Arrow Left Arrow Right Camera icon set icon set Ellipsis icon set Facebook Favorite Globe Hamburger List Mail Map Marker Map Microphone Minus PDF Play Print RSS Search Share Trash Twitter Video Camera Youtube
A fighter of Libyan forces allied with the UN-backed government walks past a ruined house captured from Islamic State militants in Cambo area in Sirte, Libya, on 17 October 2016. REUTERS/Ismail Zitouny

How the Islamic State Rose, Fell and Could Rise Again in the Maghreb

Despite its ongoing demise in Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State (ISIS) could prove resurgent in the Maghreb if past lessons and lingering threats remain unheeded. Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia should go beyond security and military measures to address persistent local grievances and tensions that ISIS has proven adept in exploiting.

Executive Summary

The Islamic State (ISIS) is in sharp decline, but in its rout lie important lessons and lingering threats. This is true for the four countries of the Maghreb covered in this report, Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia, which constitute a microcosm of ISIS’ identity, trajectory and shifting fortunes to date. Those countries possess two unwanted claims to fame: as a significant pool of ISIS foreign fighters and, in the case of Libya, as the site of ISIS’ first successful territorial conquest outside of Iraq and Syria. The pool is drying up, to a point, and the caliphate’s Libyan province is no more. But many factors that enabled ISIS’s ascent persist. While explaining the reasons for ISIS’ performance in different theatres is inexact and risky science, there seems little question that ending Libya’s anarchy and fragmentation; improving states’ capacities to channel anger at elites’ predatory behaviour and provide responsive governance; treading carefully when seeking to regiment religious discourse; and improving regional and international counter-terrorism cooperation would go a long way toward ensuring that success against ISIS is more than a fleeting moment.

Its operations in the Maghreb showcase ISIS’s three principal functions: as a recruitment agency for militants willing to fight for its caliphate in Iraq and Syria; as a terrorist group mounting bloody attacks against civilians; and as a military organisation seeking to exert territorial control and governance functions. In this sense, and while ISIS does not consider the Maghreb its main arena for any of those three forms of activity, how it performed in the region, and how states reacted to its rise, tells us a lot about the organisation.

To much of the outside world, Tunisia is known equally for its relatively successful democratic transition as for the fact that it boasts the highest ratio per capita of people who have joined ISIS to fight outside their country. That dubious distinction has prompted head scratching, as has to a lesser extent ISIS’s ability to recruit foreign fighters in neighbouring countries. As Crisis Group’s earlier report on ISIS, Exploiting Disorder, laid out, reasons for ISIS’ success in some arenas and failure in others defy generic explanations.

But its ability to recruit in these countries suggests a series of factors that gave rise to a more conducive environment: a demand for a quasi-revolutionary, anti-establishment discourse and practice, especially among young people who blame their relative deprivation on structural injustice (chiefly Tunisia); a security apparatus in disarray (Libya and Tunisia); the ascent and subsequent reining in of a more political, pragmatic form of Islamism (Tunisia); the presence of pre-existing networks of a jihadist or militant variety (Libya, Tunisia and Morocco); and either lack of regional or international coordination or, worse, regional actors backing rival groups (Libya). Progress has been made to address several of these matters, but not all, and almost certainly not in a sustainable manner.

Many of those same factors likewise would seem to explain ISIS’ focus on Tunisia in carrying out several dramatic terrorist attacks in 2015-2016. Its propaganda emphasised perceptions of injustice shared by large swathes of the population – particularly those from marginalised regions and poor urban peripheries that most often encounter state brutality, corruption and social exclusion. ISIS also appeared determined to disrupt the country’s fragile and contested democratic transition, take advantage of the security forces’ disorganisation and play on the feeling among some Islamists that the transition had betrayed their aspirations and that secular forces had forced upon political Islamists ignominious compromise.

Libya tells another, even more striking side of the story. There, the instability resulting from the uprising, the country’s ensuing fragmentation, the struggle among powerful militias and competing interference by various regional actors produced an enabling context not only for recruitment, but even more so for ISIS’ territorial expansion. Libya illustrated what Iraq and Syria proved: that jihadists’ influence is more a product of instability than its primary driver. The fact that, with Western assistance, Libyan forces were able to oust ISIS from Sirte shows that superior military force can vanquish the organisation, a reality that has also been made evident in Mosul, Iraq, and will be soon in Raqqa, Syria. But that this was achieved without curing the problems that originally led to ISIS’ emergence is reason to worry.

What’s apparent from the Maghrebi experience is that state responses focused on security and military steps can work.

What’s apparent from the Maghrebi experience is that state responses focused on security and military steps can work. ISIS essentially has been rolled back in Libya, and both Algeria’s and Morocco’s robust security services were able to contain its rise within their borders. But what’s also apparent is that such responses only can go so far, and that the following other dimensions need equal attention:

  • Resolving Libya’s conflict or, at a minimum, diminishing the country’s fragmentation, both to prevent ISIS remnants from regrouping inside the country or using it as a springboard to attack fragile states in the region.
     
  • Increasing the capacity, and political willingness, of state elites to address local grievances and latent conflicts in inclusive ways in order to channel popular frustration away from violent options, especially in youth constituencies that feel that their poverty and marginalisation are a function of structural iniquities and self-enrichment by corrupt and brutal elites;
     
  • Avoiding the temptation to over-regulate the religious sphere in an effort to combat jihadism; instead, allow for the expression of non-violent religious forms of contestation; and
     
  • Ensuring greater regional and international counter-terrorism cooperation and, in the case of Libya in particular, halting the intense regional tug-of-war between Egypt and the UAE on the one hand, and Qatar and Turkey on the other.

Out of ISIS’ likely defeat in the region and beyond will come some respite, but also new threats from the group’s remnants. Previous waves of transnational jihadism, after all, mutated or lingered as manageable nuisances for many years until a new window of opportunity appeared. The Maghreb has shown that it has, for the most part, resilient state capacity but also persistent tensions within societies and their elites, as well as between them. It is also surrounded by fragile states to the south. Vigilance about avoiding a next wave requires more focus on appeasing and channelling these tensions away from violence, not just post-facto security approaches.

Rabat/Algiers/Tripoli/Tunis/Brussels, 24 July 2017

 

I. Introduction

From its inception in 2013, the Islamic State (ISIS) has both recruited widely from the Maghreb and sought to build a presence there in multiple ways, from the creation of recruitment and operational cells to seizing and governing territory.[fn]For the purposes of this report, the Maghreb includes Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia. Egypt and Mauritania are not covered.Hide Footnote In Libya, taking advantage of the anarchy and security vacuum created by conflict that started in mid-2014, it implemented the first extension of its territorialisation strategy outside of Iraq and Syria. In Tunisia, it has staged spectacular attacks aimed at undermining a democratic transition and made a failed attempt to seize control of territory. In western Tunisia and eastern Algeria, some of its affiliates, in some cases drawn from jihadists previously aligned with al-Qaeda, conduct low-level guerrilla warfare in hard-to-reach mountainous areas. In Morocco, it has tried but failed to carry out operations but recruited hundreds.

The relatively high numbers of Maghrebi fighters that have joined ISIS, particularly from Tunisia and Morocco, and its success in establishing itself in Libya, caused alarm in 2014-2015 that the group could further ensconce itself in the Maghreb and destabilise a region at the crossroads of Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Since then, however, ISIS has suffered setbacks in both its core territory in the Levant and in the Maghreb, as regional states, a variety of sub-state actors and international powers confronted it. The challenge is now to take advantage of these setbacks, including the potential elimination of much of ISIS’ leadership at local and global levels, to ensure that it is not given the opportunity to regroup or mutate into a new type of threat.

This report, based on Crisis Group’s field work in the Maghreb since 2011 and more focused research from 2015 till now, seeks to place the evolution of ISIS in the region and the reaction to it in context, highlighting where the group came from, how it adapted to various local situations, and how effectively states and non-state actors reacted against it. It first assesses the phenomenon of Maghrebi foreign fighters joining ISIS outside their countries, then turns to ISIS’ expansion in the Maghreb and the policies pursued by regional states to counter it. Finally, it suggests principles to consolidate achievements against ISIS and address some of the underlying violent conflicts or political and societal tensions that create an enabling environment for jihadist recruitment.

II. Maghrebi Foreign Fighters in ISIS

A. Putting a Number on Maghrebi Foreign Fighters

Since the outbreak of the Syrian uprising in 2011, tens of thousands of individuals have travelled to join rebel groups in Syria.[fn]See “Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community”, testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, 9 February 2016.Hide Footnote Of these, an estimated 36,500 ended up joining the Islamic State (ISIS) and other jihadist groups once they imposed themselves as major actors in the conflict, particularly after 2013. Most of these foreign fighters are from the Arab world, and close to 8,000 from the four countries of the Maghreb (compared to 6,600 from Western countries) – although such numbers are estimates and thus inherently uncertain.[fn]The exact number of foreign fighters in ISIS is contested. This is in part because numbers have tended to remain static for long periods of time and do not seem to always reflect attrition rates and returnees, and in part because they likely include foreign fighters who have joined groups other than ISIS. This report uses official government figures, which generally tend to be validated by other sources, from intelligence agency estimates to academic analyses. Studies that have sought to determine the weight of different nationalities among foreign fighters in ISIS have tended to focus on necessarily limited, if substantial, data sets (ISIS administrative documents) that tend to confirm the picture given by governments. One such study suggests that Tunisia contributes 50.83 fighters per million citizens, compared to 18.74 for Saudi Arabia (the next highest figure), 13.90 for Libya, 7.08 for Morocco, and 1 for Algeria). See “The Caliphate’s Global Workforce: An Inside Look at the Islamic State’s Foreign Fighter Paper Trail”, Brian Dodwell, Daniel Milton and Don Rassler, Combating Terrorism Center at Westpoint, April 2016. Crisis Group interviews, Libyan, Tunisian, Algerian and Moroccan officials and experts, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, Rabat, September 2016-February 2017.Hide Footnote Moreover, European countries with large immigrant populations of Maghrebi origin, such as France and Belgium, have also contributed high numbers of dual-nationality volunteers travelling to Syria especially and who, at some point in their trajectory, joined ISIS there.[fn]See Alex P. Schmid and Judith Tinnes, “Foreign (Terrorist) Fighters with IS: A European Perspective”, International Center for Counter-Terrorism, December 2015.Hide Footnote Maghrebi fighters have played an important role in the organisation, all the more remarkable given their home countries’ relative distance from ISIS’ chief theatre of conflict.

There are important variations among Maghreb countries. Tunisia has produced the highest ratio of foreign fighters per capita (6,000 individuals or 545 per million inhabitants, although this figure is likely exaggerated)[fn]A Tunisian security official suggested the 6,000 number was initially claimed by his country’s security services to secure Western support. Crisis Group interview, Tunis, February 2015.Hide Footnote of any country in the world, in both relative and absolute terms far more than both countries closer to ISIS’ initial conflict theatre (Saudi Arabia, Russia, Turkey and Jordan, which contribute the largest numbers of foreign fighters to ISIS after Tunisia – around 2,000-2,500 each) and the other major sources of Maghrebi fighters, Morocco (1,623 individuals according to Moroccan authorities, or 46 per million inhabitants, plus an estimated 2,000 Moroccans who also hold a European citizenship) and Libya (an estimated 600 individuals, or 100 per million inhabitants). Algeria is a regional outlier, having contributed very few nationals (78 individuals or less than 2 per million inhabitants, although an additional 200 or so hold a second nationality and came from Europe).

These numbers are, at best, approximate, but have implanted themselves – particularly in the case of Tunisia – in media and official narrative as representing a particular problem for the Maghreb. Moreover, given these relatively small numbers, even in Tunisia, it is perilous to seek broad societal explanations when personal circumstances, intensity of ISIS efforts or some other factor might have played a part in attracting individuals to the organisation.

Bearing those caveats in mind, it nonetheless remains likely that levels of ISIS recruitment in a particular country reflect multiple factors: the political and security context; the presence of pre-existing jihadist networks; the level of demand for a quasi-revolutionary, anti-establishment discourse and practice; particular local histories, etc. In the context of the collapse of Libya’s regime in 2011, the Libyan contribution to the foreign fighter phenomenon seems more understandable. Likewise, Tunisia’s high numbers, while surprising, arguably reflect strong militant, anti-state sentiment, as well as a situation of genuine revolutionary upheaval combined with multiple forms of marginalisation and social exclusion.[fn]See Valentina Colombo, “Multiple Layers of Marginalization as a Paradigm of Tunisian Hotbeds of Jihadism”, in Jihadist Hotbeds: Understanding Local Radicalization Processes, Italian Institute for International Political Studies, 2016.
Hide Footnote

Morocco also presents somewhat of a surprise: despite a regime widely seen as legitimate by the population, a strong state in full control of its territory and a highly effective security sector, the number of its citizens who went to fight in Syria between 2011 and 2016 is greater than the total number of Moroccan foreign fighters since the first wave of Arab fighters to Afghanistan in the 1980s. Reasons remain unclear, though for some this suggests that the country’s apparent stability obscures socio-economic frustration and a desire among a part of the population, of which those that travelled to Syria are a small subset, for political radicalism that can only be satisfied abroad.[fn]Crisis Group interview, researcher on Moroccan Islamists, Rabat, November 2016.Hide Footnote

Algeria’s very low number, however, is perhaps most surprising of all considering the country’s history. An Algerian expert notes this anomaly, speculating it could be explained at least in part by a still-fresh national trauma:

Before, Algerians were in the lead compared to Moroccans and Tunisians – now for the first time they’re the lowest. Confrontation with Islamist armed groups has been going on basically since 1992. 200,000 people have been killed. After 25 years of war, joining Islamist armed groups is not that attractive anymore. There has been an exhaustion of the extremist reservoir.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Djallil Lounnas, academic, Algiers, September 2016.

For many observers, the reason for this low number is that the de-radicalisation strategies (together with ruthless policies to exterminate or drive away recalcitrant individuals) put in place when the Civil Concord was implemented after the end of the Islamist insurrection in 1999, including an amnesty for former members of Islamist groups that had fought the state, has worked (whatever negative effects it otherwise may have had).[fn]Crisis Group interview, Yahia Zoubir, academic, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote

In accounting for the relative numbers of various nationalities in ISIS, it is also important to keep in mind that many recruits joined the group from Syria when it emerged in 2013, not from their home countries – ISIS’ recruitment was in good part done in a theatre of war, not at home, creating an important link between the foreign fighter phenomenon of 2011-2013 (when many states, Arab and Western, either supported, downplayed or ignored the phenomenon) and the 2013-2016 period of ISIS ascendency.[fn]The creation of ISIS was formally announced in April 2013 by Omar al-Baghdadi as a merger of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Nusra Front, operating in Syria under the leadership of Abu Mohammed al-Julani. Julani rejected the merger and was backed by al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri in the dispute in July 2013, resulting in a fallout and rivalry between al-Qaeda and ISIS that had global repercussions for jihadist groups.Hide Footnote This occurred often en masse, because fighters from particular countries had already largely organised themselves into single-nationality brigades – such as Harakat al-Sham, a unit comprising some 800 Moroccans that provided already well-trained fighters to the group, or Katiba al-Battar al-Libi, a Libyan group.

B. Push and Pull Factors for Foreign Fighters

1. A market for revolutionary radicalism?

In the Maghreb as elsewhere, the emergence of ISIS spurred a second peak of departures for the Syrian (and now also Iraqi) arena after the initial one in 2011-2013.[fn]The number of foreign fighters in Syria is believed to have at least doubled between 2014 and 2015, largely because of the emergence of ISIS. See “Foreign Fighters: An Updated Assessment of the Flow of Foreign Fighters into Syria and Iraq”, The Soufan Group, 8 December 2015.Hide Footnote Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, ISIS’ self-styled caliph, plausibly could claim not only to have achieved spectacular military victories where many other representatives of Sunni communities in Iraq and (mostly Sunni) Syrian rebels had failed, but also to have communicated in a novel way. Videos recorded by Tunisian or Moroccan ISIS fighters extolling achievements of the “caliphate” and the rewards that awaited those who joined it played a role in attracting new recruits.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, researchers on ISIS, Rabat and Tunis, October-December 2016.Hide Footnote Even among jihadists there was something tantalising about both the medium and the message:

Zawahri’s videos are boring, whereas Baghdadi’s are inspiring. For ISIS supporters, Baghdadi is doing something concrete, controls territory, defies the entire world, unlike the old scholars of al-Qaeda who appear behind the times.[fn]Crisis Group interview, David Thomson, journalist, Tunis, February 2016.Hide Footnote

In the Tunisian case, a regional counter-terrorism analyst evokes a desire for radicalism:

You have a great number of Tunisians because, having overthrown their own dictator, they think it’s their duty to do it [in Syria] – these are the modern Che Guevaras. It’s the same for the Libyans.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Algerian researcher on regional jihadism, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote

According to this analysis, those disappointed with the meagre returns of the democratic transition (particularly economically) might have sought fame and fortune with the new group, keeping the early revolutionary flame of 2011 through a more radical option than the prevailing mood of political compromise could offer. A similar pattern arguably took place in Morocco after the dissipation of the 20 February protest movement by the end of 2011, when a small number of its adherents, searching for an alternative, saw in ISIS a truly radical option that could prevail where reformism had failed.[fn]Crisis Group interview, former 20 February movement member turned ISIS supporter, via Facebook, September 2016.Hide Footnote

2. Security vacuums and favourable political contexts

The prevailing security disarray and the fall of the Ben Ali and Qadhafi regimes played an important role in permitting many individuals from Libya and Tunisia to go abroad, reaching higher numbers than previous waves of foreign fighters and drawing from a more sociologically diverse recruitment pool. The security apparatuses of both countries either collapsed or, for an extended period of time, largely were unable to function properly. Once-feared intelligence and security agencies lost the ability to monitor militant groups even as they emerged from the underground and sought to impose themselves as political (and in the case of Libya, also military) actors. State authority was weakened and the capacity to gather information and act on it was disrupted.

Even governments from countries that did not experience regime change preferred to see those inclined toward violence go abroad rather than stay home. Algeria and Morocco already had developed policies to deal with the jihadist movements in response to internal crises, albeit of different scopes – the devastating insurgency of the 1990s for Algeria and the 2003 Casablanca bombings for Morocco. They had had some success in either co-opting and “de-radicalising” jihadist Salafis or killing, imprisoning and driving into exile unrepentant ones. Security agencies were not weakened – indeed they had been strengthened in the preceding decades, especially in their understanding and even infiltration of jihadist groups.[fn]For a positive account of Morocco’s counter-terrorism efforts see Kei Nakagawa, El Mostafa Rezrazi, Shoji Matsumoto (eds.), Le Livre gris du terrorisme: au cœur de la coopération sécuritaire Maroc-Europe (Paris, 2015). Most experts on Morocco’s counter-terrorism strategy paint a far more nuanced picture, although Moroccan intelligence penetration of radical movements in the region and in Europe is widely recognised. Crisis Group interviews, Moroccan and European experts, September 2016-March 2017.Hide Footnote

In Morocco, where the 20 February protest movement never seriously threatened a monarchy that had deftly, and rapidly, offered constitutional reforms, stabilising domestic politics – and if necessary exporting any jihadist threat – nonetheless was a priority. As a Moroccan participant in these protests who later became an ISIS supporter in prison put it:

At first, Arab countries permitted travelling, and several religious scholars issued fatwas permitting jihad in Syria. This helped youth to travel there because Arab states gambled on overthrow of the Assad regime as well as bringing all jihadists in one place to destroy all of them.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Moroccan ISIS supporter, via Facebook, September 2016. The idea that Morocco turned a blind eye to its nationals leaving to fight in Syria in 2011-2013 is also echoed by experts on the Morocco Salafi milieu and European intelligence officials. Crisis Group interviews, Rabat, October 2016-March 2017.Hide Footnote

In other words, the flipside of these security measures at times was turning a blind eye to those who sought jihad abroad, in the process getting rid of them and providing an outlet for the local Salafi-jihadist scene by giving them an opportunity to fight abroad.

