Al-Qaeda’s Abu Yahya al-Libi Calls for Continued Jihad in Somalia

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

July 1, 2008

Abu Yahya al-Libi, a Libyan-born senior al-Qaeda commander now based in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region, has issued a statement calling on Somalia’s Islamist insurgents to ignore a truce recently negotiated between their leaders and Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG) in favor of continuing their jihad (al-Sahab Media Production Organization, June 23).

al-LibiAbu Yahya al-Libi

In a 20 minute video entitled “Somalia – No Peace Without Islam,” Abu Yahya calls on Somali jihadis to reject the terms of the June 10 agreement signed by the TFG and the Alliance for the Re-liberation of Somalia (ARS), an umbrella group of former Islamic Courts Union Islamists and other anti-government Somali militants: “The mujahideen are not concerned with such agreements or with their provisions – indeed they consider them not worth the paper on which they were written” (for the full agreement, see Shabelle Media Network, June 10; see also Terrorism Focus, June 24).

Abu Yahya describes the agreement as the result of conspiracy and intrigue, “which the enemies of Muslims have mastered to enable them to prolong their domination on this earth. These agreements are aimed to absorb the indignation of the oppressed and wronged Muslim peoples. They are employed as a means to uproot jihad and the mujahideen in all hot areas, including beloved Somalia, by portraying the mujahideen, through the huge media networks of the enemies, as an obstacle in the way of achieving peace, stability, and reconciliation…” Abu Yahya suggests that Somalia’s jihadis find the inflexible firmness in the face of unbelievers recommended by the Quran rather than look for “common ground… a unified principle or a front of struggle that provides an umbrella for you… Say with clarity and frankness: We will continue to fight our enemies from among the despicable Abyssinians [Ethiopia’s occupation army] and their apostate collaborators… until we remove all traces and wipe out any mention of them in our country.” The Libyan militant tells Somalis that civil war is not always something to be avoided at all costs, reminding them that the Prophet Muhammad battled the unbelievers within his own Quraysh tribe.

Displaying his own unyielding approach to jihad, Abu Yahya insists that even the withdrawal of the Ethiopian army and its replacement by African Union or UN peacekeepers “will not change the situation at all” and will merely be “an attempt to replace an occupation with another occupation… a move from the state of a blatant occupation to that of a legitimate occupation.” Somalia’s mujahideen must be prepared to face any force that sets foot on Somali land, regardless of its affiliation or proclaimed intentions.

This is not the first statement from Abu Yahya directed at the Somali insurgents; it appears to be part of an effort to re-establish an al-Qaeda relationship with Somali Islamists that seems to have deteriorated over the last decade, contrary to assertions to the contrary from Ethiopian, TFG and U.S. sources. The effort may be working—last month Shaykh Mukhtar Abu al-Zubayr, the leader of the militant Somali al-Shabaab organization (which has rejected the TFG-ARS agreement outright), sent “greetings to Shaykh Abu Yahya al-Libi, who revived the al-Usra [family] Army, and whose words have had a stronger impact than 1,000 jihadist soldiers in your brothers’ battle against the global Crusade.”

This article first appeared in the July 1, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Hekmatyar Tells Pakistani Taliban to Stay Out of Afghanistan

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

July 1, 2008

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a veteran Afghan rebel and leader of the Hezb-i-Islami Party, has issued a statement asking members of the Pakistani Taliban to refrain from crossing the border to join the jihad in Afghanistan. The statement was issued by fax on June 24 (Afghan Islamic Press, June 25).

While thanking the Pakistani mujahideen for their “compassion and kindness” and willingness to join Afghan efforts to expel the occupying Coalition, Hekmatyar suggests that cross-border insurgent activity is used as an excuse for continuing the foreign occupation of Afghanistan. According to Hekmatyar, the Pakistani Taliban could be far more useful to the Afghans by pursuing jihad within Pakistan and attacking Coalition supply-lines that carry military and logistical equipment through Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province to the Khyber Pass. “The entire nation of Afghanistan is ready to take part in the holy war against the U.S. occupiers, just the way they fought the Russians. If we have problems, it is only logistical problems.”

