout the world, and it has successfully altered its organizational structure so that it can both weather America's enduring full-spectrum assault and tailor its message to specific audiences. Authoritative and highly readable, Byman's account offers readers insightful and penetrating answers to the fundamental questions about Al Qaeda: who they are, where they came from, where they're going-and, perhaps most critically-what we can do about it.

scholarly journals Al-Qaeda’s New Orientation After the Death of Osama bin Laden

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-145
Author(s):  
Siti Fatimah ◽  
Yanuardi Syukur
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Osama Bin Laden

After the death of Osama Bin Laden and the declaration of the establishment of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the Al-Qaeda movement changed from being aggressive to being passive. The aggressiveness of the Al-Qaeda movement, for instance, was seen during the spectacular terror of 9/11, which was then followed by various actions carried out by followers in various parts of the world. However, Bin Laden's death and the rise of the ISIS group made Al-Qaeda look passive. This paper seeks to see the history of the Al-Qaeda movement to the dynamics that influence the movement’s choices. The author found that changing Al-Qaeda's orientation from aggressive to passive did not deny the existence of a consolidated movement that deliberately distanced itself from the anti-terrorism campaign carried out by the United States.

scholarly journals United States Intervention Against Terrorism in Iraq

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ida Susilowati ◽  
Nur Rohim Yunus ◽  
Muhammad Sholeh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade ◽  
World Trade Center ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
The World ◽  
Trade Center ◽  
United States Intervention

Abstract: Terrorism is a crime committed by a group of people to frighten, terrorize, intimidate a country's government. In the case of the September 11, 2001 terror that occurred at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the United States accused the al-Qaeda group of being behind the attack. Furthermore, the United States attacked Afghanistan and Iraq. America considers the attacks carried out are legitimate because they are carried out to reduce world terrorism crimes. Whereas behind that there is another motive for controlling the oil in the country that it attacked.Keywords: Terrorism, Intervention, United States. Abstrak:Terorisme merupakan kejahatan yang dilakukan oleh sekelompok orang guna menakuti, meneror, mengintimidasi pemerintahan suatu negara. Dalam kasus teror 11 September 2001 yang terjadi pada World Trade Center dan Pentagon, Amerika Serikat menuduh kelompok al-qaidah di balik serangan tersebut. Selanjutnya Amerika Serikat melakukan penyerangan terhadap Afghanistan dan Iraq. Amerika menganggap serangan yang dilakukan adalah sah karena dilakukan untuk meredam kejahatan terorisme dunia. Padahal di balik itu ada motif lain untuk menguasai minyak yang ada di negara yang diserangnya.Kata Kunci: Terrorisme, Intervensi, Amerika Serikat

scholarly journals TERORISME INTERNASIONAL DAN PENGARUH AL-QAEDA PASCA MENINGGALNYA OSAMA BIN LADEN

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agung Yudhistira Nugroho
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Organizational Structure ◽  
The United States ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
The World ◽  
Chain Of Command ◽  
Global Terrorism ◽  
Osama Bin Laden ◽  
The U.S

al-Qaeda is one of the movement of global terrorism network that has a neat organizational structure and has established a strong chain of command and have an extensive network, greatly influenced by movements in sentiment toward the United States. WTC tragedy and other actions always lead to the infrastructure of Western countries, especially the U.S.. Osama Bin Laden as the leader of the al-Qaeda network has strong power in giving its influence in leading al-Qaeda. It can not be denied that Bin Laden was in first place most wanted people in the world. Under Bin Laden, al-Qaeda terrorist movement became a professional and highly coordinated, it can be seen from their actions is very neat. Osama bin Laden's death in 2011 and then, for some people is the end of the story of al-Qaeda. But the name of al-Qaida continues to appear in the news all over the world. In the name of the late al-Qaeda has been attributed to several events in the form of bomb attacks in Iraq, killing and conflict in Mali, clashes in Yemen, and sporadic raids and several incidents of kidnapping in Afghanistan. Looking at some of these cases the question "How gait or lunge al-Qaeda terrorist network after the death of Osama Bin Laden?

Moderate Islam

2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 29-38
Author(s):  
Abid Ullah Jan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Muslim World ◽  
Dark Spot ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
American Government ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Part Time