At least for those countries that had experienced a change of regime, some analysts argue that a novel factor was the political influence of Islamists whose solidarity with the Syrian rebels (echoed by many Western capitals as well as Arab Gulf states) manifested itself far more openly than would have been conceivable under the fallen regimes. In Tunisia, for example, Ansar Sharia’s recruitment was tolerated by the troika government (2011-2013) led by the Islamist party An-Nahda alongside the non-Islamist parties Ettakatol and Congrès pour la République.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, members of security forces, Tunis, 2015-2016; troika politicians, Tunis, 2013. In January 2017, after a debate prompted by civil society on the return of Tunisian jihadists from conflict zones, Tunisia’s parliament voted to create of a commission of inquiry on the recruitment of jihadists. The commission, composed of 22 MPs, began its work in February 2017, with some MPs travelling to Syria for investigations and interviewing troika-era officials and ministers on the matter. Its work is politically controversial, particularly as it revives the common accusations by anti-Islamists that An-Nahda was in connivance with Ansar Sharia in 2011-2013. Some MPs from parties opposed to the governing coalition aligned themselves on the regional anti-Islamist axis led by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and sought to use the commission to revive anti-Islamist polarisation.Hide Footnote This happened notwithstanding their stated opposition to, and intellectual battles with, jihadists, giving some cover (either actively encouraging or looking the other way) to pre-ISIS foreign fighter recruitment networks. It likely contributed to mainstreaming elements of the jihadist narrative via the endorsement of the political and religious legitimacy of travelling to combat the Assad regime.[fn]For instance, by sanctioning the idea of jihad against the Assad regime at a major gathering of (mostly Salafi) Islamists in Cairo in June 2013 – a call endorsed by the soon-to-be-overthrown Egyptian president, Mohammed Morsi. Many in the Salafi and jihadist milieu consider the Cairo event to have been an important official green light to go to Syria. Crisis Group interview, researcher on Islamists, Rabat, November 2016.Hide Footnote Although the vast majority of Tunisian foreign fighters in Syria joined the rebel side (whether jihadist or non-jihadist), some also fought on the regime side – reflecting how Tunisians often projected the Syrian conflict onto a domestic canvas, as an extension of the Islamist/anti-Islamist polarisation experienced at home.[fn]The Mohammed Brahmi Brigade, an entirely Tunisian group named after the leftist politician assassinated by Ansar Sharia in July 2013, is incorporated into the pro-Assad Arab Nationalist Guard active in the greater Damascus area, for instance.Hide Footnote

Recruitment of foreign fighters to various groups operating in Syria during this pre-ISIS period (carried especially by Salafi groups such as Ansar Sharia) also was facilitated by the Tunis embassies of countries backing the Syrian rebels as well as Gulf-financed religious charities.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, security officials, Tunis, 2015-2016. The president of the commission of inquiry on recruitment networks to conflict zones said in a radio interview that foreign countries were involved in helping recruits reach conflict zones. See “Héla Omrane: Des pays étrangers impliqués dans l’envoi des Tunisiens dans les zones de tension”, businessnews.com.tn, 11 July 2017.Hide Footnote Investigations into the 2011-2013 period suggest that in Tunisia at least, local and international networks supporting the supply of foreign fighters to various Syrian groups (jihadist and non-jihadist) operated on a logistical level, facilitating the delivery of passports, subsidising travel costs, recruiting from prisons, etc.[fn]Crisis Group interview, researcher at Tunisian Institute for Strategic Studies, Tunis, July 2013; Crisis Group interviews, security experts, journalists, Tunis, May 2017. Official efforts to look into jihadist recruitment in Tunisia has been curtailed, most recently by the dismissal of the head of the parliamentary commission tasked with investigating the phenomenon. See Rebecca Chaouch, “Tunisie – Leïla Chettaoui: ‘Depuis le début, la commission parlementaire sur les filières jihadistes dérange’”, Jeune Afrique, 29 May 2017.Hide Footnote Given the absence of controls at Tunis’ international airport, the fact that Tunisians (like Moroccans) did not need a visa to go to Turkey, and the low cost of financing the trip, reaching Syria was relatively easy. Although much of this type of recruitment ended in 2013 after the UN Security Council listed the Nusra Front as a terrorist organisation and the emergence of ISIS, it contributed to the large pool of Tunisian fighters present in Syria, many of whom ended up in ISIS.

3. Pre-existing networks and locales of radicalism

The individuals who initially sought to fight in Syria and ended up forming a “fourth wave” of transnational jihadist violence followed a trend established with the movement of fighters to Afghanistan and Iraq in earlier decades.[fn]See Crisis Group Special Report, Exploiting Disorder: al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, 14 March 2016.Hide Footnote Often, veterans of these conflicts played a role in urging younger volunteers to make the same trip. Recruitment networks piggybacked on well-established, pre-existing Salafi-jihadist networks, but also localised nodes of militancy. These are often in historically marginalised areas with a history of dissidence and alienation from the central state, where the role of the informal or criminal economy is strong and the rule of law relatively weak.

Ansar Sharia, the most important Salafi-jihadist group to emerge in Tunisia after the 2011 uprisings, made use of the connections of its leader, Seifallah Ben Hassine (better known by his nom de guerre Abu Iyadh), a veteran jihadist with close ties to al-Qaeda leaders from his time in Afghanistan in the 1990s and who served as the former emir of the Tunisian Combatant Group. Abu Iyadh founded Ansar Sharia soon after he and many other jihadists were released from prison starting in January 2011, after the first post-Ben Ali government granted a series of amnesties. Indeed, as in Syria and Iraq, prisons were an important source of networking and recruitment in Morocco, Libya and Tunisia.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Moroccan and Tunisian officials, Libyan politicians, September-December 2016. In Tunisia, a number of jihadist detainees also escaped from prison on the night of Ben Ali’s departure, especially from the Borj Erroumi prison in the northern city Bizerte and Borj El Amri prison in Manouba (also in the north). A few days later, several thousand detainees imprisoned on terrorism charges between 2003 and 2010 were released though a general amnesty. Many had experience in combat zones. These former detainees organised themselves into small discussion groups, recruiting young Tunisians (especially students and the unemployed from poor areas). Ansar Sharia appeared in May 2011 partly as a way to unite these discussion groups into a national network.Hide Footnote

Like al-Qaeda-linked groups elsewhere, Ansar Sharia in Tunisia was initially selective in its recruitment: it required ten recommendations, did not promise compensation and recruits were expected to pay their own costs. It recruited largely on behalf of like-minded jihadist groups, generally affiliated with al-Qaeda – including the Nusra Front (jabhat an-nusra). Given stringent screening, these recruits were “few in number but of high quality”.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Tunisian researcher on foreign fighters, Tunis, June 2013.Hide Footnote

Ansar Sharia (and similar groups) most easily could spread their message and seek recruits in the long-marginalised southern and interior provinces [...] where the local economy is dominated by smuggling and state authority is relatively weak.

Ansar Sharia (and similar groups) most easily could spread their message and seek recruits in the long-marginalised southern and interior provinces – for instance in towns such as Ben Guerdane, on the Libyan border, where the local economy is dominated by smuggling and state authority is relatively weak, or Sidi Bouzid, the interior town where the December 2010 protests began. Likewise, the poor urban periphery of major cities – whose inhabitants often are originally from the south and interior – is another important source of recruits.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Tunisian security officials, lawyers for defendants in terrorism cases, Tunis, January 2016. Statistics on over 1,000 individuals convicted on terrorism charges between 2011 and 2016 show that Sidi Bouzid is the second largest town of origin of those convicted (138, after Tunis’ 181, despite having a population of 127,000 compared to Tunis’ 2,700,000). Even so, such statistics underplay the fact that most arrested in the greater Tunis area come from its periphery – in part because police concentrate their efforts in these areas rather than wealthier neighbourhoods of the capital. See Le terrorisme en Tunisie à travers les dossiers judiciaires, Centre Tunisien pour les Recherches et les Etudes sur le Terrorisme, Forum pour les droits économiques et sociaux (Tunis, 2016).Hide Footnote

It was not just groups such as Ansar Sharia that found it easy to operate in deprived neighbourhoods. Other, more diffuse streams of recruitment to Syria existed. After the 2011 uprising and the spike of illegal migration to Europe that accompanied it, criminal networks that specialised in facilitating it began to diversify their business, recruiting fighters for non-jihadist groups in Syria such as the al-Farouq Brigades (kataib al-farouq) and Descendants of Saladin Brigade (liwa ahfad Salaheldin) – both associated with the Free Syrian Army. These recruiters – who later developed links with some of the jihadist groups and arms smugglers operating in Tunisia – reportedly were paid $3,000 per recruit.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Tunisian researcher on foreign fighters, Tunis, June 2013.Hide Footnote In a sense, the closure of Europe and dwindling prospects there allowed Syria to emerge as another “market” for Tunisians seeking to improve their lot, a trend ISIS would later tap into.

In Libya, pre-existing jihadist groups and the areas in which they operated once again come to the fore. Detainees from groups such as the Libyan Islamist Fighting Group (LIFG, known locally as al-jamaa al-libiya al-muqatila), a jihadist group whose leadership comprises Afghanistan veterans from both the anti-Soviet jihad and Taliban periods, were released during the uprising. The mass release of prisoners during and after the 2011 uprising allowed a suppressed network of people inclined toward jihadism to re-emerge. This network played an important role in the overthrow of the Qadhafi regime, often building relationships with more moderate Islamists and non-Islamists in the crucible of the 2011 conflict that have lasted to this day.[fn]This explains, for instance, why former LIFG leaders such as Abdelhakim Belhaj in Tripoli (who has distanced himself from jihadist groups) have forged alliances with non-Islamists there, or how the Benghazi Revolutionaries’ Shura Council united opponents of General Khalifa Haftar’s Operation Dignity, from jihadists to mainstream Islamists to non-Islamists.Hide Footnote Seized ISIS documents show that Derna, in eastern Libya, long a bastion of the LIFG and the site of a failed insurgency in the 1990s, is the major city of origin for Libyan foreign fighters.[fn]See Nate Rosenblatt, “All Jihad is local: What ISIS’ files tell us about its fighters”, International Security, July 2016.Hide Footnote Likewise, other areas with a history of jihadist activity – such Ajdabiya, Benghazi and Nawfiliyya – became prime recruitment nodes for foreign fighters and, later, hubs for ISIS activity.

Well-established networks of Moroccans who previously had fought in Afghanistan or Iraq urged young men to follow in their footsteps, recruiting a new generation of foreign fighters. Members of the Joint committee of defence of Islamist detainees (CCDDI, Coordination commune pour la défense des détenus islamistes) – an advocacy group created by Salafi and former jihadist detainees imprisoned in the 2000s – was for instance instrumental in building a network of recruitment for those who want to travel to Syria. Some of its members – especially veteran fighters of Afghanistan or Iraq – were active in recruiting young foreign fighters.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, CCDDI members, Rabat, 2013-2014. See also Jules Cretois, “Les salafistes marocains, une voix qui veut compter dans le paysage politique”, Middle East Eye, 30 December 2016.Hide Footnote

An ISIS supporter who was imprisoned for attempting to join the group noted that he had been inspired by previous generations of foreign fighters, seeing it as part of tradition of participation in righteous causes:

The first group travelled to Syria to support oppressed people after they witnessed the carnage committed by Bashar al-Assad against his own people. The main difference between those that went to Afghanistan in the 1980s and the new generation is that [the latter] are more passionate, and many are only recently reborn to religion.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Moroccan ISIS supporter, via Facebook, September 2016.Hide Footnote

The role of pre-existing jihadist groups is one reason recruitment was initially particularly strong in the north of the country: among prominent Moroccan foreign fighters in ISIS, many come from northern towns such as Tangier, Tetouan, Fnideq, or al-Hoceima.[fn]Among the better-known Moroccan members of ISIS, this is the case of Mohammed Abu al-Baraa al-Maghribi (Tetouan, died August 2014), Abu Anas al-Andalusi (Fnideq), Abu Osama al-Maghribi (Fnideq, died March 2014). Their identities were established through ISIS propaganda videos and eulogies collected by Crisis Group from jihadi forums. See also Aziz al-Driyoushi, “من أحياء المغرب المهمشة إلى أشرس مقاتلي “داعش”, Deutsche Welle Arabic, 27 July 2014. The case for the Rif playing a particular role in the modern jihadist movement can also be exaggerated, however. See Leela Jacinto, “Morocco’s outlaw country is the heartland of global terrorism”, Foreign Policy, 7 April 2016; Mohammed Chtatou, “Morocco’s Rif region is not an outlaw country and certainly not the heartland of global terrorism”, Morocco World News, 20 April 2016; Mohamed Daadaoui, “In defense of the Rif and the pitfalls of parachute journalism”, Huffington Post, 11 August 2016.Hide Footnote The region – a predominantly Amazigh (Berber) area named after the Rif mountain chain – has a history of jihadist activity as well as of neglect and anti-state contestation.[fn]The Rif was a front line of resistance to Spanish colonisation in the early 20th century (Spain retains the enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla there); was long neglected by central authorities, particularly under the reign of King Hassan II; is the centre of Morocco’s cannabis cultivation and trafficking; has a thriving contraband economy; and continues to be an area of frequent contestation against central authorities: since November 2016, regular protests for greater investment in the region and against human rights violation have evolved into an important movement, hirak, that has united activists of various ideologies together. See “Governor sacked as new violence hits Morocco province”, The New Arab (alaraby.co.uk), 30 March 2017.Hide Footnote The northern cities also had established salafi-jihadi groups. For instance, Sheikh Omar al-Hadouchi and Sheikh Mohamed al-Fizazi – prominent Salafi preachers – have been active in spreading jihadist ideology in this region since the late 1990s.

Even so, regional origins diversified after ISIS’ emergence, a sign of its ability to appeal beyond pre-existing jihadist networks. The recruitment cells that operated were far less likely to be associated with al-Qaeda – for one Moroccan analyst, “it is as if after 2014 al-Qaeda disappeared and is replaced by ISIS”.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Moroccan counter-terrorism analyst, security officials, Rabat, January-February 2017.Hide Footnote The proliferation of new, smaller cells suggests new jihadist activity rather than the extension of pre-existing networks, as had tended to be the case in 2011-2013. A similar pattern could be seen elsewhere – for instance in Tunisia, where the ISIS label briefly acquired a certain glamour among urban youth. The lack of requirement of religious knowledge or known practice of piety by ISIS recruiters also made the group more accessible, less “elitist” than pre-existing, al-Qaeda-oriented, groups.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, young men, security officials, Tunis and Tunis suburbs, 2014-2016. The view that ISIS is “less elitist” was also echoed in Algeria and Morocco. Crisis Group interview, counter-terrorism officials, researchers, Algiers and Rabat, September-December 2016.Hide Footnote

The link between regional marginalisation, poverty, state neglect, petty criminality and jihadist recruitment is not straightforward or direct.[fn]“As there are more poor people in these areas, it’s normal that we find more jihadists there”, notes a Tunisian security official about southern provinces. “But we should not forget that many come from well-to-do, educated backgrounds”. Crisis Group interview, former senior security official, Tunis, February 2016.Hide Footnote However, those factors can create an enabling environment that can facilitate recruitment, particularly if socio-economic conditions are perceived to be a result of structural injustice. Poverty in absolute terms, in other words, does not correlate with the propensity to join a jihadist group – but the perception of relative poverty, interpreted as the result of a political choice or historic injustice, often does.

It is striking that many of the areas of the Maghreb that have provided above-average number of foreign fighters to ISIS share some commonalities, including a perception of relative deprivation and a history of state violence or marginalisation, and are ongoing sites of political contestation. That last factor – the existence of political contestation – is key and differentiates these areas from others, which may suffer similar levels of marginalisation but have not articulated an anti-state (or anti-central government) political narrative around it. Northern Morocco, southern Tunisia and parts of eastern Libya share such features. In other words, much as conflict zones provide ideal conditions for recruitment to jihadist groups, areas where a deep-seated, even if latent, political conflict exists helps to pre-dispose inhabitants toward such revolutionary causes.

III. ISIS Targets the Maghreb

Beyond its role in recruiting fighters for battle in Syria, ISIS and its affiliates have carried out operations in a variety of ways, ranging from the capture and governance of territory in Libya, to operating a guerrilla group in mountainous areas in Algeria and Tunisia or simply as an underground presence in Morocco. In all of these countries, ISIS-affiliated groups have planned attacks targeting civilians, although it has yet to succeed in carrying any out in Morocco. They also adapted their approach to distinct political contexts: in Tunisia, for example, ISIS affiliates sought to disrupt the transition, exploiting dissatisfaction with its pace and direction; in Libya, they used the opportunity of war and chaos to seize territory. The following sections describe ISIS’ presence and tactics in the four Maghrebi countries.

A. Libya: the Beachhead

If the foreign fighter phenomenon was the first vector that connected Maghreb countries to the emergence of ISIS, the latter’s decision to target Libya as its first major area of expansion outside of Iraq and Syria demonstrated a clear intention to widen its caliphate to North Africa. In a January 2015 essay disseminated online, an ISIS supporter claiming to be in Libya wrote:

As well as the harmonious social makeup of Libya, and the fact that 99 per cent of [its population] is made up of Maliki Sunnis – aside from the Ibadhia minority – by the grace of God to Libya, God bestowed upon this country a strategic position and immense potential. These are things from which it would be possible to derive great benefits if they were efficiently exploited. Unfortunately, some supporters do not recognise the extent of the Libyan arena, the proliferation of variant weaponry within it, its geographic dimensions and its critical environs. Sufficed to say, Libya looks upon the sea, the desert, mountains, and six states: Egypt, Sudan, Chad, Niger, Algeria and Tunisia.[fn]Charlie Winter, “‘Libya: The Strategic Gateway for the Islamic State’, Translation and analysis of IS recruitment propaganda for Libya”, Quilliam Foundation, February 2015.Hide Footnote

Crucial to the ability of ISIS’ strategy to expand in Libya, at least after mid-2014, were the divisions between rival governments and parliaments. The General National Congress (the parliament elected in July 2012) and its Government of National Salvation in Tripoli on the one hand, and the House of Representatives (the parliament elected in June 2014) and its government in al-Bayda on the other, competed for recognition as the internationally-recognised government after August 2014. Neither parliament was backed by all of its own members. UN-led efforts at reconciling the two resulted in the Libyan Political Agreement of 17 December 2015, which created a Presidency Council, a nine-member rump executive tasked with forming a Government of National Accord.

The Presidency Council began to operate out of Tripoli starting from late March 2015, although the government it appointed has still not been accepted by the House of Representatives as required per the agreement. This competition between rival governments – none of which have much actual ability to effectively govern – created an opening in which ISIS’ claim to deliver some of the trappings of a state (or at least, a form of basic governance) filled a vacuum, especially in areas effectively abandoned by all governments.

1. Derna and Benghazi

The move toward expansion in Libya had begun earlier. Members of the Battar Brigade, a Libyan-only group that had been fighting in Syria since 2012 and joined ISIS there in 2013, began to return to Libya in 2014. They primarily went to Derna, at the time in the hands of a variety of Islamist groups, some of them jihadist, including Ansar Sharia. The Battar Brigade members, together with local jihadists, formed the Islamic Youth Shura Council and, in June 2014, pledged allegiance to ISIS.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Derna residents, June-December 2014.Hide Footnote This effort was led by an experienced Iraqi ISIS operative, Abu Mughirah al-Qahtani (alias Abu Nabil al-Anbari), who recruited from Ansar Sharia and other pre-existing groups as well as foreign fighters who had come to Libya for training on their way to Syria.

As the emerging Libyan branch of ISIS sought to impose itself in Derna – the Libyan city with the oldest history of jihadism – it met with resistance from rival jihadist groups with informal connections to al-Qaeda, as well as non-jihadist militias grouped under the banner of Shura Council of Derna Revolutionaries. Although the Islamic Youth Shura Council and the Shura Council of Derna Revolutionaries shared some common aims at the local level – particularly implementation of Sharia through the creation of Islamic courts – they clashed over the fundamental point of whom they should pay allegiance to, with the latter’s members refusing to recognise any caliphate outside of Libya and remaining within a national rather than transnational, framework. By summer 2015, in a tactical alliance with dissident officers from the Libyan National Army (dominant in eastern Libya), the Shura Council of Derna Revolutionaries defeated the Islamic Youth Shura Council (by now dominated by ISIS) and drove it out of Derna and continued to fight against them in the nearby countryside.