After emphasizing that it is only Afghans rather than the Pakistani Taliban or al-Qaeda who are resisting the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan, Hekmatyar compares the current occupation with that of the Soviets in the 1980s, suggesting: “The way the arrogant and ruthless Americans treat Afghans is far more violent and ruthless than that of the communists and Russian troops in Afghanistan… The Russian troops were invited by their puppet government, but the Americans first occupied Kabul, and then made a government in Bonn and brought it to Kabul!” Hekmatyar also accuses the Americans of selling “trucks full of weapons and military equipment” in a way the Russians never did. He also complains that the degree of financial corruption and embezzlement in the upper echelons of the “U.S. puppet government” far surpasses anything committed by the communists of the 1980s.

Hekmatyar’s statement comes as the warlord is denying persistent rumors of secret negotiations with the government of President Hamid Karzai.

This article first appeared in the July 1, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

 

 

 

Taliban Claim Arghandab Occupation a Diversion and Demonstration of Strength

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 24, 2008

Last week’s apparent attempt by the Taliban to occupy the Arghandab district of Kandahar province perplexed many observers. Following the successful raid and breakout of prisoners from Kandahar Prison on June 13, the large-scale operation in Arghandab, where there is little support for the Taliban, resulted in the loss of scores of Taliban fighters.

Arghandab3rd Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment on Patrol in Arghandab

A June 19 statement from Taliban spokesman Qari Yusuf Ahmadi outlined some aspects of the movement’s strategy: “There were some hidden objectives behind our plan to enter Arghandab… The obvious aim of this was to show that we can easily enter an area and then leave it without suffering any casualties whenever we want to. We also wanted to divert the enemy’s attention to this area so that our prisoners could safely return to their homes” (Voice of Jihad, June 19). According to Qari Yusuf, the Taliban fighters left the district of their own accord rather than being driven out: “They did so in order to prevent loss of life and material among the local people, because the enemy’s cruelty and their bombardment of the area, which would have caused losses to civilians, were intolerable.”

Afghan troops assisted by Canadian forces quickly defeated the insurgents in a counter-offensive that began on June 18. The Taliban claimed a loss of only six men, but a Defense Ministry spokesman cited a loss of 56 fighters, while Kandahar governor Asadollah Khaled claimed over 100 Taliban were killed (Tolo TV, June 19).

The number of Taliban fighters killed in the operation is disputed by Afghan and Coalition security forces, though there seems little doubt that hundreds of fighters were involved in a sweep through at least a dozen villages in Arghandab. There was similar disagreement over the number of foreign militants involved in the operation, with Afghan security officials claiming that the large number of militants wearing the distinctive woolen pakool cap indicated that most of the attackers came from Pakistan, though other sources failed to see the pakool worn by any of the dead fighters (Globe and Mail [Toronto], June 21). The fighters were apparently led by a Taliban commander known as Mullah Shakoor.

The withdrawal does not appear to have been hurried; before leaving Arghandab the Taliban are reported to have destroyed an important bridge and heavily mined and booby-trapped the whole district. It was, according to General Zaher Azimi, “a move similar to the Russian occupiers” (Tolo TV, June 19; Radio Afghanistan, June 17).

There is some speculation within Afghanistan that the Pakistani government organized and financed the operation as covert retaliation for successive U.S. strikes on targets within Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province (Hasht-e Sobh, June 18).

Canadian Brigadier General Denis Thompson did not agree with Afghan speculation that the attack was part of an attempt to occupy the provincial capital: “What you have to understand about this district is it’s all one tribe, the Alokozai… They’re mostly pro-government. So this was the Taliban demonstrating to the tribe that they’re vulnerable. It was a psychological operation, not a military operation” (Globe and Mail, June 21).

