The Islamic State of Syria, Iraq and Levante (southwest of Asia)
In general, the jihadists groups have failed in actively and firmly joining in a social wide group, which gives coverage and permanent impulse to their «imperialistic social religious movement». Their «catechizing of the violence» allows them to be prepared mental for the glorious and in peace death, and, even for the suicide, in the accomplishment of their punctual tactical actions. But this rage and insanity sermon is not a weapon for the conversion of social groups. And there is a fundamental reason for it,: their «creed» lacks possibilities of acceptance, victory and permanency, out of the vicissitudes of a war. The jihadists groups act with an unnecessary and indiscriminate brutality, which discredits them before the Islam, the Koran and the Sunna or Islamic tradition gathered in the hadises or writed «comments and facts» of Mohamed. This lack of religious legitimacy provokes the absolute absence of venerable, respected and pious ulemas and mufties at their side. Their supposed «Islam ideology» is based on a few favorable verses of the Koran (this has approximately 6200), on some formely historical facts, when the minor Jihad (or violent one) was applicable and useful for the Umma, and not on the totality of the message of the Islam.
The Operational Complications of the Jihadists.
Al-Qaeda acted in Syria in 2011 and 2012 using the Front al-Nusrah for the Liberation of the Peoples of East. This name was and is of inversely proportional length to his real operational capacity. Al-Nusrah was responsible of the great isolated and indiscriminate attacks with bombs in Damascus and other cities. They were seeking to introduce a factor of instability and social fracture in the real parameters of this war. That did not manage to produce for the discontinuity of the attacks and for be knowing the authorship of these insanity assaults against Muslims. In the revolt against the occupation of 2003 in Iraq, al-Qaeda had lines of supplies and recruitment from Syria, which nowadays are used in the other way. From Turkey they were also receiving «internationalists muhaydinnes». And in 2012, part of the liberated in several assaults to Iraqi prisons, joined the Front al-Nusrah, which was fortifying in number and operational capacity.
The differences between the ISSIL and the Front al-Nusrah are born in a personal clash: the ill-will between Abu Abdulah al-Bagdadi, chief of the Islamic State of Iraq (today, the ISSIL), and Abu Mohamed al-Golani, founder of the Front al-Nusrah. Initially, the Iraqis helped the Syrians to establish their own affiliated organization of “the Network”. But, in the spring of 2013 al-Bagdadi announced the creation of the Islamic State of Syria, Iraq and the Levant. And tried to fuse his organization with her of to the-Golani. Certainly, the Front al-Nusrah rejected directly his absorption. The Iraqi al-Baghdadi considers himself to be a direct disciple of Osama Ben Laden. And already in 2010, took the command of the AQI, which inherited from the unsuccessful Musab al-Zarkawi, changing then its name to «Islamic State of Iraq».
The ISSIL is very unpopular in Syria, for his extremism and for having a qualified majority of Iraqis and jihadists from Europe and other parts of the world in his rows. After Yarabulus’s recent occupation, in the north of Syria, they beheaded a dozen of men, and fixed his heads in stakes. And the habitants who could, frightened emigrated to Karkamis, a Turkish locality. The rejection to the ISSIL is such that the Syrian National Coalition, the principal political opponent platform, assures that the organization is supported by the Syrian regime, which theoretically is enemy of all of them. This way, In a communique of January, 2014 it affirmed: «The Coalition believes that the ISSIL is closely linked with the terrorist regime, and serves directly or indirectly, to the interests of the president al-Assad and his lobby. The Syrians’ murder at hands of this group does not leave doubts on the intentions in his creation, his aims and the agendas to which he serves, confirmed by the nature of his terrorist hostile actions to the Syrian Revolution».