Separately, as early as 2013, Derna-based jihadists had begun to plan the expansion of a network that would spread to Benghazi, Sirte and Sabratha – towns that would become major hubs of ISIS activity in the years that followed.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Derna residents and activists, 2013.Hide Footnote The evolution of ISIS in Libya took place in the context of various groups’ fluid identities and boundaries. Ansar Sharia played a key role in this process as the chief channel through which ISIS would spread, in what, rather than a merger, could be described as a strategy – which yielded varying degrees of success – of infiltration and takeover by ISIS operatives who had returned from Syria.

The transition of some Ansar Sharia branches into ISIS occurred gradually starting in 2014, often at different paces depending on locale.

The transition of some Ansar Sharia branches into ISIS occurred gradually starting in 2014, often at different paces depending on locale. It initially was contested in Derna and Benghazi, with elements of Ansar Sharia refusing to pledge allegiance to ISIS – reflecting Ansar Sharia’s more pragmatic approach, including its close collaboration with other groups, including non-Islamists.[fn]In 2013, a military officer could still speak of Ansar Sharia members as wayward boys rather than extremists, advising dialogue with them rather than confrontation. Crisis Group interview, military officer, Tobruk, September 2013.Hide Footnote The Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries, created in June 2014 to counter forces under General Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army that had vowed to take control of Benghazi, was an example of such an alliance: it gathered Ansar Sharia (believed to be involved in a string of high-profile assassinations in the city between 2012 and 2014) alongside other armed groups (both Islamist and non-Islamist) that emerged in 2011. Ansar Sharia Benghazi’s leader, Muhammad Ali al-Zahawi, was also a leader of this council and known to be resistant to the push to declare allegiance to ISIS. His death in January 2015 (some analysts and individuals close to Ansar Sharia believe ISIS assassinated him)[fn]Crisis Group interview, expert on Libyan Islamists, Brussels, July 2017.Hide Footnote allowed the pro-ISIS faction to gain dominance over Ansar Sharia, eventually effectively subsuming it.[fn]See Aaron Y. Zelin, “The Rise and Decline of Ansar al-Sharia in Libya”, Hudson Institute, 6 April 2015.Hide Footnote

This fluidity of the Islamist and thuwwar (revolutionary) scene would later allow Haftar to claim that he was leading the fight against ISIS in Benghazi – and tarnish his opponents in the city with a jihadist brush. Indeed, ISIS’ strategy of infiltrating or piggybacking on pre-existing Islamist (and even non-Islamist) groups, has been one factor that enabled Haftar to make the blanket claim that all Islamists were a threat, a claim that has gained currency among many Libyans and is echoed by anti-Islamist rhetoric elsewhere in the wider region.[fn]

2. Sirte

By early 2015, the emerging Libyan branch of ISIS was focusing its efforts chiefly on Sirte and its environs – indeed its first major public act was the execution of 21 Egyptian Christians in January 2015 on a beach near Sirte, followed by multiple recruitment videos in the ensuing months.[fn]See Jason Pack, Rhiannon Smith, and Karim Mezran, The Origins and Evolution of ISIS in Libya, Atlantic Council, June 2017, pp. 22-23.Hide Footnote In Sirte too, its emergence through pre-existing groups – at first the Supreme Security Committee, then Ansar Sharia – was gradual and obscured the ambition to establish a branch of ISIS.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Sirte and Ben Jawwad residents, Misrata and Ben Jawwad, October 2016.Hide Footnote The General National Congress (GNC), the parliament elected in 2012, downplayed the concern of Sirte residents who saw the growing strength of militant forces in their city, often because the various groups that had taken control of Sirte in 2011 were GNC allies. As a result, the GNC preferred to look the other way.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, GNC politicians, Tripoli, 2015. See also Issandr El Amrani, “How much of Libya does the Islamic State control?”, foreignpolicy.com, 18 February 2016.Hide Footnote As an official in Operation Bunyan Marsous ­– the Misratan-led effort to retake Sirte from ISIS in 2016-2017, carried out under the aegis of the UN-recognised Tripoli government and with international support – put it, “ISIS took advantage of the absence of the state and the rivalry among the three governments. They were able to enter Sirte with the help of key people in Ansar Sharia”.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Reda Issa, spokesman for Operation Bunyan Marsous, Misrata, October 2016.Hide Footnote

The fact that, after rebel groups defeated the Qadhafi regime in Sirte, the city essentially was neglected and ungoverned is one reason why some of its residents often initially welcomed hard-line Islamist groups that were ISIS’ precursors, even if they imposed stringent rules or espoused a jihadist discourse. Local authorities were dismantled, creating insecurity. Militias that initially took control of the city (mostly coming from Misrata) had poor relations with locals. In this context, more militant groups held out the promise of stability:

From 2012 they started raising the black flag. They controlled mosques, had money, mediated reconciliation – in fact they had no problem with the people, they were liked. We had no police, no army, no state institutions.[fn]Crisis Group interview, member of Sirte local council, Misrata, October 2016.Hide Footnote

Residents of Sirte and the surrounding towns that came to be controlled by ISIS confirm that the lack of security forces enjoying good relations with locals greatly contributed to the ease with which they fell. In many cases, these places simply surrendered to ISIS or negotiated its entry (sometimes in exchange for the release of captives) because they saw little alternative.[fn]Crisis Group interview, resident of Nawfiliya (near Sirte), via telephone, February 2016.Hide Footnote And because ISIS forces did not exact punitive measures on locals at first – not until at least mid-2015, after ISIS envoys dispatched from Iraq and Syria came to Sirte and applied the harsh regulations in place in Raqqa and Mosul[fn]Some of the men who reportedly lead ISIS in Libya are believed to be foreign: Abu Mugir al-Qahtani (aka Abu Nabil al-Anbari), an Iraqi, had been the “governor” of Salahadeen province in Iraq, north of Baghdad. He was killed in November 2015 in a U.S. airstrike in Derna. Abdel Qadr al-Najdi, a Saudi, had a prominent role in 2015 and read out the group’s statement of allegiance to ISIS in Sirte. Jalal al-Din al-Tunsi, a Tunisian, is believed to have taken over in late 2016 and likely died when in the fighting to liberate Sirte. Moez Fezzani (aka Abu Nasim), believed to lead the ISIS cell in Sabratha in western Libya, is a Tunisian. Crisis Group interviews, journalists, politicians, military officials, Tripoli, Misrata and Rome, October-December 2016.Hide Footnote – no organised resistance to the group manifested itself until ISIS secured control of the city and began to implement more drastic measures.[fn]Measures implemented by ISIS included compulsory propaganda classes, public hangings and stoning of dissidents and persons deemed to be acting against religious mores (including alleged prostitutes and adulterers). In one case, a young man was executed by being thrown from the roof of the highest building in Ben Jawwad after being accused of homosexuality; residents were forced to watch this and most other executions. Crisis Group interviews, Ben Jawwad residents, October 2016.Hide Footnote

Officials from the competing governments of the east and west for the most part failed to do anything about the situation in Sirte until it was too late.[fn]“Until March 2015 life was normal in Sirte. There were ISIS militants but they did not control the whole city because some Misratans were still there. After that, they began targeting anybody who was a policeman, a lawyer or military – these had to be killed. And they started physical punishments in the square”. Crisis Group interview, member of Sirte local council, Misrata, October 2016. In August 2015, ISIS crushed an uprising after the killing of a locally prominent Salafi preacher from the Ferjana tribe. Neither of the competing governments of Libya, despite claims that they would “liberate Sirte”, responded beyond a few airstrikes. See Jared Malsin, “ISIS re-establish their hold on Qaddafi’s home town after crushing a rebellion”, Time, 19 August 2015.Hide Footnote This was in part because they did not take the situation seriously enough and tended to believe in conspiracy theories about ISIS’ appearance in Sirte (each believing that ISIS was a creation of its rival), and in part because few wanted to fight for Sirte, a bastion of Qadhafi loyalists. Misrata, the military force closest to Sirte, knew of the changes in the area in late 2014 and early 2015 – at the time they had launched an offensive to take control of oil facilities in the Gulf of Sirte whose operation centre was only a few kilometres from an ISIS base in Nawfiliyya – but had other priorities. Besides, Misrata had withdrawn from Sirte partly based on the assessment that it should not confront ISIS unless the Government of National Salvation it backed secured international recognition.

Sirte’s association with the former regime – it is Muammar al-Qadhafi’s birthplace – caused many to speculate that some of its members formed the core of ISIS. This is unconvincing: while members of local tribes associated with Qadhafi joined the group, as did some Qadhafi-era officials, many also resisted it and many recruits appear to have come from anti-Qadhafi groups.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Bunyan Marsous commanders, Misrata, October 2016. A member of Sirte’s municipal council said: “When the assassination campaign started at first we thought it was the azlam (remnants the Qadhafi regime) but then realised both azlam and pro-17 February revolution were being killed. At the beginning there was some support for ISIS by the azlam because they considered it a form of resistance against the 17 February forces, but they grew disaffected”. Crisis Group interview, member of Sirte municipal council, Misrata, October 2016. Moreover, in the towns they controlled ISIS affiliates also persecuted many relatives of Qadhafi-era military officers because of their affiliation to the old regime, which they considered apostate. Crisis Group interviews, Ben Jawwad residents, Ben Jawwad, October 2016.Hide Footnote ISIS offered the opportunity for loyalists – generally shunned post-2011 – to assume a new identity, and the group may have had an initial popularity among Sirte residents who had lost status after the regime’s fall. But so did other ultraconservative groups that are less radical and now on the ascent, such as Madkhali Salafis (followers of an influential Saudi strand of Salafism). The comparison with Iraq, where former Baathists provided ISIS with local knowledge and networks, remains superficial, particularly, according to Libyan and international security officials, as the bulk of the rank-and-file and key leaders of ISIS in Libya were non-Libyan.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Sirte residents and Libyan intelligence officials, Misrata, October 2016; European intelligence official, location withheld, May 2017.Hide Footnote

Once firmly established in Sirte (after the suppression of the August 2015 insurrection against its rule), ISIS focused on three modes of operation. First, it expanded slowly in the Gulf of Sirte, eventually controlling over 100km of the coastline to the east of the city and extending its control over major crossroads to the west, toward Misrata, and targeting infrastructure such as power and water stations. This included attacks on oil wells in the “oil crescent” south-east of Sirte, aimed at depriving the government of income rather than taking control of oil production facilities.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, residents of Sirte, Ben Jawwad, Nawfiliyya and Ras Lanuf, October 2016.Hide Footnote Having established this safe zone in which to operate, ISIS increased its membership in Libya, which skyrocketed to some 4-6,000 by 2016 according to Western intelligence estimates, which now appear inflated.[fn]See “Department of Defense Briefing by Gen. David M. Rodriguez”, U.S. Department of Defense, April 2016. Crisis Group warned about a tendency toward number inflation at that time, estimating that a lower figure – 2-3,000 fighters – was more realistic. See Issandr El Amrani, “How much of Libya does the Islamic State control?”, foreignpolicy.com, 18 February 2016.Hide Footnote

Second, it continued attacks in western Libya aimed at destabilising political and military actors there – especially Misrata – and also continued fighting the LNA in Benghazi.[fn]The first attack suspected of being conducted by ISIS in western Libya was against the Corinthia Hotel in Tripoli on 27 January 2015, in which ten people died, including five foreigners. The most significant was against barracks used by Misratan forces in Zliten on 7 January 2016, in which at least 50 soldiers were killed. ISIS also carried out a series of smaller attacks on checkpoints in western Libya, ostensibly to weaken Misratan control of roads leading to Sirte.Hide Footnote It also extended its influence in Sabratha, in the west, at least until the U.S. bombed a training camp on 19 February 2016, killing dozens of mostly Tunisian ISIS fighters believed to be involved in attacks in Tunisia.[fn]The strike on Sabratha targeted Noureddine Chouchane (aka Sabir), a Tunisian national believed to have masterminded the March 2015 attack on the Bardo Museum in Tunis. See Terri Moon Cronk, “Strike on ISIL Camp Protected National Security, Pentagon Press Secretary Says”, U.S. Department of Defence News, 19 February 2016.Hide Footnote

Third, benefiting from its polished propaganda machine, ISIS sought new recruits by depicting itself as a military force superior to militias and condemning both Libyan governments as apostates or agents of the West. Its overall plan, aside from strengthening its military capacity, appeared to have been to weaken the rival governments and more generally sow chaos – in other words, causing disorder it could later exploit. That the rival governments and the main military coalitions aligned with each viewed each other as a graver threat than ISIS, allowed ISIS to continue unhindered for some eighteen months between early 2015 and mid-2016, during which time only targeted U.S. airstrikes (in Derna, Ajdabiya and Sabratha) dealt it some setbacks.[fn]Some military units from Misrata initially sought to contain ISIS’ expansion in Sirte but eventually withdrew from the city’s outskirts when they failed to get more support.Hide Footnote

3. Efforts against ISIS in Libya

The urgency, felt most acutely by Western powers, of combating ISIS’ growth in Libya (amplified by ISIS propaganda and attacks in Tunisia that were linked to Libya) was a chief motivation underpinning their support for the Libyan Political Agreement of 17 December 2015. Although there was insufficient Libyan consensus behind the agreement, many hoped that it would enable a united government to take the lead in combating ISIS and call for broader international support. However, as Libya’s divisions undermined the fledging Government of National Accord created by the agreement, separate actions against ISIS were pursued.[fn]See “Statement on a Political Deal for Libya”, Crisis Group, 12 December 2015; Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Report N°170, The Libyan Political Agreement: Time for a Reset, 4 November 2016.Hide Footnote

Haftar’s banding together of all of his opponents under the ISIS label was both in-accurate and deeply divisive, worsening local fractures in Benghazi and driving groups that could be amenable to a negotiated peace toward extremes.

In the east, counter-ISIS activity focused on Benghazi, where General Haftar’s Libyan National Army has fought the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries – a diverse grouping of Islamists and non-Islamists that made tactical alliances with Ansar Sharia and later ISIS. The LNA ultimately claimed to have driven most Shura Council combatants out of the city in early 2017, with some external support. These operations – labelled Operation Dignity – came at great civilian cost, and human rights groups allege the LNA committed war crimes against members of the Shura Council.[fn]See “Evidence points to war crimes by Libyan National Army forces”, Amnesty International, 23 March 2017.Hide Footnote Haftar’s banding together of all of his opponents under the ISIS label was both inaccurate and deeply divisive, worsening local fractures in Benghazi and driving groups that could be amenable to a negotiated peace toward extremes.[fn]The debate over the Benghazi Defence Brigades (BDB), composed mostly of fighters formerly with the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries who were driven out of the city, is a case in point. In partnership with allies in western Libya, including supporters of the UN-backed Government of National Accord, the BDB, which the pro-Haftar eastern government accuses of jihadist sympathies, conducted multiple attacks on the LNA in central and southern Libya as part of its effort to return east. On 20 May 2017, it participated in an attack on an LNA-controlled airbase at Brak Shati, in the south, in which over 80 persons were killed, including civilians. Officials from the eastern government say that the BDB includes pro-ISIS and al-Qaeda fighters. Crisis Group interview, Mohammed Dayri, foreign minister of the interim government based in al-Bayda, Brussels, February 2017.Hide Footnote

In the centre of the country, a coalition of militias mostly from Misrata led Operation Bunyan Marsous to liberate Sirte. The coalition fell under the newly formed Presidency Council’s nominal leadership, although it effectively operated independently, coordinating with U.S., UK and Italian partners.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Bunyan Marsous officials, Misrata and Sirte environs, July-September 2016. Western officials, especially from the U.S., were pushing for Misrata – as the most effective land force in Libya – to take the lead against ISIS. “The Misratans are going to be the Kurds of Libya”. Crisis Group interview, U.S. official, Washington, March 2016.Hide Footnote While both the Dignity and Bunyan Marsous forces combatted ISIS in part because they felt directly threatened by the group, gaining international support was a critical motivation too: each side presented itself as a privileged counter-terrorism partner.

Bunyan Marsous – which lasted from June to December 2016 – succeeded at great cost to the forces involved: 771 fighters died and over 4,000 were wounded. Casualties mostly were from Misrata, whose units conducted most of the ground fighting.[fn]“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Support Mission in Libya”, United Nations, 4 April 2017.Hide Footnote U.S. air support was fundamental to success, particularly as Misrata lacks significant ability to carry out precision airstrikes. But the operation, while sending a strong political signal by being Libyan-led, highlighted the limits of most militias’ capacities: many lives were unnecessarily lost through negligence and poor planning for the guerrilla tactics ISIS deployed in its defence: booby-traps, suicide bombings, vehicle-borne bombs, etc.[fn]“We did not think the war in Sirte would be this violent, that they would be equipped with tanks, heavy machine guns, mines, tripwires or use suicide bombers. Half of the Bunyan Marsous fighters who died were killed by IEDs and suicide attacks that caused 25-30 deaths at a time. Nobody wants more war, we’re fed up”. Crisis Group interview, Misratan brigade commander, Misrata, October 2016.Hide Footnote

How sustainable is the situation in Sirte is another question. Post-ISIS circumstances are tense: Misratan groups remain dominant but are contested and local community leaders likely will want their withdrawal at some point;[fn]“People from Sirte see Misrata the same as the Islamic State: no system, no government, no army. Misrata is not building a state. Their fighters wear flip-flops”. Crisis Group interview, member of Sirte local council and Sirte crisis committee, Misrata, October 2016.Hide Footnote the Misratan forces that took part in Bunyan Marsous also are being drawn elsewhere and they themselves are divided in their loyalties;[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Bunyan Marsous commanders and officials, October 2016-March 2017.Hide Footnote finally, poor planning for the aftermath of ISIS’ defeat in Sirte has left demining and reconstruction efforts lagging behind – never mind more comprehensive programs to deal with the trauma the city’s residents suffered and the reintegration and rehabilitation that local ISIS fellow travellers that melted back into the population should be receiving. A post-conflict plan for the city also remains “in need of resources”, according to the UN.[fn]“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Support Mission in Libya”, United Nations, 4 April 2017.Hide Footnote As of mid-2017, ISIS militants have carried out at least three attacks in the areas south of Sirte.