Until last October the leading Alokozai elder was Mullah Naqib, a famous anti-Soviet mujahideen and a leading backer of the Hamid Karzai government in Kabul. Though he resisted Taliban encroachment into Arghandab, Mullah Naqib was also prominent at times in negotiations with the Islamist militants. Following his death from a heart attack last fall, the Mullah was replaced by his 26-year-old son on the orders of Hamid Karzai. The appointment of this untested youth broke with tradition—tribes generally choose their own leaders—and overlooked a number of capable fighters and leaders in the tribe. There is reason to think that the Taliban operation was intended to intimidate the Alokozai into cooperation or passivity, eventually clearing the way into Kandahar.

This article first appeared in the June 24, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Ayman Al-Zawahiri Rebukes Kurds for Failing to Join Jihad

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 24, 2008

A northern Iraq-based Kurdish-language newspaper has published an interview with Ayman al-Zawahiri, in which the senior al-Qaeda leader comments on several Kurdish leaders and the state of jihad in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq (Levin [Sulaymaniyah], June 17). In a process that took several months, the questions were relayed through al-Hisba jihadist internet forum to al-Sahab Foundation—al-Qaeda’s information agency—before being passed along to al-Zawahiri for reply. Al-Zawahiri takes a dim view of the Kurdish failure to participate in jihad in large numbers: “I have known the Kurds from Salah-al-Din [the 12th century Kurdish ruler of most of the Islamic Middle East], but now I feel that the Kurds have deviated from the path of the great Salah-al-Din, the leader of the Islamic world who defeated the Crusaders. Now the Kurds are the greatest agents of the Crusaders occupying their land, the land where Salah-al-Din was born.”

Salah al-DinStatue of Salah al-Din al-Ayoub, Damascus

Asked which prominent Kurdish Islamists he is familiar with, al-Zawahiri names the former leader of the Islamic Movement of Kurdistan, Shaykh Uthman Abd al-Aziz (died in 1999) and his brother and successor, Ali Abd al-Aziz al-Halabji. The movement now has two ministers in the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), though participation in official political structures does not appear to impress al-Zawahiri: “Those Islamic groups that are participants in power and in the parliament are no different from groups of unbelievers. If they do not express repentance and return to the fundamentals of the religion, which is jihad, they will die as ignorant people.”

Al-Zawahiri has a more favorable impression of the now largely dormant Kurdish Ansar al-Islam movement, which was alleged in 2002-03 to be working closely with al-Qaeda: “Ansar al-Islam are a jihadist group who obey Allah… We consider them the initiators of jihad against America and its agents.”

The jihadi leader is opposed to greater autonomy for Iraqi Kurdistan or its prolonged occupation by American forces: “Kurdistan is part of the Islamic world and we will never accept its occupation or separation. We know that Kurdistan owns great oil wealth but the U.S. is squandering it now… As long as America is in Iraq, those people who live on Iraqi soil do not own what is under the soil and are unable to protest because they receive their share for being [American] spies and agents.”

This article first appeared in the June 24, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Egypt’s al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah Accuses Copts of Establishing a Parallel State

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 18, 2008

A recent round of violence between Egyptian Muslims and Egypt’s ancient Coptic Christian community has raised fears of a return to sectarian violence. Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah, formerly one of Egypt’s most dangerous Islamist terrorist groups, has weighed in on Coptic claims of persecution, claiming in a June 10 statement that the Copts were using the incidents to create “a parallel state,” suggesting that “many men of the Coptic Church have become, together with their churches, enmeshed to the marrow in political activism.”

Deir Abu FanahDeir Abu Fanah – Attacked in May 2008 (Photo – Andreas Paul)

The statement went on to claim that Church leaders were “seeking protection behind its walls to proclaim from behind them their mutiny against the state and rebellion against it” (al-Hayat, June 11). Even some Copts have suggested that the flow of funds from the successful Coptic diaspora has enabled the church to assume responsibility for aspects of their community that were once the sole domain of the state (al-Araby, January 6, 2005). The Egyptian Copts, led by 84-year-old Pope Shenouda III, are the largest Christian community in the Middle East and comprise an estimated 10 percent of Egypt’s population.