On other hand, the Islamic Front is an alliance created in 2013 by seven islamist «radical and moderate» groups, all opposite to the Network. His spokespersons say that they approximately count with 45 thousand fighters. But, we do not believe that reach 10 thousand militias of «light irregular infantry». If the Front is n force in a key point as the frontier position Bab al-Hawa with Turkey, at the level of Hatay’s province, the ISSIL has kept for four months Azaz, the ville of access to Alepo from the Turkish border in Kilis. In the north of Syria operate all the groups, controlling unconnected chunks of ground. The ISSIL killed Abu Rayan, a negotiator of «Ahrar Sham», a group of the Islamic Front, at the end of December. To the murder joined the assault of the ISSIL at the beginning of year to Kafranbel, in the power of the ELS. The clashes between the Islamic Front and the Islamic State of Syria, Iraq and Levant spread to Alepo’s neighborhoods and to the localities Tel Rifat and Maskanah. On Friday, the 3rd of February, an offensive of «Suqur Sham», another group of the Front, prevented the ISIS from send reinforcements near Azaz. Complicating everything, the so called «Army of the Syrians Muyahidins» has just been formed, where gather the adversaries of the ISIL and also joined by the Front al-Nusrah. We verify that the islamist terrorists are generally ideologically, institutionally and strategically divided. Though the rivals bands could offer occasionally support, refuge, information or supplies between them. The reasons are that the chiefs of principal bands always want to be «emirs (princes) and interpreters (doctors) of the Islam.» Their urgencies and organizational and tactical preferences have very mundane and degenerate foundations. «By their actions and fruits you will know them».
A confused, diffuse and schizophrenic strategy…
Keeping a similar strategy in Syria and Iraq by the ISSIL for the creation of his radical salifist independent caliphate has several important mistakes. One is to simultaneously fight in two countries with different strategic approaching. Other is to divide their meagres trained operational forces in two fronts. In Syria, the valid strategic for the heterogeneous, multiple and divided opposition to al-Assad, is to support, at least, the unit in the military strategy. This way, all the military efforts could converge in different, simultaneous or successive, objectives, that decides a military high command, respected by all the present and active groups in Syria. Already we have seen how al-Assad amounts means and efforts to his cause (militias trained of Hezbola, armament, equipments and ammunitions reinstatement, political diplomatic support from China, Iran and Russia). This is allowing him to beat in diverse combats the opposition groups and to expel them from positions that were occupying, some during certain time. Not observance of this strategy, of pure survival, would lead the opposition to his progressive destruction by the SNA.
In Iraq, the strategy of the Sunnis does not try to gain a civil war at the democratic imperfect regime al-Maliki, of Shiite majority. Neither she claims, nor might, expel them from the country by depletion, on having emphasized their disability to finish with the armed rebels and forcing them to assume it. This was the case of many “wars of national liberation” in the colonial countries in the middle of the 20th century. To many of the guerrilla popular movements it was enough to them to resist for some years the floods and onslaughts of the foreign military forces. And, this way, resisting, they tired the metropolis peoples from support a distant, poor assumed and harmful war and enervated their armed forces. Which were often lack of understanding and up to underestimated in their own homes. The Sunnis fight to regionally guarantee the power of their tribes, based on their accepted chiefs, on their «assemblies of equals» of those standing up in them and in the Pashtunwalli or code of honor for their behavior and their individual and collective rights and duties. The Sunnis fight to get rights and concessions from the Shiite majority, which they too obstinately deny to them within the rules of the imperfect inorganic democracy existing in Iraq.
For it, their combats are very measured. And his aims go on through few and successive steps. So, the Sunnis leave certain freedom of action to the Islamic State, provided that they respect their hegemony and do not try to establish strategic guerrilla bases in the tribal zones. Then, in concrete cases, they facilitate temporary refuge, supply and concealment to their «action groups» in their operations. As was the case of the previous concentration of the companies and battalions of the Islamic State for the harassment and the temporal occupation of al-Ramadi and Faluya. The Islamic State has little probabilities of establishing itself and managing to control a more or less great zone in Iraq. Because, both the army and the Sunnis militias would reject his attempts of creating stable bases. Necessary to realize consistent and connected operations, looking for some military and/or social definite and transcendent aim.
(TO BE CONTINUED)