4. ISIS after Sirte

Prior to Operation Bunyan Marsous, an estimated 6,000 ISIS members were thought to be in the Sirte area, half of them fighters and the other half in charge of logistics. Yet less than 2,000 of its members are estimated to have been killed, suggesting that either these estimates were inflated or many managed to escape. That said, information garnered from bodies taken to morgues and from ISIS documents recovered in Sirte suggest that the vast majority of ISIS members in Sirte were not Libyan.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Libyan interior ministry official in charge of collecting ISIS fighters’ bodies from Sirte, Bunyan Marsous commanders, Misrata, October 2016. At the time, only 450 bodies were expected to be processed. According to a senior Libyan intelligence official, some 70 per cent of ISIS members were foreign. Main nationalities included Tunisians, Egyptians, Nigeriens, Chadians, Malians, Eritreans and Senegalese, with smaller numbers of Saudis, Yemenis, Qataris, Iraqis, Syrians, French, British and Canadians. Many sub-Saharan African members likely were mercenaries; in this respect ISIS is no different than many Libyan militias in making generous use of hired guns. Crisis Group interview, Ismail Shukri, head of military intelligence, Misrata, October 2016.Hide Footnote

Among those who escaped, many are believed to still be in Libya, moving in small groups and concentrating in the desert south-west of Sirte, near towns that also were Qadhafist strongholds such as Bani Walid, near Uweinat in the south east, and in Sabratha in the west, as well as across the south.[fn]“They are no longer passing in convoys, but in small groups or as individuals. They’ve learned the lessons of the past – if they come in large convoys they will be bombed”. Crisis Group interview, Jamal Triki, commander of Misrata’s Third Force, Sebha, March 2017.Hide Footnote Some foreigners have headed toward their country of origin.[fn]“The Tunisians have headed west and are largely around Sabratha, although not concentrated – they’ve learned the lessons from the U.S. strike. This is very worrying for the Tunisians and Algerians. The Sudanese went back toward Sudan. Others are in the greater Sirte area in small groups”. Crisis Group interview, senior European intelligence official, location withheld, May 2017.Hide Footnote In many cases, local militias do not engage with ISIS escapees and Bunyan Marsous forces have remained in Sirte rather than chase them.[fn]An army officer in Sebha said: “Sometimes we see ten cars from ISIS come through, but nobody stops them. Nobody wants to pick a fight, it’s not worth it”. Crisis Group interview, army officer, Sebha, March 2017.Hide Footnote Even in the Gulf of Sirte area, in proximity to Bunyan Marsous or LNA forces, many local ISIS members simply went back into their community where they might or might not be held accountable by local tribes. The assessment of a senior European intelligence official concurs with this view:

What we have seen so far is that ISIS in Sirte has split into its components. The Libyans have melted into the background, into their communities and are laying low. We were surprised to have only picked up signs of very small numbers headed toward Niger and Mali. We had worried they would bring their experience to locals there, but we think northern Mali is not a safe zone for jihadists, France is very active there and it’s difficult for them. And they have no particular attachment to Malian causes and rivals in al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb who might not welcome them. So most ISIS people who escaped Sirte are just keeping a low profile.[fn]Crisis Group interview, senior European intelligence official, location withheld, May 2017.Hide Footnote

B. Tunisia: Discrediting Democratic Politics

If Libya’s growing anarchy after the outbreak of hostilities among rival militias in 2014 offered an opportunity to recreate the strategy of exploiting disorder ISIS had successfully implemented in Iraq and Syria, in Tunisia the group sought to undermine the fragile ongoing transition and consensus-driven politics. The regional context was defined by two developments that resonated strongly in the country: on the one hand, the rise of ISIS and its violent, revolutionary message; on the other, Islamist-secular polarisation and – in the jihadist narrative – failure of the strategy of pragmatic Islamists to participate in electoral politics, as demonstrated by the July 2013 coup against the Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt. The decision by An-Nahda to crack down on Ansar Sharia in August 2013 and later the same year to pursue negotiations with its secular opponents, including former regime figures – leading in late 2014 to the election of Beji Caïd Essebsi, a stalwart establishment figure, as president – provided jihadists with easy targets.

Videos produced by ISIS (as well as al-Qaeda aligned jihadist groups such as Oqba Ibn Nafa Brigade, operating in the west of the country and composed in part of the more hard-line elements of Ansar Sharia) in 2014-2015 make this clear, condemning Essebsi as an agent of Western interests and An-Nahda leader Rached Ghannouchi as an infidel. They advocated violent overthrow of the democratic institutions put in place since 2011 and challenged the consensus being crafted by political elites.[fn]“In all of the videos by Tunisian ISIS members, they are clear about what they want to see happen in Tunisia. They attack An-Nahda and President Beji Caïd Essebsi and condemn the political consensus between them. They say they want to carry out attacks in Tunisia once they have consolidated their position in Libya, and speak of wanting to create an ‘African army’ that will attack Tunisia”. Crisis Group interview, researcher, Tunis, February 2016.Hide Footnote This stood in stark contrast to what much of Ansar Sharia’s leadership in Tunisia advocated until mid-2013, as it tried to avoid confronting the state and did not see Tunisia as a land of jihad; instead, it sought popular support through proselytisation and charitable action.

ISIS emphasised feelings of injustice shared by large spans of the population.

Building on a theme pioneered by Ansar Sharia, ISIS emphasised feelings of injustice shared by large spans of the population – particularly those from marginalised regions and poor urban peripheries that most often encounter state brutality, corruption and social exclusion.[fn]Also see Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Briefing N°50, Jihadist Violence in Tunisia: The Urgent Need for a National Strategy, 22 June 2016. 
Hide Footnote It frequently cited cases of police abuse – especially of Islamists and their families – as well as of the ill-treatment of Ansar Sharia members in prison. This, coupled with ISIS’ call for violence in Tunisia, helped split Ansar Sharia between more quietist and more violent factions, even if both shared many similar concerns. For a time, ISIS’ stance – and its decision not to target Muslim civilians, focusing instead on security services and foreigners – lent it at least superficial popularity as many Tunisians strived for the kind of tabula rasa for which it stood.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, residents of low-income neighbourhoods, Tunis, 2015-2016.Hide Footnote

While attacks by both ISIS and al-Qaeda-linked groups have taken place since the August 2013 crackdown on Ansar Sharia (some of whose members joined one or the other), ISIS has focused on spectacular operations targeting civilians and state symbols. The 18 March 2015 attack on the Bardo Museum complex in Tunis (22 killed), the 26 June 2015 attack by a lone gunman on a beach resort in Sousse (38 killed, all foreign tourists) and the 24 November 2015 suicide attack on a bus carrying presidential guard members in Tunis (twelve killed) destabilised the government, exposed the security forces’ weakness, harmed the economy and fed the perception that Tunisia was on the brink of collapse.[fn]While ISIS claimed all three attacks, the one targeting Bardo Museum initially was claimed by the Okba Ibn Nafaa Brigade, a jihadist group operating in the Mount Chambi area of western Tunisia that has expressed support for both ISIS and al-Qaeda. See Michael Ayari, “Tunisia’s Grand Compromise Faces its Biggest Test”, Crisis Group commentary, 19 March 2015.Hide Footnote

The November attack in particular made clear that the security services, destabilised and demoralised by the 2011 uprising and long associated with the former regime’s brutality, were not up to the task. It marked a turning point, prompting a strong response from the security services. Senior officials from the Ben Ali era were appointed to key positions and the government put in place far more draconian policing methods, including imposing a state of emergency. The degree of coordination among the various attacks – and whether they served a coherent strategy – remains unclear, even if hostility to the consensus between An-Nahda and its secular rival Nida Tounes was a recurrent message of ISIS in its propaganda.

The most spectacular operation was still to come, however. On 7 March 2016, ISIS fighters attempted to seize control of Ben Guerdane, a town on the border with Libya. The attack appeared to have been planned in Libya as a response to the U.S. air strike on an ISIS camp in Sabratha, at a distance of 170km in western Libya. ISIS’ goal seemed to be to replicate the strategy of territorialisation practiced in Mosul, Raqqa and Sirte and keep control of the town. It also sought to exploit local tensions between the town’s establishment, an extended tribe called Touazine that dominates the contraband networks exercising control over the local economy, and its poorer residents.[fn]“What happened in Ben Guerdane was akin to a civil war. The residents of Ben Guerdane who joined ISIS are not Touazines. These non-Touazines rose through the ranks of the smuggling networks in the 2000s, and especially after 2011. Most come from the foothills at the limit of Beni Gedeche province. It was the Touazines who showed the army where the terrorists were hiding”. Crisis Group interview, geographer specialising in southern Tunisia and Libya, Tunis, October 2016.Hide Footnote Over 60, mostly Tunisian jihadists – a mix of returnees from Libya and sympathetic locals – took control of major thoroughfares, attempting to get residents to join them and distributing weapons before storming the local police and national guard compounds.[fn]“They immediately started setting up checkpoints and would interrogate us – asking us for our profession, whether we knew how to use weapons, whether we would join them, asking taxi drivers if they leased their cars and if so promising them that under their rule there would be no usury or corruption”. Crisis Group interview, Ben Guerdane resident, Tunis, May 2016.Hide Footnote They failed after security forces sent reinforcements; 36 jihadists, eleven members of security forces and seven civilians were killed.

The assault on Ben Guerdane was a shock, but the fact that security forces quickly took control of the situation boosted their confidence.[fn]“The U.S. airstrike on Sabratha accelerated plans for the Ben Guerdane attack, but planning was already under way. It was well-prepared. They had support throughout the city. We think 300-500 sympathisers in Ben Guerdane supported them”. Crisis Group interview, European intelligence official, location withheld, March 2016.Hide Footnote Subsequent investigations into the attacks also contributed to dismantling other ISIS cells in Tunisia, contributing to making Ben Guerdane a turning point: although ISIS has claimed many small-scale attacks, mostly targeting security forces, there has been no major attack since then.[fn]Crisis Group interview, lawyer, Tunis, August 2016.Hide Footnote Still, that ISIS sought to exploit divides between the town’s establishment, an extended tribe called Touazine that dominates the contraband networks exercising control over the local economy, and its poorer residents, is telling of the group’s ability to exploit localised tensions.[fn]Crisis Group interview, geographer specialising in southern Tunisia and Libya, Tunis, October 2016.Hide Footnote

The strong security measures taken by the government in the aftermath of the 2015 attacks also raised longer-term questions that Tunisia will need to address as part of its democratic transition. In particular, they rekindled both polarisation between Islamists and anti-Islamists, especially regarding control of the religious space and debate about the kind of security sector reform that still must be implemented.[fn]See Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Briefing N°50, Jihadist Violence in Tunisia: The Urgent Need for a National Strategy, 22 June 2016. 
Hide Footnote

C. Algeria: AQIM’s Dissidents

Jihadists who pledged allegiance to ISIS and operate within Algeria were drawn chiefly from pre-existing groups previously affiliated with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). They are remnants of the 1990s “black decade” who for the most part survived in the mountainous parts of Kabylia and eastern Algeria.[fn]“ISIS in Algeria is 100 per cent composed of groups that previously existed in the country”. Crisis Group interview, regional counter-terrorism official, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote To date, only two such groups have declared their loyalty to ISIS and, overall, only a relatively small number of Algerians are ISIS members; while some have encouraged attacks in their home country from Syria,[fn]Abu Hafs al-Djazairi and Abu al-Bara al-Djazairi, two Algerian ISIS recruits, vowed to wage a “long war” in Algeria on their way to Andalusia. See “
سندكدك كل من يتطاول على الجزائر و أبناء الجزائر 2”, Facebook, 14 July 2015; Mohamed Berkani, “Daech déclare la guerre à l’Algérie et promet de reconquérir l’Andalousie”, Géopolis, 15 July 2015.Hide Footnote
very few individuals in Algeria itself – most probably less than 100 – [fn]Crisis Group interviews, Algerian officials, foreign diplomats, Algiers, September-October 2016.Hide Footnote have heeded the call to pledge allegiance to ISIS. All in all, security officials worry more about ISIS’ presence in their neighbours than at home.[fn]“The Algerian security services seem less worried about Algeria than about Libya and Tunisia. They say the armed groups in Algeria are under control – it’s the impact of Libya and Tunisia that worried them, because those are not under control”. Crisis Group interview, Djallil Lounnas, researcher at Montreal Centre for International Studies, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote

To an extent, this reflects steps Algeria took after a January 2013 wake-up call, when al-Murabitoun, an Algerian-led jihadist group led by former members of AQIM, attacked the In Amenas natural gas complex in Tiguentourine, near the Libyan border. In the wake of the attack, the country’s security approach was overhauled. This eventually led to a restructuring of the intelligence agency chiefly responsible for counter-terrorism.[fn]See Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Report N°164, Algeria and its neighbours, 12 October 2015.Hide Footnote

Since Tiguentourine, measures have been taken, especially with surveillance of borders. We can’t rule out a large-scale attack but there is an increasingly thorough surveillance mesh and cooperation with the local population. We are not in a situation where local populations are helping terrorists, unlike in neighbouring countries. There’s also an important concentration of troops, border guards, and aerial border surveillance with international cooperation. Algeria learned the lessons of the 1990s. We have built up our immune defences against radicalisation. All of the security services – police, gendarmes, intelligence – have improved their coordination, working together to identify places – mosques, prisons, etc. – and techniques of radicalisation. The prisons are also much better managed. The imams who go there are designated by the Minister of Religious Affairs and Endowments and the radical leaders are isolated so they can’t proselytise.[fn]Crisis Group interview, senior Algerian counter-terrorism official, Algiers, March 2017.Hide Footnote

Since then, Algeria’s security services have taken no chances. When, in September 2014, Jund al-Khalifa, a group operating in the Jurjura mountains, announced its allegiance to ISIS and claimed responsibility for kidnapping and killing Hervé Gourdel, a French tourist, the response was swift. The group’s leader, Abdelmalek Gouri, appeared principally motivated by a desire to emancipate himself from the AQIM hierarchy, echoing previous disputes among leaders of the al-Qaeda franchise that resulted in splinter movements in the last two decades.[fn]“Those in ISIS who are older are those who have been discredited within AQIM, or aspired to a position in AQIM but did not get the job”. Crisis Group interview, regional counter-terrorism official, Algiers, September 2016. The move from AQIM to ISIS may also suggest that the AQIM-affiliated groups were running out of steam. “AQIM has major problems of recruitment in Algeria – they’re not attracting people, not like they used to. They’re able to maintain roughly 200-300 men fighting but still they have problems – you kill 50-60 they can replace maybe 30-40”. Crisis Group interview, Djallil Lounnas, researcher, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote Gourdel’s murder provoked a fierce response from the security services; by January 2015, Gouri had been killed and by the end of the same year most of Jund al-Khilafa’s 50 members reportedly had been either killed or arrested.

Another group, Katiba al-Ghuraba, announced its formation in July 2015 in the eastern towns of Constantine and Skikda. Composed in part of a previously AQIM-aligned group, Katiba al-Ittissam, it has carried out relatively small-scale attacks in the region which in turn prompted extensive military responses. Neither ISIS affiliate poses a serious threat to the Algerian state, even if those from the east have the possibility of gaining influence over contraband trade with Tunisia or seek refuge there.[fn]See Salima Tlemçani, “Drogues, carburants et trafic d’armes à Bir El Ater”, El Watan, 11 May 2017.Hide Footnote They nonetheless were met by a zero-tolerance response from the authorities, which stood in contrast to their prior stance of leaving open the possibility of amnesty for groups that lay down their arms.[fn]“150 terrorists have been killed in the past six months. The orders were to kill, no prisoners. So if you want to surrender you still can, but the focus now is on force. Also there’s no real risk to the government in going after these fringe groups in the middle of nowhere with no popular support”. Crisis Group interview, counter-terrorism researcher, Algiers, September 2016.Hide Footnote

Generally speaking, Algeria has put into practice a three-part strategy: massive force deployment against militant groups; pervasive security presence (the ranks of the police, in particular, have expanded considerably over the last decade); and, notably through the Civil Concord, a policy of national reconciliation that provided an amnesty to Islamist insurgents and, in exchange for leaving politics, allowed them to engage in conservative social activism.[fn]This is not without controversy. “Algeria made the choice to have a social Islam rather than a political Islam, and we’ve allowed all sorts of aggressions against individual liberties. Freedom of religion, freedom of clothing – soon those of us who don’t wear the veil will be a minority. Those who came down from the maquis imposed their laws. These are codes that were imposed on society and mean that we are anchored in an Islam that doesn’t necessarily show itself – it’s rooted in the spirit of the young. They will grow up with a more and more hateful discourse”. Crisis Group interview, political analyst, Algiers, September 2016. Such sentiment is common among educated elites across the francophone Maghreb.Hide Footnote ISIS’ emergence led to the addition of a fourth dimension, a focus on cybersecurity and online jihadist recruitment.

Overall, the feeling among officials and many analysts is that this strategy – however imperfect and often-criticised for its eschewing of accountability for the killings and kidnappings committed by militants and security forces in the 1990s – has worked.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, officials, security analysts, September 2016-March 2017.Hide Footnote The small number of Algerian foreign fighters and low level of in-country ISIS activity comforts this view. That said, the high costs of maintaining such an imposing security posture – in particular the deployment of thousands of troops at the borders with Libya, Niger and Mali – could prove prohibitive, especially given falling oil prices. Another concern revolves around a potential battle to succeed President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, who has been seriously ill for many years. This in turn could provoke infighting within the security establishment, although many analysts believe that any turmoil will be temporary and the army will remain firmly in charge.[fn][12] Ibid.Hide Footnote

D. Morocco: Safe, for Now

Morocco is the only Maghreb country that, to date, has not experienced an ISIS attack – this, despite several reported attempts and ISIS’s successful recruitment efforts; likewise, it stands alone in not having any part of its territory serve as a maquis (isolated safe zone, often in mountainous areas) for jihadist groups.

Explanations vary. Morocco deployed a vast security web across the country. Morocco’s borders also are very well-guarded, especially in Western Sahara,[fn]“These may be the best-guarded borders in Africa, despite proximity to a very troubled Sahel region”. Crisis Group interview, French diplomat, Paris, March 2015.Hide Footnote and Rabat tightened its 2003 anti-terrorism law, adding provisions to sanction foreign fighters, including five-fifteen year prison terms and heavy fines. Plus, like Algeria, Morocco believes it has learned lessons from past confrontation with jihadist groups. Since the 2003 Casablanca bombings, it has improved its policing and intelligence and, more recently, begun to address its prison radicalisation problem.[fn]See Mohamed Salah Tamek, “Morocco’s Approach to Countering Violent Extremism”, Washington Institute for Near Policy, 16 May 2014.Hide Footnote Since 2014 – in response both to ISIS’ emergence and to Libya’s worsening situation – it has deployed joint army, gendarmerie and police patrols, called hadar (vigilance) at many sensitive locations.

This security-oriented, preventative approach, focused on professionalisation of the security services, culminated in March 2015 with the creation of a new government agency, the Central Bureau of Judicial Investigations (Bureau central d’investigation judiciaire, BCIJ), which prioritises counter-terrorism and transnational crimes. The BCIJ, which unlike other security agencies frequently communicates about its activities in local media (which dubs it the “the Moroccan FBI”), claims to have dismantled over 40 terrorist cells over 2015 and 2016; among those, most were small (three-nine members) and engaged chiefly in recruitment,[fn]See “Abdelhak Khiame: ‘Grâce au travail de nos équipes, plusieurs projets d’attentats ont pu être déjoués à travers le monde entier’”, Telquel, 24 December 2016. Some Moroccan officials and their international partners criticise this strategy of frequent communication about counter-terrorism efforts as both tending to exaggerate the danger posed and creating false confidence about the capacity to prevent attacks that – as seen in Europe – are very hard to predict or thwart. Crisis Group interviews, Moroccan and European security officials, Rabat, October 2016-June 2017.Hide Footnote although the government believes some were preparing attacks and had smuggled weapons from Libya.[fn]See “Terrorisme: Les armes saisies par le BCIJ ont transité via l’Algérie”, L’Economiste, 29 January 2017.Hide Footnote The bureau also contributed to the capture of several terrorism suspects in Europe, including the perpetrators of the November 2015 Paris bombings.[fn]See “Terrorisme: El Khayam, directeur du BCIJ, dit tout sur la coopération avec la France”, le360.ma, 20 January 2016. Among other claims, the BCIJ said its intelligence led to the location of the hideout used by Paris attack ringleader Abdelhamid Abaaoud and prevented other attacks in France in Belgium.Hide Footnote

Amid this sense of confidence, there is at least one reason for concern: several of the dismantled ISIS cells reportedly were in the southern region of Agadir, an area not previously known for its militancy. This suggests that ISIS is spreading to areas where other jihadist groups have not.

IV. Lessons from the Past; Prospects for the Future

Unpacking the causes of ISIS’ relative strength in various localities is an inexact science at best. It is a perilous one, too: because correlation can be mistaken for causation and ISIS’ local opportunism mistaken for a global strategy; and because ISIS decision-making, which may play an important part in determining its focus on a certain locale, is opaque. More broadly, as Crisis Group wrote in its report, Exploiting Disorder:

The roots of [ISIS’] expansion defy generic description. Patterns of radicalisation vary from country to country, village to village, individual to individual. Autocrats, political exclusion, flawed Western interventions, failing governance, closing avenues for peaceful political expression, the distrust of the state in neglected peripheries, traditional elites’ declining authority and the lack of opportunity for growing youth populations have all played their part …. Proselytising of intolerant strands of Islam has, in places, helped prepare the ground. The sectarian currents coursing through much of the Muslim world both are aggravated by IS[IS]  and give it succour.[fn]Crisis Group, Exploiting Disorder, op. cit., p. ii.Hide Footnote

Nonetheless, there are patterns and practices from which governments can learn, and in this regard ISIS’ performance in the Maghreb offers a microcosm of trends observed elsewhere – the close relationship between conflict and instability on the one hand, and ISIS’ success on the other; the organisation’s appeal to a youthful, anti-establishment constituency (albeit only a small minority of that constituency) that feels marginalised, neglected and suppressed by regimes; its ability to take advantage of both pre-existing non-state networks (whether jihadist, criminal or otherwise) and of failures of more pragmatic, politically-oriented Islamist strands; and its resilience and adaptability to differing and shifting circumstances.