Once best known for its involvement in a number of spectacular incidents of terrorism, including the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981 and the massacre of 58 foreign tourists and three Egyptians at Luxor in 1997, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah has not only accepted the legitimacy of the Egyptian state, but has now emerged as one of its most vocal defenders. After the movement renounced violence in 2003, 1,000 leaders and members of al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah were released from Egyptian prisons. Nearly 1,000 more were set free in 2006 as prominent leaders of the group apologized for their violent activities.

There were concerns in August 2006 that al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah had reverted to its former militancy when al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri released a video claiming that al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah had decided to join al-Qaeda. One of the movement’s leaders, Muhammad al-Hukaymah, appeared in the video to confirm the claim. In response to al-Zawahiri’s statement, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah leaders in Egypt issued a complete denial of the al-Qaeda leader’s claims, stating that they “contradicted reality.”

On May 31, 60 to 70 Muslim villagers attacked a prominent Coptic monastery in Middle Egypt, home to a substantial number of Egyptian Christians. Police took three hours to arrive from the local police station two kilometers (one mile) away. A foreign-based Coptic website has accused police of “complacency or even complicity” in the attack (unitedcopts.org, June 4). Although the violence at the fourth century monastery of Deir Abu-Fana (St Epiphanius) was supposedly a result of monks building a government-approved fence through fields claimed by local Muslims, aspects of the attack suggested more sectarian motives. The attackers targeted the Church of Pope Kyrillos, destroying icons, bibles and the altar before setting the building on fire. Three monks were abducted, tortured, forced to spit on a representation of the cross and pronounce the Muslim profession of faith. One attacker was killed in what the police described as “an exchange of fire,” thought the monks do not carry arms (al-Jazeera, June 1; Watani News, June 8).

In previous attacks on Copts, the police have routinely claimed the perpetrators were either mentally deficient or acting from purely criminal rather than sectarian motives. The governor of Minya Province described the attack as “a fight between two neighbors and nothing else” (AFP, May 31). In the protests that followed, Copts took to the streets chanting: “With our blood and soul, we will defend the cross” (Middle East Times, June 2; The Peninsula [Qatar], June 2).

In another incident two masked men on a motorcycle killed four Copts in a Cairo jewelry shop (al-Arabiya, May 28). The murders were at first described as part of a robbery, but it later turned out that nothing had been stolen from the shop (Middle East Times, June 2). This incident was followed by another in southern Egypt, in which a Copt was stabbed to death by his Muslim neighbor. Though it appeared the murder was the result of a long-standing dispute, Copts again took to the streets in protest, throwing rocks at police cars and injuring three policeman (AFP, June 6).

Egyptian writer Ahmad al-Aswani suggests that the latest round of violence “is an attempt to terrorize Egypt’s Copts, and to force them either to emigrate from the homeland once and for all, or to convert to Islam to protect themselves and their families” (Aafaq.org, June 7). Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyah reminds fellow Egyptians that “Egypt is a state indivisible by two … it is the throbbing heart of Islam and Arabism, and no one has managed to change this fact … so let no one come today and tempt you to try to tamper with this fact and seek to change Egypt’s Islamic, Arab face” (al-Hayat, June 10).

This article first appeared in the June 18, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Afghanistan and Pakistan Agree to Implement Biometric Security on Border

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 18, 2008

The governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan have agreed to adopt a high-tech method to address the ongoing problem of suspects wanted for terrorism and other crimes crossing their mutual border. At a June 8 meeting between President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and the advisor to Pakistan’s prime minister on internal affairs and narcotics control, Rehman Malik, an agreement was reached to resume a once-aborted program to install biometric identification equipment at border points (The News International [Karachi], June 9).