The Debate Question 1: Various commentators have frequently invoked the importance of moderate Muslims and the role that they can play in fighting extremism in the Muslim world. But it is not clear who is a moderate Muslim. The recent cancellation of Tariq Ramadan’s visa to the United States, the raids on several American Muslim organizations, and the near marginalization of mainstream American Muslims in North America pose the following question: If moderate Muslims are critical to an American victory in the war on terror, then why does the American government frequently take steps that undermine moderate Muslims? Perhaps there is a lack of clarity about who the moderate Muslims are. In your view, who are these moderate Muslims and what are their beliefs and politics? AUJ: The promotion of “moderate” Muslims is part of an extremist tendency sweeping the United States, unlike the situation in the Muslim world. It is the result of a war between two Americas: the America of ideals (e.g., of equality and justice) and the America of extremism, which has succumbed to self-interest groups and individuals. For the America of ideals, the Tariq Ramadan episode is a dark spot, one among many such episodes in recent times. Periodic episodes of tragedy are the hallmark of the America that has shifted its priorities under the pressure and manipulation of the extremists. These forces use all expedient means to sacrifice the wellbeing of the United States for self-interest and promotion of the Zionist state. This extremism entails a morbid dread of Islam. It never regards any Muslim as moderate unless one publicly rejects the Qur’an as “the final manifesto of God,”1 considering this belief a “disturbing cornerstone of Islam,”2 and submitting to the rejection of key parts of the Qur’an.3 Unquestioning support for Israel, along with all other American-approved dictatorships, is the minimum criterion.4 All other factors are irrelevant. The fascistic American track record of accepting “moderates” and rejecting “radicals” is clear.5 The final distinction is not defined by their adherence to Islam, but by the assumed threat they pose to the interests of these extremists. For example, a devout man, fervent in all of his personal rituals but not participating in political affairs, would be a “moderate,” whereas a marginally practicing Muslim with the zeal to voice his opposition to the injustice perpetrated by the extremists’America is classified as a “radical.” In the current political context, a moderate is one who is passive like the devout man, or active like the extremist “moderates” – the Muslim neomods – who openly promote the extremist agenda using Islamic interpretations or “Project Ijthihad”6 as a cover. Hence, the distinction is not academic or religious, but political. Two opposing factors prove this point. First, there are clear commands for Muslims to be moderate by default.7 Moderateness is a prerequisite for all Muslims, not a label of identity for some. Accordingly, Muslims cannot be part-time or partial Muslims (Qur’an 2:208) or reject part of the Qur’an (Qur’an 2:85).8 Hence, such religious labelling is irrelevant. Second, the extremists insist that strong belief in the totality of the Qur’an makes Muslims “Islamists.”9 That is why they believe themselves to be “absolutely at war with the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran.”10 It means that the standards of “moderateness,” as set by the American extremists, are directed at neutralizing a preconceived threat. Under these circumstances, mere claims of being a “moderate” do not make any difference at all, as long as a Muslim is presented as a threat, however baseless, to the interests of extremist America. Similarly, the so-called extremism in the Muslim world is not the result of Muslims’faith. Rather, it is a function of the perpetually colonized and oppressed people due to the lack of true independence and a central authority to control and productively channel their energies. It is naïve to suggest that a few ill-informed “moderate” individuals or puppet regimes can emulate the abilities of an entire central authority (i.e., the Islamic state) and effect progress and positive meaningful change.

scholarly journals Til amerikanerne: I Guds, den Nåderike, den Barmhjertiges navn.

2008 ◽  
Vol 36 (105) ◽  
pp. 40-51
Author(s):  
Osama Bin Laden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
North American ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The United States ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
North American Society ◽  
Patriot Act ◽  
Environmental Destruction ◽  
Osama Bin Laden ◽  
American Society

To the Americans:In this letter from 2002 Osama Bin Laden replies to unidentified American writers explaining why al-Qaeda is justified in attacking North American targets. The letter poses two questions: What are we fighting for? and What are we calling you to do, and what do we want from you? According to Bin Laden al-Qaeda is engaged in a fight responding to decades of Western aggression. Bin Laden presents a detailed account of the misdeeds that the United States are responsible for in the Middle East and in Afghanistan. The letter also denounces North American society as characterised by usury, debauchery, gambling, prostitution and environmental destruction. Finally Bin Laden provides the reader with a series of examples connected to the ‘war on terror’ where the United States does not live up to its own rhetoric: the detention of prisoners at Guantanamo, the suspension of civil liberties in the Patriot Act and the rejection of the Kyoto Accords.

scholarly journals Successful Schools, Stagnant Education

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 144-152
Author(s):  
Saulat Pervez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Private Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Successful Schools ◽  
Muslim World ◽  
Urban Centers ◽  
Relevant Concept ◽  
The World

With so much focus on illiteracy, we sometimes forget the dire stateof affairs in our urban centers with regard to education. Educationin the Muslim world has increasingly regressed into an exercise ofrote learning, a mass of discrete knowledge, and a frenzied race towardwhat we deem “useful” skills. By showing the ground realityin private education in Karachi, Pakistan, this article strives to highlightthe cyclical and future-oriented trends in schools that are inimicalto the very spirit of education. In doing so, it emphasizes theneed to adopt thinking as the primary skill taught to students inschools, with everything else encompassed within its fold. WhileKarachi is a case study here, the importance of creating thinkingcultures within schools is a crucial and very relevant concept toschools everywhere in the world, including the United States.

Counterterrorism and the Western Response

2019 ◽  
pp. 51-75
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Affective Response ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
The West ◽  
The World ◽  
The U.S ◽  
United Nation

There has been a neglect on the part of Western governments with focus on the U.S. to take seriously the internet campaign that ISIS has been waging since 2014 and the affective response that still draws citizens from across the world into their promise of a civilized, united nation for Muslims. It is possible that the West, even with a severely increased commitment to fighting the Islamic State, may be too late. This chapter will explore responses by Western governments including the United States to fight internet-enabled terrorism.