Equally apparent from the Maghrebi experience are the strengths but also limitations of state responses focused on security and on regimenting the religious sphere, especially because their reaction to recurrent political contestation – about the perception of pervasive corruption, socio-economic grievances or sentiments of ethnic or cultural marginalisation – often tend to the repressive and because of the lack of effective mediation between average citizens and political elites. Finally, while the Maghreb (with the exception of Libya) for the most part has been spared some of the intense regional jockeying for power and geopolitical rivalries, it has witnessed what can be accomplished with regional cooperation – and what is missing without it.

A. Conflict and Chaos as Catalysts for ISIS

ISIS’ territorial inroads in the Maghreb were, unsurprisingly, most pronounced in Libya – the one state that experienced state collapse. As Crisis Group wrote:

Especially in the Middle East, jihadists’ expansion is more a product of instability than its primary driver; is due more to radicalisation during crises than beforehand; and owes more to fighting between their enemies than to their own strengths. Rarely can such a movement gather force or seize territory outside a war zone or collapsed state.[fn]Crisis Group, Exploiting Disorder, op. cit., p. ii.Hide Footnote

That has been the principal causal factor for ISIS’ rise in the Maghreb, and to this day presents the most potent threat to this region. Simply put, there can be no sophisticated, coherent or unified Libyan response to ISIS as long as the country remains as fragmented as it is today, and the country is likely to remain fragmented as long as external actors – both direct neighbours and countries farther afield – pull in different directions.[fn]See Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Report N°170, The Libyan Political Agreement: Time for a Reset, 4 November 2016.Hide Footnote Paradoxically, in this sense, if the international community wants to fight terrorism it must expand its focus beyond counter-terrorism. With the appointment of a new UN Special Envoy, Ghassan Salamé, the time for a robust rethink is now.[fn]See Crisis Group media release, “Crisis Group Welcomes Ghassan Salamé’s UN Role in Libya”, 23 June 2017.Hide Footnote

First, as Crisis Group has argued elsewhere, the international community must pay greater attention to some of the drivers of Libya’s fragmentation. This will entail renewing efforts toward a more inclusive peace process, ameliorating the state of its economy (notably by ensuring that the strongest remaining economic institutions – the National Oil Corporation and the Central Bank of Libya – are protected from the rival governments’ attempts to control them); and encouraging dialogue among key military actors and rival non-jihadist militias, ensuring they are involved in negotiating military arrangements in a revised Libyan Political Agreement.

Second, it should make sure that victory against ISIS in Sirte is sustained, and does not fall victim to Libya’s dysfunctionalities. That will require adequate funding for stabilisation and reconstruction plans as well as consultation with local residents. Too, if the goal is to ensure that ISIS fighters who left Sirte not regroup elsewhere or join the ranks of other militias, limited types of military intervention, such as airstrikes, while probably necessary, will not suffice. Instead, in this fragmented, militia-dominated landscape, the goal ought to be to try to integrate groups at risk of falling prey to the strategy of infiltration successfully used by ISIS operatives in 2014-2015 into political processes and conflict resolution initiatives, rather than conflate them with jihadists.[fn]This is particularly relevant for militias that stand to lose from the current situation and have some ideological affinity with radical Islamism, even if they are not jihadist.Hide Footnote

The broad expanse covering eastern Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Libya as well as northern Chad and eastern Sudan is experiencing weak or even non-existent state governance. That does not mean it is ungoverned; in many instances, non-state actors fill the vacuum.[fn]See Crisis Group Africa Report N°227, The Central Sahel: A Perfect Sandstorm, 25 June 2015.Hide Footnote ISIS and other jihadist groups are extremely mobile, demonstrating a capacity to “flex across the battlespace” and deploying a form of warfare based chiefly on all-terrain vehicles and light weaponry. [fn]Crisis Group interview, senior U.S. military official, Washington, June 2016.Hide Footnote Monitoring and preventing the movement of ISIS fighters from and to Libya therefore should be a priority. If neighbouring states that have the means to do this are already doing so – particularly Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia – and others, like Niger and Mali, benefit from international support where they lack the means, Chad and Sudan are particularly exposed, especially since regions of these states (the north for Chad and Darfur for Sudan) have contributed fighters and mercenaries to a range of belligerents in the Libyan conflict.[fn]See Jérôme Tubiana and Claudio Gramizzi, “Tubu Trouble: State and Statelessness in the Chad– Sudan–Libya Triangle”, Small Arms Survey, June 2017.Hide Footnote

B. Security Plus

Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia all claim to be aiming for a holistic counter-jihadist approach. This, they define as focusing on inclusion, combating socio-economic inequalities, improving prison conditions, carrying out de-radicalisation campaigns, and so on.[fn]In the case of Tunisia, see Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Briefing N°50, Jihadist Violence in Tunisia: The Urgent Need for a National Strategy, 22 June 2016.Hide Footnote But reality differs. In practice, their focus chiefly is on two aspects: investing in security and controlling the religious sphere.

Crisis Group has raised questions about the “Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)” agenda and the risk posed by of presenting a grab-bag of root causes to explain an almost impossibly vague and broad phenomenon. One should be careful about drawing a straight line between factors such as poverty or underdevelopment and jihadist recruitment; re-hatting as CVE activities like education or job creation in marginalised areas risks casting the net too wide or stigmatising communities as potential extremists.[fn]See Crisis Group, Exploiting Disorder, op. cit., Section IV.D, p.46-49.Hide Footnote

That said, there is little question that particularly vulnerable, marginalised youth groups constitute a recruitment pool for ISIS, in the Maghreb as elsewhere, and their anti-establishment sentiment lends credence to jihadist criticism of corrupt local regimes.  The geographic patterns of ISIS’s expansion, notably in Tunisia and Morocco, confirm this and serve as a warning regarding present and future vulnerabilities of Maghrebi states as well as the need to tackle some of the more obvious causes of discontent. Corruption ranks among the highest, insofar as it solidifies the perception that socio-economic conditions result from structural injustice.[fn]On the link between corruption and regional socio-economic exclusion in Tunisia, see Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Report N°177, Blocked Transition: Corruption and Regionalism in Tunisia, 10 May 2017. 
Hide Footnote

C. State Control of Religious Discourse?

Most regional states have advocated, and in some cases implemented, policies that seek to pit a so-called authentic, “moderate” Islam with the vision presented by ISIS and other jihadists. Described as “reform of the religious sphere” in Morocco or “occupation of religious space” in Algeria, these constitute pillars of counter-radicalisation policies, the soft counter-point to hard security policies.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, politicians and security officials, Algiers, Rabat and Tunis, September 2016-March 2017. An Algerian imam said: “We have to take care of the mosques because that’s where it all starts; and we’re calling on the Algerian authorities to coordinate among the school, the mosque, and the family, because each school has an association of students’ families. It’s in this triptych we must work: family, school, mosque. It is necessary to occupy the discursive space”. Crisis Group interview, Algerian imam involved in counter-radicalisation strategy, Algiers, April 2016.Hide Footnote

Promotion of mainstream religious discourse offers the state several important benefits. It focuses attention on official religious spaces (mosques and madrasas); enables greater oversight over them; and minimises the risk of their being used as recruitment centres. It also allows regimes to promote a non-threatening discourse and to cultivate as well as co-opt religious scholars who accept its legitimacy. In this vein, Morocco promotes a reformist religious approach that seeks to “balance modernity and tradition”,[fn]This expression is commonly used in official statements and King Mohammed VI’s speeches. See for instance “Discours royal relatif à la restructuration du champ religieux au Maroc”, 30 April 2004, available on the website of the ministry of religious endowments and religious affairs, www.habous.gov.ma.Hide Footnote implement progressive reforms where possible, all the while ensuring hegemony of a pro-monarchy discourse in which the king’s role of “commander of the faithful” is widely accepted by ordinary citizens and various strands of Islamists, including former jihadists. Algeria likewise sought to nurture pro-regime sentiment among Sufi brotherhoods and pointed to Sufism, a mystical Islamic tradition, as an antidote to extremism.

Co-optation of religious discourse risks discrediting mainstream religious leadership.

But this approach presents drawbacks. Notably, they do nothing to address the yearning for a more militant, anti-establishment message; indeed, rather than legitimising the state, co-optation of religious discourse risks discrediting mainstream religious leadership. This is the case, for example, when Sufis are used by political figures to vouch for reputation or when they become an extension of regime clientelist networks.[fn]As a prominent Algerian religious figure put it, commenting on the well-publicised tour of Sufi shrines by of a former senior official who had been charged with corruption, “it furnishes material to the Wahhabis and the terrorists to say, look, everything is fake”. Crisis Group interview, Algerian imam involved in counter-radicalisation strategy, Algiers, April 2016.Hide Footnote As an Algerian imam put it, for this effort to succeed, “there needs to be social justice, the people need to have faith in their government. Religious discourse cannot solve the problem by itself”.[fn]Ibid. A Moroccan writer advocated a focus on education rather than religious discourse.Hide Footnote

This point often is ignored by governments at their peril. The appeal of groups such as ISIS is precisely that they are protest movements, offering the type of anti-government and anti-establishment discourse that appeals, particularly to the young. A propped-up, official “moderate Islam” inevitably will be weighed down by the perceived illegitimacy of the governments doing the propping up. Morocco offers a recent case in point: the ministry of religious endowments’ decision to have a local imam condemn a protest movement in al-Hoceima, in northern Morocco, turned a Friday sermon into a confrontation between the imam and a protest leader. It also prompted further unrest amid unconvincing accusations by the pro-government press that the protest movement was emulating ISIS.[fn]See “Nasser Zefzafi attaque sur le terrain des valeurs religieuses”, Telquel, 26 May 2017; Tarik Qattab, “Quand Zefzafi se comporte comme Al Baghdadi en plein prêche du vendredi”, le360.ma, 26 May 2017.Hide Footnote

Precisely given the demand for a radical, anti-establishment discourse, attempts to imposing a state-sanctioned religious one can backfire. A better response to the appeal of violent, jihadist groups is to allow and protect a more pluralistic, inclusive religious space. This is especially so given that jihadists have proven adept at deploying a language of religious contestation and that ISIS in particular has prioritised a recruitment strategy premised on a doctrine of personal empowerment or advancement more than on theological grounds.[fn]“ISIS recruits through the internet by using Tunisians who are there [in ISIS-controlled places]. They do propaganda for the group, tell their neighbours, their families, ‘it’s fantastic over here, I have a job, a wife, I can pray in peace, they let women veil, etc’. But the reality is that when they recruit someone, they get paid, so they lie and make it sound better than it is”. Crisis Group interview, Tunisian lawyer specialising in jihadist cases, Tunis, 5 December 2016.Hide Footnote

D. Regional Collaboration

Regional coordination is essential to the fight against ISIS in two principal respects: it enables vital security and intelligence cooperation, and it reduces the risk of various countries fuelling proxy wars that, in turn, create an enabling environment for jihadist movements.

As to the first point, and given the transnational nature of the threat, security cooperation is critical both among Maghrebi security agencies and between them and the rest of the world. Although Libya has been an outlier in this respect, other Maghrebi countries have had relative successes in terms of international support. Tunisia has received substantial Western aid to bolster its security services and its military; Moroccan intelligence played an important role in preventing and apprehending perpetrators of attacks in Europe, including the November 2015 Paris bombings; and Algeria works closely with both Western and African intelligence agencies to monitor security in the Sahel.[fn]See Crisis Group Middle East and North Africa Report N°164, Algeria and its Neighbours, 12 October 2015.
Hide Footnote
That said, intra-regional cooperation has proved more problematic.

Collaboration has been most successful between Algeria and Tunisia, especially in the mountainous border areas. Both nations face a common threat as the mostly AQIM-linked groups operating in western Tunisia often have Algerian leadership and strong links with groups originating in eastern Algeria. Tunisia needs Algeria’s help, while Algeria cannot afford to see another weakened state on its borders. As a result, Algeria has provided training, resources and intelligence to the Tunisian army and both countries conducted joint cross-border operations.[fn]Crisis Group interview, senior Algerian counter-terrorism official, Algiers, March 2017.Hide Footnote

Relations between Algeria and Morocco are more strained due to longstanding tensions related to the Western Sahara and unresolved border issues. The two countries share information but security cooperation remains patchy. The security relationship often is framed in a hostile manner: Algeria arrests and expels Moroccans it claims illegally crossed the border to rejoin ISIS in Libya; Morocco decries lack of cooperation from its eastern neighbour.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Algerian officials, Algiers, 2014-2015; Moroccan officials, Rabat, September-November 2016. See also “Abdelhak Khiame, patron du BCIJ, appelle l’Algérie à la cooperation”, ledesk.ma, 17 April 2017.Hide Footnote The result, as an Algerian counter-terrorism official put it, is a minimalist form of collaboration.[fn]“With Morocco, there is nothing formal but we have a gentleman’s agreement: don’t do anything that could harm the security or ability to fight terrorism of the other. It’s a negative cooperation – I do nothing against you, you do nothing against me”. Crisis Group interview, senior Algerian counter-terrorism official, Algiers, March 2017.Hide Footnote

On all scores, the Libyan case is akin to a counter-model, demonstrating how costly is the absence of coherent regional or international cooperation. To begin, Libya’s neighbours lack a clear security or counter-terrorism counterpart. The Tripoli-based, UN-recognised government has an intelligence agency and nominal control over state security services but in practice these are in the hands of a myriad of armed factions. For example, Misratans dominate the counter-terrorism field, and they took the lead in uprooting ISIS from Sirte, but their reach rarely extends beyond their areas of operation. As a result, neighbours tend to deal with armed groups that are geographically closest to them: Algeria and Tunisia with an assortment of western Libyan militias, Egypt with Haftar-aligned eastern tribes and militias, etc. Compounding the challenge is the groups’ implicit threat to halt cooperation should the neighbouring country act against the lucrative smuggling in which they engage – whether related to refined fuel, heavily subsidised in Libya, or consumer goods.[fn]This is particularly the case for Tunisia, a major destination of smuggled Libyan gasoline. Crisis Group interview, senior Tunisian ministry of interior official, Tunis, September 2016.Hide Footnote

The issue goes beyond the prevailing chaos and absence of state control over large parts of Libyan territory. The ongoing conflict and the country’s fragmentation has politicised security policy, leading to competing and at times conflicting information and advice. Each of Libya’s governments and quasi-independent, geographically-centred military coalitions has its own security agency, and each has its own list of purported terrorists. A Tunisian security researcher notes:

There are long lists of Tunisian jihadists that Tunisia has been given by both sides in Libya – both the Tripoli government and the pro-Haftar government. They are giving us different information: each side has provided us the names of genuinely dangerous people mixed in with the names of their enemies. The Tunisian authorities have started to realise that these lists are erroneous and end up no longer paying any attention to them.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Tunisian security researcher, Tunis, August 2016. This was confirmed by a senior Tunisian security official. Crisis Group interview, senior Tunisian ministry of interior official, Tunis, September 2016.Hide Footnote

Not only are its neighbours and the broader international community unable to work efficiently with Libya, but they also are unable to work in concert with one another. Regional rivalries in particular mean that different countries back competing factions, potentially further encumbering the fight against ISIS or other jihadists. This principally has revolved around competition between, on the one hand, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, which back Haftar and his Libyan National Army, and, on the other, Qatar and Turkey – competition that might well escalate in light of the crisis that has driven Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Doha even further apart.[fn]See Joost Hiltermann, “Qatar punched above its weight. Now it’s paying the price”, New York Times, 18 June 2017; Robert Malley and Jon Finer, “Fixing Trump’s blunders on Qatar”, Washington Post, 9 June 2017.Hide Footnote At a minimum, international actors should push for greater respect for the arms embargo put in place by the UN Security Council, and which so far has been honoured in the breach.[fn]The UN Panel of Experts on Libya’s June 2017 report notes that “materiel entering Libya has been of an increasingly sophisticated nature” and particularly drew attention to the acquisition of attack helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft by the Libyan National Army, believed to have been provided by the United Arab Emirates. See “Letter dated 1 June 2017 from the Panel of Experts on Libya established pursuant to resolution 1973 (2011) addressed to the President of the Security Council”, United Nations Security Council, 1 June 2017, pp. 22-36.Hide Footnote

E. Thinking of the Post-ISIS Moment in the Maghreb

The most significant threat presented by ISIS’ Maghrebi foreign fighters is not that, defeated in places where the group once held territory, they might return to their home countries. It is that they will move to other ripe theatres – most likely, conflict zones and areas where state governance is weak. Where stringent security procedures are in place (such as Algeria and Morocco, but also increasingly Tunisia) ISIS returnees have come back only in small numbers and almost always directly to prison.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Maghrebi and European intelligence officials, September 2016-March 2017.Hide Footnote In contrast, harder-line jihadists are more likely to seek new areas in which to expand. For the estimated few hundred foreign fighters driven out of Sirte, for instance, finding a new base in Libya itself or in weak states further south may prove more enticing than heading back to police states where, in many cases, they already figure on wanted lists.

While ISIS is very much on its heels, notably in Libya, its surviving fighters – many of them opportunists recruited from other groups; in some cases mercenaries – are battle-trained and positioned to continue fighting in a context that offers ample opportunity and scant reintegration prospects. Moreover, even as ISIS fades, al-Qaeda and other loosely-connected groups appear once more on the rise in the region and could be poised to recuperate ISIS veterans.[fn]See Dominique Thomas, “État islamique vs. al-Qaïda: autopsie d’une lutte fratricide”, Politique Étrangère 1:2016.Hide Footnote A European intelligence official said:

ISIS in Libya was a failure, it never really put roots down and became a Libyan movement. ISIS was something imported from abroad, something artificial. So we are seeing an evolution in ISIS – they have methods of action that may influence others, like spectacular attacks, but the territorialisation model of ISIS will no longer work. And in the meantime al-Qaeda has become more like ISIS, and at the very moment that ISIS is moving away from territorialisation we might see al-Qaeda moving toward it. There are already signs of it in Syria.[fn]Crisis Group interview, senior European intelligence official, location withheld, May 2017.Hide Footnote

In other words, the jihadist landscape in the Maghreb will evolve, though its direction and ultimate form – and whether jihadists can again seize territory or recruit large numbers – remain uncertain. An observer of jihadist groups in North Africa said, “tactical disagreements and different loyalties keep these two groups apart, but there is fluidity between them and individuals move back and forth”.[fn]See Geoff Porter, “Terrorism in North Africa: An Examination of the Threat”, Testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism & Intelligence, 29 March 2017.Hide Footnote Whether this amounts to a fifth wave of transnational jihadism or the remnants of a largely exhausted fourth wave most likely will depend on the context in which this evolution takes place –­ most of all, the existence of conflict and polarisation in the region.

V. Conclusion

Maghrebi states have had considerable success combating ISIS and reversing its advances through military and security means. The flow of fighters to the group has slowed down dramatically in recent years and its ability to carry out operations has been curtailed. ISIS’ military reversals in the Levant and in Libya have also dampened the aura of invincibility that was an essential part of its appeal in 2014-2015. Yet, this has been essentially a security-driven approach. This is understandable: ISIS’ success in Libya illustrates its ability to exploit a security vacuum and so that vacuum must be filled, one way or another. But in Libya as elsewhere, ISIS’ appeal likely has other causes, among them polarised polities and a constituency of economically and socially marginalised youth that view their fate as directly linked to the state’s corruption and injustice.

Whether in Casablanca, Tunis or Tripoli, a small but nonetheless significant number was attracted to ISIS in part because some perceived it as an empowering, anti-establishment revolutionary group.

Whether in Casablanca, Tunis or Tripoli, a small but nonetheless significant number was attracted to ISIS in part because some perceived it as an empowering, anti-establishment revolutionary group. Addressing this demand for a more radical response to the status quo, and pushing it toward non-violent channels will require more than security crackdowns, regional and extra-regional intelligence cooperation or regulation of religious discourse (which could well prove counterproductive). Among the region’s youth, many find themselves economically, politically and socially marginalised in a range of ways, and stuck between the ossified status quos and uncertain violent options. Depending on circumstances, some might be drawn to jihadist groups. The challenge is to channel this energy away from violent options. This in turn will require more than just after-the-fact security measures, but also proactive government steps to better address those grievances and to more inclusively engage those who hold them.