The biometrics program was to begin in February 2007, but was halted when Afghanistan ceased cooperating. Biometric scanning equipment will be placed at first at three points along the common border (PakTribune, June 9). Technical teams will be assigned to install the system in the interests of improving security along the border (Bakhtar News Agency, June 9).

Biometric identification covers a wide range of techniques and systems, including fingerprinting, facial recognition scans and retinal scans. The joint announcement did not specify which systems will be put in place along the Afghan/Pakistani border.

The announcement came only days after President George W. Bush issued a presidential directive authorizing the “application of biometric technologies” which will “improve the executive branch’s ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat.” The directive is aimed at “known and suspected terrorists” and authorizes federal agencies to “use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner” (NSPD 59/HSPD 24, June 5). One of the main problems in biometric recognition is the widespread use of incompatible systems, even within the U.S. federal government, thus hampering the sharing of data.

The use of biometrics is not new in Afghanistan; U.S. Marines have been using fingerprinting, iris scans and electronic databases to vet recruits to the Afghan National Police, though even here not all military databases are compatible (Wired, May 22). There are other unresolved problems with the technology, including the irreversibility of security breaches. Cambridge security engineering professor Ross Anderson warned of these dangers in a recent report to the UK House of Commons: “There is a fundamental security engineering problem with biometrics as opposed to the cryptographic keys in your chip and pin card. Once your biometrics become compromised, you cannot revoke them. It is not practical to do eye or finger transplants” (Daily Mail, June 7).

This article first appeared in the June 18, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Al-Qaeda’s al-Zawahiri Urges Egyptians to Smash “the Fence of Treason”

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 10, 2008

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri released an audiotape last week urging Egyptians to help break the Israeli “siege” of Gaza (al-ekhlass.net, June 5). Released on the 41st anniversary of the beginning of the 1967 June War (known in Israel as “the Six-Day War” and to many Arabs as “al-Naqsa”—the Setback), the 11-minute audiotape was entitled “In Memory of the Setback… Break the Siege on Gaza.”

al-NaqsaArab Defeat in the 1967 June War

Al-Zawahiri attacks the secular governments of the Arab world whom he holds responsible for the 1967 defeat and “are still destroying our societies and countries.” He refers to food shortages in Muslim nations such as Egypt, asking why such conditions exist when the Arab world’s enormous oil wealth makes the Muslim nation “the wealthiest nation on the face of the earth.”

The al-Qaeda leader also refers to the steel barrier between Gaza and the Egyptian Sinai that was briefly forced open last January by Hamas militants, urging Egyptians to defy their government to bring relief to the Palestinians of Gaza: “Help your brothers in Gaza and join in their battles with whatever you have. If they start smashing the fence of treason then smash it with them. This disgraceful fence is denying our kinsmen and brothers in Gaza food and medicine, while it opens to welcome 50,000 Israeli tourists who came during Israel’s Passover to engage in corruption on the shores of Sinai.” The latter phrase refers to the resort towns of the Egyptian Sinai, which have become extremely popular with Israeli vacationers despite several bombings in recent years.

An Egyptian himself, al-Zawahiri also condemns the rule of President Hosni Mubarak and the planned succession of Mubarak’s son to the presidency: “Egypt is not a private farm belonging to Mubarak and his son.” Al-Zawahiri goes on to claim Egypt is collaborating with Israel in blockading Gaza: “I say to my brothers in Gaza, those who are putting you under siege are traitors, starting from the soldier in the central security forces who is guarding the treason fence to Hosni Mubarak” (AFP, June 5). Al-Zawahiri has frequently been critical of Hamas, spurring Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal to explicitly reject al-Zawahiri’s “advice,” insisting that Hamas “has its own vision” (BBC, March 5, 2006; Al-Ahram Weekly, July 12-18, 2007).