Terrorism as a Global Wave Phenomenon: Religious Wave

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Rapoport
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Critical Groups ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Islamic World ◽  
Important Group ◽  
Major Player ◽  
Tamil Tigers

Time gaps existed in the first three waves between precipitating political events and the development of terrorist activity. But now the time gap has disappeared because the precipitating events were directly associated with terrorism. All of those events occurred in the Islamic world where religion was employed to justify terror. Jewish, Sikh, and Christian terror groups emerged very quickly afterwards, but Islamic groups were larger, more durable, and had a more significant global impact. The international world changed; Iran’s religious revolution made it a major player; and the Soviet Union’s collapse intensified Islamic opposition to the United States. Sikh, Jewish, and Christian terrorists came from a national base, but Islamic ones often emerged from many countries to join a particular group; and two critical groups, al-Qaeda and ISIS, aimed to re-establish a caliphate embracing the Islamic world. Diasporas provided financial support as they had in other waves, but some Islamic immigrants, like first wave anarchists, employed terror in their new homes and often left those homes to seek targets elsewhere. “Suicide bombing” or “self-martyrdom,” the wave’s distinguishing tactic, made it the most destructive wave. The only religious groups to embrace this tactic were Islamic, though ironically, the secular Tamil Tigers used it and did so more often than any Islamic group did. Islamic groups initiated social services for their societies, a program not seen earlier, and the Tamil Tigers adopted social services for their communities as well. Al-Qaeda, born in the resistance to the Soviet Afghan invasion, became the wave’s most important group. After difficulties in helping uprisings outside Afghanistan in the Islamic world, it decided to strike the United States, and its 9/11 attacks, the wave’s high point, are the most destructive terrorist acts ever. The United States then invaded Afghanistan forcing al-Qaeda to leave that country. Instead of completing the job, however, the United States decided to invade Iraq to prevent Iraq from giving al-Qaeda weapons of mass destruction, weapons Iraq did not have. This over-reaction inflamed Muslims everywhere, enabling al-Qaeda to get more recruits and develop Iraqi resistance. One crucial focus of al-Qaeda in Iraq was its gruesome atrocities towards the Shia population, which produced violence between Sunni and Shia throughout the Islamic world. The United States ultimately eliminated al-Qaeda in Iraq, and al-Qaeda Central was unable to get another ground base. Al-Qaeda Central then adopted two methods to revitalize itself. The lone wolf strategy, developed first by U.S. Christian terrorists, did not produce many significant results. At the same time, many franchises were created but each focused on local activities and did not strengthen al-Qaeda’s global capacities. A new situation developed with the “Arab Spring” in 2011, when peaceful secular demonstrations for equality and democracy were transformed into violent conflicts between Shia and Sunni sects. Syria, the bloodiest scene, attracted support from Shia and Sunni elements everywhere and encouraged Russia and the United States to get engaged. ISIS (Islamic State), the remnant of al-Qaeda in Iraq, was reborn and grew immensely there as it captured much territory in Iraq and Syria and became the wave’s most important group. Al-Qaeda Central also became involved and eventually turned against ISIS. In a short time ISIS lost most of the territory gained, and its European strikes to get the West more deeply involved in the conflict by sending troops to Syria and Iraq failed. Al-Qaeda and ISIS franchises continue to fight each other, a conflict that may end the wave.

Discerning Rhetorical Techniques in Barack Obama’s Speech “A New Beginning”

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 56-80
Author(s):  
Lok Raj Sharma
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Muslim World ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Mutual Respect ◽  
New Beginning ◽  
The World ◽  
Mutual Interest ◽  
Prime Objective ◽  
Principles Of Justice

The prime objective of this article is to discern rhetorical techniques in US President Barack Obama’s speech “A New Beginning” delivered at Cairo University on Thursday, June 04, 2009 as part of his efforts to improve American relations with the Muslim world by evoking a vision of peace, prosperity, coexistence and cooperation.   Some major sentences or assertions were taken from his speech and were evaluated as analysis which involved rhetorical techniques to persuade his audience. Mr. Obama felt the necessity of removing burning suspicion, mistrust and discord between America and the Muslim World. He proposed a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, based upon mutual interest and mutual respect. He highlighted common principles of justice and progress; and valued the tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. It can be concluded that Mr. Obama’s rhetorical techniques used to persuade his audience were influential and his assertions trustworthy.

The mole’s empire

Lovecidal ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trinh T. Minh-ha
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
The World ◽  
Human Costs ◽  
Strategic Outcomes ◽  
David And Goliath

This chapter further examines the human costs of war, first discussing quantitative measures of victory (for the United States) versus qualitative (for al-Qaeda) and how they compare with each other. On a broader scope the chapter lingers on the concept of time as it applies to war. In today's battles across the world, if on the side of the occupying forces, “victory” is short lived and accordingly defined with time—meaning, at most, preventing catastrophe—on the side of those fighting against occupation and colonization, victory remains defiantly linked to strategic outcomes. As long as battles à la David and Goliath persist, there will be claims for David-versus-Goliath victories and gleeful stories of heroism woven around them. The chapter then returns to an oft-remembered setting for such David-versus-Goliath conflicts—Vietnam.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document