Rabat/Algiers/Tripoli/Tunis/Brussels, 24 July 2017

Kobani’s central market destroyed by mortars from the Islamic State, December 2014. MAGNUM/Lorenzo Meloni

Exploiting Disorder: al-Qaeda and the Islamic State

The Islamic State, al-Qaeda-linked groups, Boko Haram and other extremist movements are protagonists in today’s deadliest crises, complicating efforts to end them. They have exploited wars, state collapse and geopolitical upheaval in the Middle East, gained new footholds in Africa and pose an evolving threat elsewhere. Reversing their gains requires avoiding the mistakes that enabled their rise.

  • Share
  • Save
  • Print
  • Download PDF Full Report

Executive Summary

The Islamic State (IS), al-Qaeda-linked groups, Boko Haram and other extremist movements are protagonists in today’s deadliest crises, complicating efforts to end them. They have exploited wars, state collapse and geopolitical upheaval in the Middle East, gained new footholds in Africa and pose an evolving threat elsewhere. Reversing their gains requires avoiding the mistakes that enabled their rise. This means distinguishing between groups with different goals; using force more judiciously; ousting militants only with a viable plan for what comes next; and looking to open lines of communication, even with hardliners. Vital, too, is to de-escalate the crises they feed off and prevent others erupting, by nudging leaders toward dialogue, inclusion and reform and reacting sensibly to terrorist attacks. Most important is that action against “violent extremism” not distract from or deepen graver threats, notably escalating major- and regional-power rivalries.

The reach of “jihadists” (a term Crisis Group uses reluctantly but that groups this report covers self-identify with; a fuller explanation for its use is on page 2) has expanded dramatically over the past few years. Some movements are now powerful insurgent forces, controlling territory, supplanting the state and ruling with a calibrated mix of coercion and co-option. Little suggests they can be defeated by military means alone. Yet, they espouse, to varying degrees, goals incompatible with the nation-state system, rejected by most people in areas affected and hard to accommodate in negotiated settlements. Most appear resilient, able to adapt to shifting dynamics. The geography of crisis today means similar groups will blight many of tomorrow’s wars.

IS has reshaped the jihadist landscape: its strategy bloodier than that of al-Qaeda, from which it split in 2013; its declared caliphate across much of Iraq and Syria and grip on a Libyan coastal strip; thousands of foreigners and dozens of movements enlisted; its attacks in the Muslim world and the West. Fighting on multiple fronts – against Iran’s allies, Sunni Arab regimes and the West – it has woven together sectarian, revolutionary and anti-imperialist threads of jihadist thought. Its leadership is mostly Iraqi but the movement is protean: millenarian and local insurgent; to some a source of protection, to others of social mobility and yet others of purpose; with strands aiming to consolidate the caliphate, take Baghdad or even Mecca, or lure the West into an apocalyptic battle. Primarily, though, its rise reflects recent Iraqi and Syrian history: Sunni exclusion and anomie after the disastrous U.S invasion; harsh treatment under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki; and the brutality of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its allies. Any response must factor in IS’s many faces. But mostly it needs to address Sunni suffering in the Levant and the dangerous sense of victimisation that has helped spawn across the Sunni Arab world.

Little suggests these groups can be defeated by military means alone, yet they espouse goals hard to accommodate in negotiated settlements.

In part obscured by IS’s rise, al-Qaeda has evolved. Its affiliates in the Maghreb, Somalia, Syria and Yemen remain potent, some stronger than ever. Some have grafted themselves onto local insurrections, displaying a degree of pragmatism, caution about killing Muslims and sensitivity to local norms. Around the Lake Chad Basin, Boko Haram, the latest in a string of revivalist movements rooted in the marginalised political economy and structural violence of northern Nigeria, has morphed from isolated sect to regional menace, though formally joining IS has changed little about it. Movements of different stripes – the largely nationalist Afghan Taliban, resurgent as foreign troops draw down from Afghanistan, and Pakistani groups including sectarian movements, tribal militants fighting the central state and Kashmir- or Afghanistan-focused elements aligned to its military establishment – comprise an evolving South Asian jihadist scene.

The roots of this expansion defy generic description. Patterns of radicalisation vary from country to country, village to village, individual to individual. Autocrats, political exclusion, flawed Western interventions, failing governance, closing avenues for peaceful political expression, the distrust of the state in neglected peripheries, traditional elites’ declining authority and the lack of opportunity for growing youth populations have all played their part. So, too, has the dwindling appeal of other ideologies, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood’s peaceful political Islam – jihadists’ main ideological competitor – diminished by President Muhammed Morsi’s ouster and the subsequent crackdown in Egypt. Proselytising of intolerant strands of Islam has, in places, helped prepare the ground. The sectarian currents coursing through much of the Muslim world both are aggravated by IS and give it succour.

But if roots are complex, the catalyst is clear enough. The descent of most of the 2011 Arab revolutions into chaos has opened enormous opportunity for extremists. Movements have gathered force as crises have festered and evolved, as money, weapons and fighters flow in, as violence escalates. Mounting enmity between states means regional powers worry less about extremists than about traditional rivals, leverage the fight against IS against other enemies or quietly indulge jihadists as proxies. Especially in the Middle East, jihadists’ expansion is more a product of instability than its primary driver; is due more to radicalisation during crises than beforehand; and owes more to fighting between their enemies than to their own strengths. Rarely can such a movement gather force or seize territory outside a war zone or collapsed state.

Jihadists’ expansion is more a product of instability than its primary driver, is due more to radicalisation during crises than beforehand, and owes more to fighting between their enemies than to their strengths.

Geopolitics hinders a coherent response. The starting point should be to dial back the Saudi-Iranian rivalry that drives Sunni and Shia extremism, deepens crises across the region and is among the gravest threats to international peace and security today. Easing other tensions – between Turkey and Kurdish militants, for example, Turkey and Russia, conservative Arab regimes and the Muslim Brotherhood, Pakistan and India, even Russia and the West – is also essential. In Libya, Syria and Yemen, tackling jihadists requires forging new orders attractive enough to deplete their ranks and unite other forces. Of course, none of this is easy. But redoubling efforts to narrow other fault lines would be wiser than papering them over in an illusion of consensus against “violent extremism”.

Vital, too, is to learn from mistakes since the 9/11 (2001) attacks. Each movement, notwithstanding the links between and transnational ties of some, is distinct and locally rooted; each requires a response tailored to context. They can, however, pose similar dilemmas and provoke similar blunders. Major and regional powers and governments in areas affected should:

  • Disaggregate not conflate: Making enemies of non-violent Islamists, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, prepared to accept political and religious pluralism and engage in politics is self-defeating. Also important is to distinguish movements seeking a place within the international order from those wanting to upend it. Even IS, its local branches and al-Qaeda affiliates, despite belonging to the latter category, are not monolithic. They have dedicated cores with transnational goals, but rank-and-files with diverse, mostly local motives whose loyalty can shift, and perhaps be shifted, with changing conditions. Governments should disaggregate even radical movements with an eye to ending violence, not lump others in with them looking for a fight.
     
  • Contain if no better option exists: Foreign powers should always have a viable plan for what comes next if they undertake to oust militants; the same applies to governments in their hinterlands. Today’s strategy in Iraq – razing towns to defeat IS in the hope Sunni leaders in Baghdad can regain lost legitimacy through reconstruction – is unlikely either to meet Sunnis’ grievances or create conditions in which they can forge a new political identity. In Libya a heavy bombardment or deployment of Western troops against IS without a wider political settlement would be a mistake, likely to deepen the chaos. In both cases, slowing military operations also carries grave risks but, without a workable alternative, is the safer option – for those contemplating going in and those in areas affected alike.
     
  • Use force more judiciously: Although force usually must be part of the response, governments have been too quick to go to war. Movements with roots in communities, tapping genuine grievances and sometimes with foreign backing are hard to extirpate, however unappealing their ideology. Wars in Somalia and Afghanistan show the shortfalls of defining enemies as terrorists or violent extremists and of combining efforts to build centralised state institutions with military action against them absent a wider political strategy that includes reconciliation. Nor can Russia’s scorched-earth approach in Chechnya – even leaving aside the human cost – be replicated in areas affected today, given porous borders, collapsed states and proxy warfare.
     
  • Respect rules: Too often military action against extremists helps them recruit or leaves communities caught between their harsh rule and indiscriminate operations against them. Jihadists’ ability to offer protection against predation by regimes, other militias or foreign powers is among their greatest assets, usually more central to their success than ideology. While often guilty of atrocities, they fight in conflicts in which all sides violate international humanitarian law. Recovering the rulebook must be a priority.
     
  • Curb targeted killings: Drone strikes can, in places, hinder groups’ operations and ability to hit Western interests and their leaders’ movements. But they feed resentment against local governments and the West. Movements weather the deaths of leaders, and the replacements that emerge are often harder-line. Foreseeing the impact of killings is hard in a reasonably stable order; doing so amid urban warfare and jihadist infighting – with al-Qaeda and others confronting IS – is impossible. Even leaving aside questions of secrecy, legality and accountability, targeted killings will not end the wars jihadists fight in or decisively weaken most movements.
     
  • Open lines of communication: Notwithstanding the difficulties, governments should be more willing to talk, even with radicals. Opportunities to engage in ways that might have de-escalated violence – with some Taliban and al-Shabaab leaders, Boko Haram and Ansar al-Sharia in Libya, for example – have been lost. The decision whether a group is irreconcilable rests with its leaders not governments. Although policy-makers can entertain no illusions about the nature of the IS and al-Qaeda top commands, opportunities to open unofficial, discreet lines of communication, through community leaders, non-state mediators or others, are usually worth pursuing, particularly on issues of humanitarian concern, where there may be shared interest.
     
  • Narrow the “countering violent extremism” (CVE) agenda: As a corrective to post-9/11 securitised policies, the CVE agenda, pioneered mostly by development actors, is valuable; so, too, are recognising the underlying conditions that can, in places, enable extremists’ recruitment and shifting funds from military spending to development aid. But re-hatting as CVE activities to address “root causes”, particularly those related to states’ basic obligations to citizens – like education, employment or services to marginalised communities – may prove short-sighted. Casting “violent extremism”, a term often ill-defined and open to misuse, as a main threat to stability risks downplaying other sources of fragility, delegitimising political grievances and stigmatising communities as potential extremists. Governments and donors must think carefully what to label CVE, further research paths of radicalisation and consult widely across the spectrum of those most affected.
     
  • Invest in conflict prevention: IS’s and al-Qaeda’s recent expansion injects new urgency into prevention, both during crises, to halt their radicalisation, and upstream. Any further breakdown in the belt running from West Africa to South Asia is likely to attract an extremist element – whether these movements provoke crises themselves or, more likely, profit from their escalation. Although generic prescriptions are of limited value, nudging leaders toward more inclusive and representative politics, addressing communities’ grievances and measured responses to terrorist attacks usually make sense. Overall, in other words, preventing crises will do more to contain violent extremists than countering violent extremism will do to prevent crises.

The past quarter-century has seen waves of jihadist violence: a first in the early 1990s, when volunteers from the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan joined insurrections elsewhere; a second pioneered by al-Qaeda culminating in the 9/11 attacks; and a third sparked by the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Today’s fourth wave is the most perilous yet. Partly this is thanks to IS’s territorial control and ideological innovation – its tapping of both local Sunni and wider anti-establishment discontent. Mostly, though, it is dangerous because of the currents propelling it, particularly the Middle East’s upheaval and fraying state-society relations there and elsewhere. World leaders’ concern is well-founded: IS’s attacks kill their citizens and threaten their societies’ cohesion. They face enormous pressure to act. But they must do so prudently. Missteps – whether careless military action abroad; crackdowns at home; subordinating aid to counter-radicalisation; casting the net too wide; or ignoring severer threats in a rush to fight “violent extremism” – risk aggravating those deeper currents and again playing into jihadists’ hands.

Brussels, 14 March 2016

Richard Atwood, Crisis Group’s Director of Multilateral Affairs, joins NPR’s Robert Siegel to discuss the Special Report ‘Exploiting Disorder’. They consider some of the report’s contents including the difficulty of defeating extremist groups by military NPR

I. Introduction

In early 2011, revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen heralded a new era of Arab politics. Protesters, often with women in the lead, took to the streets demanding greater dignity, opportunity and political pluralism. Among the main winners as authoritarians fell were Islamist parties prepared to participate peacefully in democratic politics.

Osama bin Laden’s ideology and tactics – a violent jihad targeting mainly Western powers – appeared increasingly out of step.[fn] See "note on terminology" for an explanation of terminology, particularly the use of “jihad” and “jihadist”.Hide Footnote  Drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas had by then decimated the al-Qaeda (AQ) core, and in May that year he was killed in Abbottabad. His most brutal franchise, best known as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), looked beaten.[fn]Al-Qaeda’s local branch in Iraq was Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (Organisation of Jihad’s Base in Mesopotamia), better known as AQI or al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia (see Section III.A).Hide Footnote  Except for al-Shabaab in Somalia, jihadists appeared peripheral to African crises.[fn]

Note on terminology.[fn]The root of the word “jihad” in Arabic refers to striving in the service of God. Many Muslims find its use in the context of political violence imprecise and offensive. It reduces a complex religious concept, which over centuries has taken many, often peaceful forms, to war-making. In the view of the vast majority of Muslims, today’s “jihadists” pervert Islam’s tenets. It is hard, however, to escape the term.
First, the groups this report addresses mostly self-identify as “jihadist”; Crisis Group normally lets actors speak for and label themselves. Secondly, while jihad has long been an element of virtually all schools of Islam, a nascent “jihadist” ideology has emerged that is more than a reflection of this history. Moving beyond the Islamist thought and practice that gave rise to modern jihad in recent decades, ideologues borrow from other traditions and at times show frustration with Salafi doctrinal rigidity that could constrain fighting tactics. Though big differences exist between “jihadist” groups, they share some ideological tenets: fighting to return society to a purer form of Islam; violence against rulers whose policies they deem in conflict with Islamic imperatives (as jihadists understand them); and belief in a duty to use violence when Muslim rulers abandon those imperatives. Our use of “jihadist” is not meant to add legitimacy to this interpretation or detract from efforts to promote alternative interpretations. 
We mostly avoid the term “violent extremist”, given that the groups covered in this paper represent only one form of “violent extremism” – namely Sunni extremism – and section IV.D explores some of the potentially dangerous policy implications of its use. Of course, lumping together movements with diverse goals and tactics under any single label, whether “jihadist” or “violent extremist”, is to a degree unhelpful. We disaggregate between and within even the hardest-line movements throughout this report and recommend policymakers do the same. We use “terrorist” only as an adjective to describe the attempt to use violence or intimidation, especially of civilians, to achieve political goals through the manipulation of fear. Though in principle both state and non-state actors can employ terrorist tactics, we use it here for actions of the latter.Hide Footnote

 This report uses the form al-Shabaab rather than Al-Shabaab (as the movement is commonly known in Africa and in Crisis Group publications) so as to maintain internal consistency of transliteration from Arabic.Hide Footnote

Today the Middle East is at war, and the main winners so far are extremists. A wider belt, from West Africa to at least South Asia, appears vulnerable.

Today, the Middle East is at war, and the main winners so far are extremists. A wider belt, from West Africa to at least South Asia, appears vulnerable. The Islamic State (IS) claims a caliphate across large parts of Iraq and Syria, effacing the border between them and, in an amplification of the mostly Arab fighters who went to Afghanistan in the 1980s, has attracted tens of thousands of foreigners from the world over. Despite recent territorial losses, it has convinced dozens of movements elsewhere to sign up and coordinated or inspired attacks in the Muslim world and the West. An al-Qaeda affiliate, Jabhat al-Nusra, is among the most powerful Syrian opposition factions. Yemen’s escalating crisis has allowed another affiliate, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), to seize Mukalla, a strategic port on the Gulf of Aden, and surrounding areas.

An IS branch controls a 200-300km stretch of Libya’s Mediterranean coast and threatens the infrastructure for oil, the country’s main source of income. Other militants are ensconced elsewhere in its cities and towns. Jihadist groups, including al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), though ousted from northern Malian towns in 2012, remain at large across the Sahel and claim responsibility for recent attacks in Bamako and Ouagadougou.[fn]See also Section III.C.Hide Footnote  Boko Haram, a vicious insurgency indigenous to northern Nigeria, overran a swathe of the north east in 2013-2014 and still terrorises a large area around Lake Chad. Al-Shabaab poses an increasing threat beyond its Somali base, particularly to Kenya. In Afghanistan, the Taliban is resurgent, while other groups, including Pakistani, Central Asian and other foreign elements as well as Taliban splinters, join IS. Pakistan, despite efforts to rein in some extremists, still faces a multipronged threat from tribal militias, sectarian groups and its own proxies. Although Russia crushed a jihadist insurgency in the North Caucasus ahead of the Sochi Olympics, its operations displaced thousands of fighters to Iraq and Syria, while remnants in the Caucasus have joined IS.[fn]Crisis Group Europe Report N°238, The North Caucasus Insurgency and Syria: Exported Jihad?, forthcoming 16 March 2016.Hide Footnote

Extremism in the Muslim world has ebbed and flowed over the past quarter century but has never looked as dangerous as today. IS and al-Qaeda-linked groups are among the most powerful protagonists in many of the world’s deadliest crises and may exploit divisions elsewhere, while their sophisticated recruitment, particularly that of IS, threatens countries hitherto unaffected.

Enormous differences exist between groups’ beliefs, strategies, tactics and targets, but all, according to their own statements, aim to return society to a purer form of Islam and believe that fighting a violent jihad to do so is a religious duty. Most to some degree define themselves as “jihadist”, however contested, varied and elusive the term’s meaning.[fn]A notable exception here is now Ahrar al-Sham in Syria, see fn 87. See also note on terminology.Hide Footnote At some point, most have had ties, however loose, to al-Qaeda. Many policymakers erroneously lump them together.

This report examines today’s jihadist landscape. Why have these groups become so powerful? What do they want, and how are they pursuing it? How do they win support and control territory when their ideology has appeared, at least until recently, to have little natural constituency? How do they shape the conflicts they fight in and prospects for ending them? What threat do they pose elsewhere? How should the world respond? It draws from and extends findings from Crisis Group’s extensive body of work on the severest crises in which such movements are prominent, focusing in particular on the Middle East, given the pace of change there, but including West Africa, the Sahel, the Caucasus, North Africa, the Horn of Africa and Central and South Asia.[fn]Crisis Group’s extensive work on violent extremism is available on our global issues page Jihad in Modern Conflict. This report mostly focuses on areas where IS- or al-Qaeda-linked groups have been able to seize territory or that appears a risk. It covers Europe – and many other places of origin of foreign fighters – only inasmuch as attacks there impact the calculations of its leaders. For similar reasons, it does not cover South East Asia: groups there are relatively small and, in the four areas of concern, southern Thailand, southern Philippines, Indonesia and the Rohingya in Myanmar, extremism per se has little attraction. Marginal groups have pledged allegiance to jihadists – Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines has released a video accepting the caliphate, as has Santoso, leader of the small Indonesian Mujahidin in central Sulawesi; Indonesia’s Jemaah Islamiyah has long-established al-Qaeda links – but none has gained traction. Despite outreach from IS and AQ, mainstream militant groups remain staunchly wedded to ethno-religious nationalism not global jihadism. Moreover, the states in which they operate are strong, with functioning institutions; repressive, but not on the scale that opens space for jihadists. Democratic and economic progress in the region over three decades allows for peaceful dissent, greater social mobility and a paradigm of growth that most people believe in. Jihadist groups exist and will continue to attack domestic and foreign targets, particularly in Indonesia, but their tactics and ideology are a hard sell in current regional conditions, and they are unlikely to reach the critical mass that would threaten society or the state. Even in the Southern Philippines, if peace talks collapse, most locals believe the danger is warlordism, not puritan Islam. For more on our reporting on South East Asia visit the regional page.Hide Footnote

The report does not examine the Muslim Brotherhood and its branches, including Hamas. Despite some shared roots, it has distanced itself over decades from the thinkers that inspire al-Qaeda and is perhaps jihadists’ main ideological competitor, though Cairo’s campaign against it has plunged it into disarray and left its future uncertain. IS and al-Qaeda attack many Brotherhood tenets and practices, including, on a political level, gradualism and participation in democratic politics. In terms of doctrine, the Brotherhood’s – and Hamas’s – relative flexibility and pragmatism sets them apart from the literalism of Salafis and the Taliban. Over the past few years, jihadists’ fortunes, particularly in the Arab world, have waxed as those of Muslim Brothers have waned.