This article first appeared in the June 10, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Bosnian War Veteran Abu Hamza Claims U.S. Asked Mujahideen to Go to Kosovo

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 10, 2008

Abu Hamza (Imad al-Husseini), a 44-year-old Syrian native and veteran of Bosnia’s foreign mujahideen, recently gave an interview to the Croatian daily Vercernji List (Zagreb, June 1). The ex-fighter is one of roughly 400 foreign mujahideen who face deportation after being stripped of the citizenship they were granted at the end of the Bosnian civil war (see Terrorism Monitor, November 8, 2007). Abu Hamza suggests the deportation order is the result of political pressure from the United States as well as a number of influential Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims), Serbs and Croatians. In the interview Abu Hamza states: “Please believe me that this circus would never have happened had we accepted the U.S. request to be resettled to Kosovo. The Americans did not negotiate directly with us at the time; they did this through the then Turkish cultural attaché, Muvekir. In 1995, at a meeting in a café in Zenica, Muvekir suggested that the entire al-Mujahid brigade be relocated to Kosovo because a war was going to break out between the Serbs and the Albanians. We did not want to accept this and become cannon fodder.” Abu Hamza made similar claims in May 2006 (Bosnian OBN TV, May 4, 2006).

Abu Hamza BosniaAbu Hamza

The mujahideen, who hailed from Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Tunisia and a number of other Muslim nations, were well known during the conflict for their brutal treatment of Serbian soldiers they believed responsible for raping and murdering Bosniak civilians. As photos circulated of mujahideen holding the severed heads of Serbian troops, the mujahideen were accused of war crimes, an allegation Abu Hamza rejects: “In our squad we had several groups that fought the war only with cold weapons [i.e., steel blades, knives, etc.]; according to their understanding of war, this is the way to instill fear in the enemy. It is absurd to call these warriors criminals, because they only had swords and knives when charging bunkers where soldiers had state-of-the-art weapons.” Abu Hamza claims that the mujahideen fought in the same manner as the Serbs: “The only difference was that we would immediately liquidate the enemy; we never had prisoners of war.” The veteran goes on to say that war crimes were committed by Arab and foreign Muslim fighters in Bosnia, but none of these individuals belonged to the Mujahid Brigade, which was a legally recognized formation within the Bosnian Army’s 3rd Corps: “They were loose cannons who did what they pleased.”

Abu Hamza denies that the mujahideen veterans act as al-Qaeda sleeper cells in Bosnia: “Today they also accuse me without evidence that I am a terrorist and a ‘sleeper,’ although we all know that I would be in Guantanamo if they had but a shred of evidence.” The veteran laments the loss of the former president of Bosnia and Herzogovina, Alija Izetbegovic, claiming that Bosniak attitudes to the mujahideen veterans have changed since his death in 2003: “It is true that they sold us, betrayed us, and used us when they needed us, and that many of our fellow fighters—who today are involved in politics, in espionage, and with the police—turn their heads when they see us.” Rallies of up to 5,000 people opposing Abu Hamza’s deportation have been organized by Ansarije, the Bosnian mujahideen veteran’s association.

This article first appeared in the June 10, 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Afghanistan’s Taliban Contest NATO Commander’s Assessment

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 4, 2008

A statement from the Afghan Taliban leadership has challenged an assessment of the military situation in Afghanistan given by outgoing International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) commander General Dan McNeill in an interview with the BBC’s Pashto language service (Voice of Jihad, May 28).

McNeill, who is turning over command of NATO’s ISAF contingent to General David McKiernan on June 3, was reported as saying that ISAF has made considerable progress in the military and reconstruction aspects of its mission in the last year, as well as describing the Taliban’s campaign as little more than a series of roadside bombs, suicide attacks and ambushes.