Nor does it examine Shia militancy, though the Iranian-sponsored radicalisation of Shia governments and militias across parts of the Middle East and the violence Iraqi and Syrian Sunnis have suffered at their hands have been major drivers of Sunni extremism. Many Crisis Group reports already cover this terrain, as well as Pentecostal fundamentalism and the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Africa, Buddhist and Christian extremism in Asia, parts of the Jewish far right in Israel and other forms of religiously-framed violence.[fn]See among many, for example, Crisis Group Middle East Reports N°s 38, Iran in Iraq: How Much Influence?, 21 March 2005; 89, Israel’s Religious Right and the Question of Settlements, 20 July 2009; 104, Radical Islam in Gaza, 29 March 2011; 153, Lebanon’s Hizbollah Turns Eastward to Syria, 27 May 2014; and 154, The Huthis: From Saada to Sanaa, 10 June 2014; Middle East Briefing N°45, Yemen at War, 27 March 2015; Asia Report N°251, The Dark Side of Transition: Violence Against Muslims in Myanmar,  1 October 2013; Africa Report N°229, Cameroon: The Threat of Religious Radicalism, 3 September 2015; and Middle East Report N°147, Leap of Faith: Israel’s National Religious and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 21 November 2013. See also, Asia Briefing N°114, Indonesia: “Christianisation” and Intolerance, 24 November 2010; Asia Report N°134, Sri Lanka’s Muslims: Caught in the Crossfire, 29 May 2007; and Africa Report N°182, The Lord’s Resistance Army: End Game?, 17 November 2011.Hide Footnote

The following sections examine the origins, trends and geopolitics beneath the recent jihadist expansion (II); give a snapshot of the evolving landscape (III); and explore policy options (IV). The main focus is less how individuals radicalise than how extremist movements have become prominent in so many of today’s deadliest crises; and less what groups and their leaders say than what they do. The report sets the stage for development of a wider body of Crisis Group work, identifying areas for further research on the nature of groups, their interaction with crises, the threat and policy dilemmas they pose and ideas on how to respond.

II. A Fourth Wave

An Islamic State fighter waves the group’s flag and a gun in Mosul, in northern Iraq, after the group seized control of the city in June 2014. REUTERS

IS’s and al-Qaeda’s expansion over the past few years is the fourth in a series of waves of jihadist violence affecting mostly the Muslim world since the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan fell in 1989.[fn]Though jihadist ideology’s roots stretch back much further, the fourth wave’s modern origins can be traced to: first, the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan, when thousands of foreign volunteers, often known as “Arab Afghans”, travelled to fight Soviet forces; the myth that these foreigners forced the invaders’ retreat, when their role was minimal compared with that of the Afghan mujahidin, became part of al-Qaeda’s founding narrative; secondly, the revolutionary violence inspired by Sayyad Qutb and his contemporaries in Egypt against President Gamal Abdul Nasser’s government; and thirdly, the Iranian Revolution and subsequent Iranian backing for Shia activism across parts of the Muslim world, which provoked in response Saudi and other Gulf funding for Sunni radicals. Different movements today draw from these several strands – anti-imperialist, revolutionary and sectarian – of jihadist thinking. To a degree, IS embodies them all (see Section III.A). Jason Burke, The 9/11 Wars (London, 2011) treats the past few decades’ ebbs and flows of extremist violence; as does Daniel Byman, Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and the Global Jihadist Movement (Oxford, 2015).Hide Footnote  The first, in the early 1990s, saw many of the foreign volunteers fighting in Afghanistan return to Algeria, the Caucasus, Egypt, Libya, Sudan and elsewhere. In some places, small cells, clustered around charismatic leaders with Afghanistan experience, launched campaigns, mostly terrorist attacks with civilian casualties, against regimes they declared un-Islamic. Elsewhere, Afghanistan veterans joined irredentist struggles, revolutions or civil wars, sometimes, particularly in Algeria and Russia (Chechnya), contributing to their radicalisation. This wave subsided by the mid-1990s, as wars ended or movements were crushed or ejected from those countries. Many members retreated to Afghanistan, then under Taliban control.

From there, al-Qaeda launched a second wave targeting mostly what it called the “far enemy”. Its aim was to suck Western powers into wars in which they would be defeated, like the Soviets in Afghanistan, so withdraw support for regimes in the region, precipitating their downfall. As local-language satellite media outlets reached across the Islamic world, Osama bin Laden pioneered spectacular attacks, mostly against Western interests, to gain attention and cement his position at the vanguard of the global jihadist movement. This wave peaked with the 9/11 attacks in the U.S., which were opposed by Taliban leaders and many of the “Afghan Arabs” fighting for the Taliban against the Northern Alliance or in training camps dotted across the country. They rightly feared that the U.S. reaction bin Laden aimed to provoke would destroy the Taliban’s emirate and deny them their safe havens.[fn]Mustafa Hamid and Leah Farrall, The Arabs at War in Afghanistan (London, 2015). See also Al-Gama’a al-Islamiya, “The Strategy and Bombings of al-Qaeda: Errors and Perils”, al-Sharq al-Awsat, 2004, for wider resistance among radical Islamist movements to the attacks. Mullah Omar’s refusal to hand over bin Laden, despite Taliban leaders’ apprehension about 9/11 and Pakistan’s urging, led to the U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan.Hide Footnote  U.S.-backed forces ousted the Taliban quickly. Many of the foreign fighters were killed or captured; others sheltered in the Pakistani tribal areas or scattered.

The 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq fuelled a third wave, reinvigorating the jihadist movement as thousands of Muslims, many from the Gulf and North Africa, travelled to fight the Americans in the heart of the Arab world.[fn]Thomas Hegghammer, “The Rise of Muslim Foreign Fighters”, International Security, winter 2010/2011.Hide Footnote  The Awakening, a U.S.-backed tribal revolt against al-Qaeda’s franchise in Iraq that was partly motivated by the movement’s brutality, stemmed that wave.[fn]For more, see Crisis Group Middle East Report N°s 74, Iraq after the Surge I: The New Sunni Landscape, 30 April 2008; 75, Iraq after the Surge II: The Need for a New Political Strategy, 30 April 2008; 144, Make or Break: Iraq’s Sunnis and the State, 14 August 2013; and 150, Iraq: Falluja’s Faustian Bargain, 28 April 2014.Hide Footnote  The Arab Spring protests that spread across towns and cities in 2011 then appeared to break it.

The collapse or suppression of most of those revolutions, however, has spurred a fourth wave. More powerful than its predecessors, it has seen IS- and al-Qaeda-linked groups seize territory, gain new footholds in Africa and pose a growing menace across much of the Muslim world and to the West. Generalising about the deeper currents driving this fourth wave is risky, particularly mid-flow. Dynamics vary between regions: from the Middle East’s war zones; to Africans’ struggles to cope with the instability that spills south; to the long legacy and Pakistan’s frequent support of jihad in South Asia. Each movement is unique and, despite the transnational ties of some, mostly rooted in local conditions. Patterns of radicalisation vary from place to place. Like any global trend, jihadists’ expansion results from different things happening in different places, some connected directly, some indirectly and some not at all.

Its immediate causes, however, are clear enough and explain why this fourth wave is potentially the most destructive and hardest to reverse. First and foremost, there is the upheaval across much of the Arab world. Jihadists’ gains have long been entwined with conflict, from Afghanistan to Algeria, from Iraq to Syria. The dramatic recent uptick in war and state collapse has opened up enormous opportunity for them. Enmity between states, meanwhile, in the Middle East at a level dwarfing that of previous waves, means regional powers worry less about extremists than about their rivals, or even quietly indulge such groups as proxies.

The sectarianism and deep sense of Sunni victimisation that the Iraq and Syria wars and the perception of an ascendant Iran have helped spawn play into extremists’ hands. So, too, do failed governance, authoritarian backlash and the elimination of legitimate and politically viable alternatives, all of which reinforce jihadists’ denunciation of corrupt local regimes and contribute to anti-establishment sentiment across the region. Weak states with limited writ across their hinterlands or borders have proven vulnerable, particularly in Africa. Aggressive proselytising over decades of intolerant strands of Islam and the dwindling appeal of ideologies that might be used to frame resistance have helped prepared the ground.

A. Opportunity in Chaos

People rush to a site in the Douma neighborhood of Damascus hit by what activists said was heavy shelling by forces loyal to Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, in June 2015. REUTERS/Bassam Khabieh

The grievances that took Syrians to the streets in 2011 were much like those motivating other Arab revolts. Most protesters did not initially call for President Bashar al-Assad to stand down but demanded that his increasingly sclerotic and repressive government reform, open politics and improve economic management. Over eighteen months, peaceful protests morphed into what has become, at least in parts of the north, a jihadist-dominated insurgency for very different reasons.[fn]See Crisis Group Middle East Reports N°s 163, New Approach in Southern Syria, 2 September 2015; 155, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs: Aleppo and the State of the Syrian War, 9 September 2014; 146, Anything But Politics: The State of Syria’s Political Opposition, 17 October 2013; and 143, Syria’s Metastasising Conflicts, 27 June 2013. Also Charles Lister, The Syrian Jihad: al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and the Evolution of an Insurgency (Hurst, 2015); Nicolas Hénin, Jihad Academy: The Rise of the Islamic State (Bloomsbury, 2015).Hide Footnote  The most important was the regime’s response: deliberate radicalisation of the crisis through cruel, publicised violence; divisive sectarian discourse, pitting the ruling Alawite and other minorities against the Sunni majority; escalating collective punishment that destroyed cities and helped displace millions; and its release of jailed radicals and targeting of more pragmatic opposition factions.[fn]Alawites, comprising roughly 12 per cent of the Syrian population, historically have lived principally in the mountain chains in the north west, along the Mediterranean coast; today, there are many in Damascus and Homs as well. Accounts of their religious origins vary; they are most likely an offshoot of the Twelver branch of Shia Islam. See Henri Laoust, Les Schismes dans L’Islam (Paris, 1977), p. 147. When Hafez al-Assad became president in 1971, he sought the help of Imam Musa al-Sadr, a leading Shia cleric in Lebanon, to certify that Alawites were Muslim and Shia. Sadr issued a fatwa (religious ruling) to that effect. Patrick Seale, Asad: The Struggle for the Middle East (Berkeley, 1988), p. 173. Hide Footnote

This pattern – jihadists’ exploitation of chances created by war and state collapse, their rise facilitated by the violence and mistakes of others – is common.

At the same time, friction between Qatar and Turkey on one side, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on the other, meant that their support to the opposition was incoherent and often flowed, like that channelled by Gulf-based clerics, to extreme proxies. Foreign fighters, who tended to be more radical, for a time entered freely through Turkey.[fn]Sally Judson and Kadir Udson, “Turkey’s ISIS Challenge”, SETA, September 2014. Western officials admit that shutting down the border completely would be impossible and that Turkey, at least since March 2014, has worked to stem the flow. Crisis Group interview, Western diplomat, Ankara, February 2015.Hide Footnote  The gap between U.S. and other Western powers’ rhetoric – that Assad must go – and the reality that they would not commit troops, conduct airstrikes or arm his opponents enough to make that happen undermined less radical groups, whose strategy had hinged on drawing Washington in. As jihadists, many with Iraq combat experience, entered, some, notably Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, leader of the local al-Qaeda branch, Jabhat al-Nusra, proved effective commanders. Tactics like suicide bombing gave them an edge. The regime’s immense violence stoked desire for revenge among many Sunnis and numbed communities to jihadist atrocities.

The paths by which jihadists have become potent in today’s conflicts vary place to place, but this pattern – their exploitation of chances created by war and state collapse, their rise facilitated by the violence and mistakes of others – is common to many.

IS’s roots in Iraq (explored in more detail in Section III.A) lie in a similar mix. The U.S. invasion and occupation policies set the stage for the sectarian civil war (2005-2008) that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of AQI, the progenitor to IS, helped provoke. Equally important was failure of Baghdad and Washington to capitalise on the Awakening. Denial to the minority Sunnis of a sufficient stake in the state, then violence by mostly Shia security forces against largely peaceful protests in Sunni-majority cities in 2012-2013 undermined non-jihadist Sunni leadership and resistance. This cleared the way for IS, which had regrouped, to eradicate rivals and seize the Iraqi Sunni heartlands in 2014, with many Sunnis seeking its protection or seeing in it an opportunity to upset the status quo.[fn]See, for example, Crisis Group Reports, Iraq: Falluja’s Faustian Bargain, and Make or Break, both op. cit.Hide Footnote

In Yemen, al-Qaeda’s local branch, AQAP, focused mostly on terrorist attacks until 2011. It was dangerous to the West because of its bomb-making expertise but largely peripheral to Yemeni politics and isolated in the remote east.[fn]Gregory D. Johnsen, The Last Refuge: Yemen, al-Qaeda and America’s War in Arabia (New York, 2014).Hide Footnote  Only when the state collapsed – first as army factions faced off in the capital during the 2011 revolution, then in 2015 as Huthi insurgents advanced, and the Saudi-led coalition escalated in response – could it seize population centres.[fn]Crisis Group Middle East Reports N°s 114, Breaking Point? Yemen’s Southern Question, 20 October 2011; and 167, Yemen: Is Peace Possible?, 9 February 2016.Hide Footnote

In Libya, too, IS and other extremist groups profited from the collapse of authority: first in the initial chaos after Muammar Qadhafi’s 2011 ouster, then, in 2014, from the escalating standoff between Tobruk- and Tripoli-aligned forces and their respective regional backers.[fn]Crisis Group Middle East/North Africa Report N°157, “Libya: Getting Geneva Right, 26 February 2015.Hide Footnote  In Mali, local al-Qaeda leaders, veterans of the Afghan and Algerian wars, had sheltered with tribes in the desert for years before they allied with, then usurped a Tuareg nationalist insurrection sparked largely by the return of mercenaries and weapons from Libya.[fn]Crisis Group Africa Briefing N°90, Mali: The Need for Determined and Coordinated International Action, 24 September 2012; Africa Report N°92, Islamist Terrorism in the Sahel: Fact or Fiction?, 31 March 2005.Hide Footnote  The Taliban and al-Shabaab emerged only after decades of chaos in Afghanistan and Somalia, in both cases partly in reaction to the predation of warlords and the dwindling legitimacy of other armed groups.[fn]Crisis Group Africa Report N°147, Somalia: To Move Beyond the Failed State, 23 December 2008; and Asia Report N°221, Talking About Talks: Toward a Political Settlement in Afghanistan, 26 March 2012.Hide Footnote

Two boys stand near the charred chassis of a vehicle after a bomb attack near the busy Ajilari-Gomari market in Maiduguri, Nigeria. March 2014. REUTERS

Boko Haram in northern Nigeria, is something of an outlier, in that it did not emerge in an existing war zone. Rooted in the north’s structural violence and marginalised political economy, it began as an isolated sect, then a protest movement demanding less corrupt Islamic governance. Its resistance to the state hardened after quarrelling with a local governor, who, according to its then leader, Mohammed Yusuf, had broken promises made to it for help mobilising votes. Even then, though, it was the 2009 crackdown in Maiduguri, in which some 800 supporters died; Yusuf’s extrajudicial killing in police custody; an inept government response to the mounting menace; and the arrival of weapons and expertise from Libya and the Sahel that drove the movement’s mutation into the insurgency under Abubakar Shekau that plagues the Lake Chad Basin today.[fn]Boko Haram is the latest in a string of revivalist movements in northern Nigeria, long the hub for a two-way exchange of ideas running between there and other parts of the Muslim world. Crisis Group Africa Reports N°s 168, Northern Nigeria: Background to Conflict, 20 December 2010; and 216, Curbing Violence in Nigeria (II): The Boko Haram Insurgency, 3 April 2014. Much about Boko Haram remains murky, including the movement’s coherence and even if Shekau is still alive.Hide Footnote

Overall, therefore, jihadists’ growing prominence over the past few years is more the product of instability than its primary driver. Movements have gathered force as crises deepen and violence escalates. In some cases, particularly Boko Haram’s, extremists have helped provoke the conflicts they fight in – though there, as elsewhere, the state’s violence has been instrumental to its growth. More often, jihadists have exploited existing conflicts, as they did in Algeria and Chechnya two decades ago, infiltrating, profiting and making them harder to resolve. Their dramatic expansion in recent years owes more to the bloody genesis of crises, in other words, than to radicalisation beforehand. They have usually been able to graduate from terrorist tactics to insurgency only in conditions of war; IS’s strategy, as shown below, and to a degree al-Qaeda’s, rest on provoking precisely those conditions.

B. Priority Number Two

Map of the Middle East. UN Department of Field Support Cartographic Section. Map of the Middle East. UN Department of Field Support Cartographic Section.

Escalating geopolitical rivalries have been another windfall for extremists. The modern jihadist movement was partly born of competition between states: Cold War rivalries in Afghanistan, which motivated the USSR’s invasion; the U.S. and Gulf monarchies funnelling and Pakistan radicalising Muslims to fight Soviet forces in response; and the explosion of Gulf funding for radical Sunni movements, partly to counter Iran’s sponsorship of Shia activism after its 1979 revolution. Mounting competition, particularly between Middle Eastern states, now drives and complicates efforts to end the crises jihadists feed off. It also means many leaders worry more about regional rivals than extremists. In Yemen, for example, the actions of Saudi Arabia and the UAE show they view the Huthis and the risk they perceive of Iranian influence on the Arabian Peninsula as graver threats than al-Qaeda. For months, AQAP-controlled areas were among the few Saudi-led coalition bombs avoided, strengthening the group relative to others.[fn]Western diplomats’ claims that the UAE is more serious about AQAP are not borne out by its actions on the ground, particularly as Saudi Arabia sets military priorities. See Crisis Group Report, Yemen: Is Peace Possible?, op. cit.Hide Footnote

Regional politics present an even greater obstacle in Syria. First, as described, state policies helped facilitate the opposition’s initial radicalisation and Jabhat al-Nusra’s expansion, paving the way for IS’s advance. Even now, few of the diverse forces arrayed against IS treat it as the main enemy. The Assad regime, Iran, allied militias and Russia mostly attack other rebels, including those on the front lines against IS, believing them a graver threat to regime survival. Gulf powers and Turkey prioritise Assad’s removal, and the Turks fear the ascendance of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), affiliated with their domestic insurgent enemy, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).[fn]Crisis Group observations, interviews, Ankara and Washington DC, January 2016. The YPG receives U.S. support, to the chagrin of Turkey, whose officials argue some of this weaponry ends up with the PKK.Hide Footnote  IS is first priority in Syria only for Western powers and Jordan.

Few of the diverse forces against IS treat it as the main enemy.