The Taliban responded to these remarks by asking: “What blind, deaf or senseless person will accept remarks by McNeill—this commander of the forces of barbarism and darkness—that the NATO forces in Afghanistan are more powerful than they have been at any other time and are more superior now to the mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate? Do not the United Nations, various research institutions, independent organizations and well known Western and regional media outlets and news agencies acknowledge that 60 percent of Afghanistan’s territory is under the control or influence of the Taliban?”

The Taliban rebuttal cited January’s attack on the Serena Hotel in central Kabul and the April 27 assault on a military parade in Kabul attended by President Hamid Karzai and General McNeill as examples of the Taliban’s broadening reach and improved operational capabilities.

A Kabul newspaper controlled by the opposition National Front—a coalition of ex-Northern Alliance leaders headed by former President Burhannudin Rabbani—was largely in agreement with the Taliban assessment of the current situation: “It has become crystal clear now that the government and its administrative units do not have as good and as effective a presence in the areas of the south, southwest and east of the country as the armed opposition groups… This situation is very similar to the last days of the communist regime in Afghanistan, which only controlled the centers of the cities while the rest was under the control of the mujahideen” (Eqtedar-e Melli, May 31).

 

This article first appeared in the June 4 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus

Deobandis Define and Reject Terrorism in New Fatwa

Posted on by

Andrew McGregor

June 4, 2008

An important Islamic seminary once blamed for inspiring the militancy of Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan has issued an important new fatwa (Islamic ruling) on the illegitimacy of terrorism. The 152-year-old Darul Uloom Deoband seminary is located in the town of Deoband, in India’s Uttar Pradesh province. The new fatwa was issued in the name of the seminary’s Grand Mufti, Habibur Rehman, who told a meeting of thousands of Islamic scholars and students: “Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form” (Independent, June 2).

dar usoolDarul Uloom Deoband Seminary

The announcement of the fatwa came in New Delhi during the Anti-Terrorism and Global Peace Conference. Based on a re-examination of relevant Islamic texts, the fatwa stated: “It is proved from clear guidelines provided in the Holy Quran that allegations of terrorism against a religion which preaches and guarantees world peace is nothing but a lie. The religion of Islam has come to wipe out all kinds of terrorism and to spread the message of global peace” (Times of India, June 1). The ruling was ratified by a host of other Muslim organizations and a mass “oath of allegiance” to the fatwa was given at the gathering. India’s 140 million Muslims, 13 percent of the population, comprise the world’s third-largest national community of Muslims.

The Deobandi scholars also issued a definition of terrorism to support the fatwa: “Any action that targets innocents, whether by an individual or by any government or by a private organization anywhere in the world constitutes, according to Islam, an act of terrorism” (Hindustan Times, June 1).

Speakers from the Deoband seminary still took the opportunity to condemn the United States and its support for Israel. Deputy Rector Hazrat Maulana Qari Sayed Muhammad Usman told the crowd: “Whenever Christian and American interests are hurt in any part of the world, they take prompt action to set things right even at the cost of human lives. They maintain silence though when Muslims are the victims” (Times of India, June 1).

India’s opposition Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), which has adopted a strong anti-terrorism stance, welcomed the ruling. Party leader Rajnath Singh declared: “Deoband is seeking to dissociate Muslims from terrorism. But the central government wants to equate Muslims with terrorism and on this very basis is rejecting an anti-terrorism law” (Times of India, June 2). The party is critical of the government’s decision to repeal India’s Prevention of Terrorism Act (The Hindu, June 1).

While the Deobandi movement has spread across the world, the latest fatwa will be of particular interest to Britain, which now hosts 17 Deobandi seminaries providing 80 percent of Britain’s domestically-trained imams (Independent, June 2).

Following the Deobandi ruling, another of India’s major Muslim organizations, the Jamiat Ulema-e Hind, issued its own anti-terrorism fatwa (Calcutta Telegraph, June 1). It remains to be seen if the Deobandi fatwa inspires Muslim groups in other parts of the Islamic world to do likewise.

This article first appeared in the June 4 2008 issue of the Jamestown Foundation’s Terrorism Focus