Worse still, a common thread in the history of many movements is the support they have enjoyed from states hoping to use them as proxies against rivals. Pakistan’s jihadist milieu defies easy description, but the roots of some movements trace back to wars in Afghanistan and Kashmir, where they served as its foreign policy instruments. Even as some of these proxies cooperate with tribal militants that attack the Pakistani state or are actively engaged in radicalising a new generation of extremists, military and many civilian leaders still indulge Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, one of the world’s largest jihadist groups, and back the Afghan Taliban. The A[fn]On the eve of 9/11, Pakistani militants could be categorised by their focus. Harkat al-Mujahidin (HuM), Jaish-e Mohammed (JeM), an HuM splinter, and Lashkar-e Tayyaba (LeT) fought in Kashmir. The Sipah-e Sahaba Pakistani (SSP) and its splinter Lashkar-e Jhangvi (LeJ) perpetrated sectarian attacks in Pakistan. Both were built decades earlier, largely with Saudi money to counter the increasing stridency of Shia militants backed by post-revolution Iran but also drawing from local resentment against wealthier Shia in Jhang. Numerous groups in the tribal areas had fought in Afghanistan. The last fifteen years have seen these distinctions gradually become less relevant, as many militants rubbed shoulders with each other and with al-Qaeda while fighting alongside the Afghan Taliban and training in the Pakistani tribal areas. The principle dividing line now is between those groups that fight the Pakistani state and those that do not – though even that is blurred. Groups that are military-sponsored and do not attack the state often provide training and infrastructure to those that do. A second dividing line is between those that attack Shia and other religious minorities and those that are less overtly sectarian. Crisis Group Asia Reports, N°s 164, Pakistan: The Militant Jihadi Challenge, 13 March 2009; 178, Pakistan: Countering Militancy in FATA, 21 October 2009; and 242, Pakistan: Countering Militancy in PATA, 15 January 2013.Hide Footnote ssad government funnelled jihadists into Iraq through the mid-2000s in an attempt to divert their attention and keep the U.S. bogged down; the latter motive drove Iran’s sporadic facilitation of al-Qaeda fighters’ transit to Iraq at the same time.[fn]Hassan Abu Hanieh and Mohammed A. Rumman, The “Islamic State” Organization: The Sunni Crisis and the Struggle of Global Jihadism (Jordan, 2015).Hide Footnote

State support, direct or indirect, for jihadists appears to be on the rise, particularly as rivalry escalates between Iran and Gulf monarchies angered at what they see as Tehran’s growing geopolitical clout after the nuclear deal. Some of the weapons and ammunition flowing from the Gulf and Turkey to components of the Jaish al-Fatah rebel coalition in Syria almost certainly reach Jabhat al-Nusra, one of its most powerful members.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Turkey, April-December 2015.Hide Footnote Amid Yemen’s chaos, weapons delivered to local allies of the Saudi-led coalition seep into the arsenal of al-Qaeda, with which some of Riyadh’s partners align tactically against the Huthis.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Yemen: Is Peace Possible?, op. cit. Also, Crisis Group interviews, Western journalist, November 2015; Adeni journalist, October 2015; Arab diplomat, tribal sheikh from Shebwa, August 2015.Hide Footnote

As Pakistan’s experience shows, jihadists make dangerous proxies. Iran’s non-state allies – the Iraqi Shia militias, Hizbollah and the thousands of Afghans and other Shia it has mobilised to fight beside Assad’s forces – are unlikely to turn on the Islamic Republic, given its reasonably coherent revolutionary narrative, their dependence on its support and its capable defence forces. By contrast, a centrepiece of many Sunni extremists’ strategy is to topple local regimes, including those on the same side of the sectarian line. The Gulf monarchies’ anxiety about Iran is understandable; Turkey has legitimate concerns about Kurdish separatism. But subordinating the threat from IS and al-Qaeda-linked groups and their ideas to these worries – or worse still, indulging such groups in the hope their sights remain on Iran’s allies – is likely to prove a miscalculation.

C. Political and Ideological Space

If wars, state collapse and geopolitics, particularly across the Arab world, are proximate causes of the fourth wave, other trends contribute. They are too complex to treat comprehensively, particularly as the dynamics are so varied, but a few stand out.

First, sectarianism has reached unprecedented levels across parts of the Middle East. Aggravated by Saddam Hussein’s overthrow, wars in Syria and Iraq and escalating Saudi-Iranian rivalry, it is more intense than any time since religion was conjoined with modern political identity. As states fail, many, not just Sunnis, are turning to other kinds of social organisation – tribe, clan, religion, sect – for protection and representation. The ramifications are still uncertain, but clearly sectarian hatred plays into the hands of IS, which both drives and feeds off it. It also moulds a new generation of jihadists who cut their teeth against Iran-backed forces on Syrian and Iraqi battlefields. It risks deepening Sunni-Shia tension in South Asia, as the Saudis cajole Pakistan, whose Shia population is the second largest in the world and has close ideological links to neighbouring Iran, to join its anti-Iran front in Yemen.[fn]Shias compose around 20 per cent of Pakistan’s approximately 200 million population. Even where Sunnis have little contact with Shia world – like, for example, the Caucasus – sectarian solidarity helps drive local recruits to IS (Crisis Group interviews, North Caucasus fighters, Turkey, January-February 2016). An Egyptian taxi driver recently told Crisis Group that the main threat facing his country emanated from the Shia, though they are less than 1 per cent of Egypt’s population. Crisis Group interview, Cairo, September 2015. Beyond growing anti-Shia popular sentiment in countries with virtually no local Shia, officials’ concern about Iranian proselytising and intelligence operations are common even beyond the country’s usual area of influence. Crisis Group interviews, security officials and politicians, Tunis and Rabat, 2015-2016.Hide Footnote

It blends, too, with Sunni Arabs’ profound sense of victimisation, a sense deepened by the West’s focus on IS atrocities that largely overlooks – or, in the case of Iraq, appeared to facilitate – the slaughter of Sunnis by Iran-sponsored regimes and militias. As the 2011 unrest spread, the Arab Sunni world’s traditional power centres, such as Egypt, were destabilised, which left others scrambling to compensate. Saudi Arabia has tried to fill the vacuum, but in part by escalating sectarian sentiment: dangerous terrain on which to compete with IS.[fn]The Saudis’ recent execution of the popular Shia sheikh, Nimr al-Nimr, both illustrated the depth of and, even if not deliberately, aggravated Sunni-Shia tensions. “Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr: Saudi Arabia executes top Shia cleric”, BBC News, 2 January 2016.Hide Footnote

A vandalised portrait of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad in Raqqa province, in northern Syria. May 2013. REUTERS/Hamid Khatib

Secondly, though a catalyst for the fourth wave was the toppling of dictators, its roots lie partly in persistent authoritarianism. Leaders and regimes, backed by major powers, have for decades clung to power through violence and repression. Their regimes provided relative stability, but their misrule did much to rot institutions, erode state-society relations and pave the way for the turmoil that followed their overthrow. In particular, the determination of Maliki (Iraq) and Assad (Syria) to consolidate or hold onto power largely provoked the wars that paved the way for IS; Assad deliberately radicalised the opposition as a regime-survival strategy.

Gloomy prospects for reform in countries, especially in the Arab world, that have not yet succumbed to violence contribute to anti-establishment sentiment, particularly among young people, and lend credence to jihadist criticism of corrupt local regimes. Western powers’ silence at their allies’, notably Egypt’s, backsliding and the dissipation, over the past few years, of their support for reform elsewhere confirms deep-seated perceptions of double standards, again strengthening jihadist narratives.

Thirdly, African leaders are for the most part more united against jihadists than their Middle Eastern counterparts, even if, in some cases, no less reluctant to let power go. Their challenge lies more in the weakness of states; their limited writ in neglected peripheries; and the inability of security forces, intelligence services and other institutions to respond with the required dexterity. The precedents of Boko Haram and jihadists in Mali, the former morphing from isolated sect to violent insurgency, the latter seizing towns after lurking for years in the desert, are especially troubling. Conditions that enabled both crises – underdevelopment, distrust of the state in its hinterlands, traditional elites’ declining authority, readily-available weapons and clumsy, heavy-handed and ineffective security forces – blight many other states, in Africa and elsewhere.

Lastly, ideological space has opened up. In the Arab world in particular, but also in parts of Africa, other ideologies once used to frame political activity and resistance against repression have lost appeal. Students across the Muslim world who once rebelled by joining socialist movements now have few moderate avenues to express discontent. Arab nationalism has diminished as much as socialism; neo-liberal reform and global governance failed to fulfil their potential and often worsened living conditions; the collapse of the 2011 revolutions has damaged liberal democracy and, particularly dangerously, peaceful political Islam.

The vast majority of Salafis do not preach or practice violence. In many places they may prove useful allies against those who do.

Notwithstanding Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi’s inept performance as Egypt’s president, the coup and repression under President Abdul Fatah al-Sisi have propelled the country in a still more perilous direction. Jihadist ideologues across the region portray the failure of the Muslim Brotherhood’s gradualism and political participation as vindication of their violent revolutionary strategy, arguments again strengthened by Western leaders’ silence as the Muslim Brotherhood was deposed and its former officials, whom they met officially only a few years ago, languish in Egyptian jails.[fn]Overall, the Muslim Brotherhood has acted more as a firewall against jihadist movements than a conveyor belt toward them, certainly in the Middle East (in Pakistan, Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam, JUI, has closer ties to Deobandi extremists and helps funnel fighters into Afghanistan but is mostly encouraged to do so by the military). For examples of jihadists attacking the Muslim Brotherhood, see, for example, Bill Roggio, “Zawahiri rebukes Muslim Brotherhood for trusting democracy”, Long War Journal, 3 August 2013; and William McCants, “Who exactly is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS?”, News­week, 6 September 2015. For the “firewall” versus “conveyor belt” discussion, see Marc Lynch, “Is the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization or a firewall against violent extremism?” Washington Post, 7 March 2016.Hide Footnote

The spread of intolerant strands of Islam – often lumped together under a single label such as Wahhabism or Salafism – has clearly contributed.[fn]The term Wahhabism refers to the religious revivalist movement initiated in Najd (central Arabia) in the early eighteenth century by Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Denouncing Islam’s perversion over the centuries and Muslim societies’ renewed descent into the state of ignorance (jahiliyya) that characterised the Arabian Peninsula before the advent of Islam, he preached a return to tawhid (exclusive worship of God) and the early practices of the “pious ancestors” – al-salaf al-salih, from which the English term Salafism derives – who comprise the first three generations of Muslims, including the Prophet Muhammad, his companions and their successors. The remedy to Islam’s plight, he argued, was to bypass Islam’s centuries-old legal and theological interpretive legacy and rely instead on the Quran, accounts from the Prophet’s life and the consensus of pious ancestors. Practically, this meant eradicating all forms of popular Islam, including Sufism, saint worship and Shiism, and imposing ritual austerity on believers. Crisis Group Middle East Report N°31, Saudi Arabia Backgrounder: Who are the Islamists?, 21 September 2004. See also Roel Meijer (ed.), Global Salafism: Islam’s New Religious Movement (New York, 2009). Crisis Group Asia Reports, N°s 73, Unfulfilled Promises: Pakistan’s Failure to Tackle Extremism, 16 January 2004; 49, Pakistan: The Mullahs and the Military, 20 March 2003; and 36, Pakistan: Madrasas, Extremism and the Military, 29 July 2002.Hide Footnote  Pakistan’s jihadist threat, for example, cannot be explained without reference to the deliberate Islamisation of laws and support for Islamist proxies by successive rulers, particularly Presidents Zia ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf.[fn]Crisis Group Asia Reports N°s 95, The State of Sectarianism in Pakistan, 18 April 2005; and 265, Women, Violence and Conflict in Pakistan, 8 April 2015.Hide Footnote  Across much of the Muslim world, decades of Gulf-sponsored proselytising – through imams, mosques and media, particularly Saudi-funded television – have created a pool of potential recruits who share a general theological disposition with jihadists.[fn]See also, for example, “Extremism as Mainstream: Implications for Women, Development & Security in the MENA/Asia Region”, International Civil Society Network (ICAN), spring 2014.Hide Footnote  But although Salafis share some broad and conservative tenets, their religious practices and political proclivities are so varied, in no small part because the term tends to be one of self-ascription, connoting legitimacy, that it is hard to draw firm conclusions about a relationship to jihad. Many of today’s most ardent combatants do not come from a Salafi tradition. Nor do the vast majority of Salafis preach or practice violence. In many places they may prove useful allies against those who do.[fn]See, for example, Rashid Abdi, “East Africa’s Sufi Path to Countering Violent Extremism”, Crisis Group, 15 September 2015.Hide Footnote

Mounting sectarianism, deepening authoritarianism, state fragility, even other ideologies’ dwindling appeal do not mean jihadists’ tenets will soon inspire mass appeal. Polls consistently show much of what they promote resonates broadly: opposition to corrupt local regimes, U.S. policy in the Muslim world, Israel and its treatment of Palestinians and Western influence, as well as a greater role for Islam in public life. But the strands distinguishing violent jihadists from political Islamists, inspire much less support. Their social vision tends to be too austere. Even for those to whom a caliphate might on some level be alluring, violent transnational revolt or drawing the West into an apocalyptic war to establish it is less so. Killing Muslim civilians is deeply unpopular without the kind of hatred only sustained conflict generates.[fn]Cameron Glenn, Garrett Nada and Melissa Nozell, “Muslims Condemning Violent Extremism? Count the Ways”, U.S. Institute of Peace, 17 March 2015.Hide Footnote  The revulsion jihadists’ extreme bloodshed inspired in the past, notably in Algeria and Iraq, partly explains previous waves’ reversal – though the widening Sunni-Shia fault line and images of the Syrian carnage on local media across the Muslim world risk inuring many to violence.[fn]In Algeria and Iraq, the enormous violence against civilians perpetrated respectively by the Sala­fist Group for Preaching and Combat, which later became AQIM, and AQI provoked widespread revulsion that partly enabled their defeats.Hide Footnote

That jihadist tactics and ideology look unlikely to resonate widely is partly moot. Revolutions throughout history have relied less on majorities than on a dedicated core able to exploit opportunities in chaos. The reach and resources these movements now command mean that any further breakdown in the Muslim world, from West Africa to South Asia, risks empowering an extremist element, whether jihadists provoke the crisis or, more likely, profit from its violent evolution. But it does suggest that countering their ideology should be but a small part of the response.[fn]Clearly, though, in some countries it is more important than in others. In Pakistan, for example, unless radicalism through the brainwashing of youths in hundreds, if not thousands, of jihadist or sectarian madrasas ends, there will be no lack of foot soldiers for their causes.Hide Footnote  The more urgent priorities are to reinvigorate efforts to end wars, dial down rivalry between states and prevent other crises erupting, particularly by responding sensibly to terrorist attacks and by encouraging leaders toward inclusion and reform.

III. An Evolving Landscape

Derna’s Islamic Youth Council stages a show of force in eastern Libya. October 2014. REUTERS

Although the pace at which the jihadist landscape is evolving means any description can offer only a snapshot, the main contours of the fourth wave are clear. Despite its loss of Ramadi, IS appears firmly in control of the Sunni heartlands in Iraq and parts of eastern Syria. It has not replicated elsewhere its dramatic success there, but it is expanding in Libya, the Sinai, Yemen and Afghanistan, winning recruits in other war zones and has coordinated or inspired attacks in the West.

In part hidden by IS’s rise, al-Qaeda has adapted. Some affiliates, particularly in Syria and Yemen, are increasingly powerful. Exploiting opportunities opened by local conflicts, they have shifted emphasis from attacking Western interests to capturing territory, targeting local regimes, often obscuring their links to al-Qaeda and, in places, acting with some pragmatism. Whether over time this will alter the identity of al-Qaeda or any local branch or help it recover ground lost to IS remains unclear.

The jihadist evolution has accelerated debate over tactics, strategy and doctrine: the killing of other Muslims, particularly Shia; how and when to impose Islamic rule; and whether the end goal is to overthrow the nation-state system or simply specific “un-Islamic” regimes. Since 2011, more movements have seized territory, supplanting the state while prompting, in some cases, a shift in relations with populations in areas they control.

A. The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria

In July 2014, IS routed the Iraqi army in Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, capturing substantial U.S.-supplied weaponry. In a few weeks, it swept across the north and west of the country, linking up to strongholds in eastern Syria. Its previously almost-unknown leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (a nom de guerre), appeared in Mosul’s central mosque to declare a new caliphate and himself the “commander of the faithful” and demand fealty from Muslims worldwide. IS forces destroyed part of the Iraqi-Syrian border, the first time a jihadist group had claimed supranational territorial authority.

The ouster of Saddam Hussein and policies adopted afterwards by the U.S. occupation were enormous gifts to extremists.

Tens of thousands of foreigners have joined, many lured by sophisticated online recruitment. Its choreographed violence, trumpeted over social media, are designed partly to sow fear and partly – like bin Laden’s attacks earlier – to generate headlines. Its enslavement of women generates headlines, too, and serves to recruit young men whose socially conservative background makes access to women difficult. It aims to expand by capturing territory and winning recruits in other collapsed states; dividing societies through terrorist attacks; and, it says, provoking a battle with Western powers that paves the way for a new Islamic order.

Above all, though, IS is a movement rooted in the recent history of Iraq and Syria and with a now predominantly Iraqi leadership. The ouster of Saddam Hussein, a largely secular dictator ruling a country with a limited history of Salafi-jihadism, and the policies adopted afterwards by the U.S. occupation were enormous gifts to extremists. De-Baath­i­f­ic­ation – the firing of many officials – and dismantling the army left hundreds of thousands of mostly Sunnis jobless. Power shifted from Sunni urban to Shiite and Kurdish provincial classes. The new political system, which expressly apportioned power by sect and to which Sunnis struggled to adapt, also served their interests poorly.[fn]Sunni leaders struggled to redefine their political identity to fit an explicitly sectarian system; to a degree they still do. See Crisis Group Report, Iraq’s Sunnis and the State, op. cit.Hide Footnote  Violence and torture by U.S. forces and local allies was well known in Iraq even before the Abu Ghraib scandal and inspired wide outrage.[fn]

To build the insurgent movement that became AQI and later IS, Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant who arrived in Iraq after fleeing Afghanistan as the Taliban were ousted, could thus tap a rich vein of Sunni discontent, as well as networks of Levantine militants he had forged in South Asia. Drawing on a new generation of jihadist ideologues, he found fertile ground for polarising the country along sectarian lines, an approach based on his deep hatred of Shia but also cold strategic logic, given the reversal of Sunni fortunes. In the early years, however, AQI was only one of many groups opposing the occupation and new government. While the leadership of his group included many foreigners, ex-regime elements dominated others.[fn]Crisis Group Report, In Their Own Words, op. cit.; Hanieh and Rumman, The “Islamic State” Organization, op. cit., pp. 25-26. Also see Michael Weiss and Hassan Hassan, ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror (New York, 2015) and Burke, 9/11 Wars, op. cit.Hide Footnote

Though the U.S. invasion prepared the way for IS’s rise – without it there would be no IS – the aftermath of the Awakening, the tribal revolt against AQI, and the escalation of Syria’s war were as important. By the time the U.S. killed him in 2006, Zarqawi had helped provoke a sectarian civil war in Iraq. His brutal tactics, however, criticised locally and by al-Qaeda’s top leadership, cost his movement support. Particularly in parts of Anbar province, tribes chafed under foreign militants’ religious strictures, disregard for local power structures and attempts to monopolise smuggling revenue. These considerations, together with promises of U.S. support, push back against Iranian influence and substantial payments, led them to realign with the U.S. against al-Qaeda. More than 100,000 tribal fighters, their capacities reinforced by the U.S. surge, routed the militants.[fn]See Crisis Group Reports, Iraq after the Surge I and Iraq after the Surge II, both op. cit.; also, Ala Ali, “Security, Religion and Gender in al-Anbar province; a Focus-Group based Conflict Analysis”, International Civil Society Action Network, 7 August 2014.Hide Footnote

The revolt against AQI was built on the understanding Sunnis would gain a greater stake in the state and its security forces. Instead, in the run-up to the 2011 U.S. troop withdrawal, Prime Minister Maliki increased sectarian rhetoric; stopped paying salaries of and otherwise cut off the tribal leaders who had risen up; and did not integrate their militias into the security forces as promised, instead arresting many. Syria’s crisis deepened the sense of escalating regional war, pushing him closer to Tehran, with which he shared fear that Assad’s overthrow could usher in a hostile, Sunni Islamist-led regime in Damascus.

The crushing by Iraqi security forces of protests that broke out in Sunni-majority towns (Falluja and Hawija) over the winter of 2012-2013 was the tipping point. It made it harder for Sunni leaders inclined to work across sects to do so and gave a green light to more extreme movements to stage armed retaliations, deepening both sides’ conviction that the clash was existential. As violence intensified, Maliki portrayed virtually all Sunni opposition as terrorist, while refusing to label as such no less brutal Shiite violence. U.S. and UN Security Council acquiescence – their support for Maliki belied token calls for political inclusion – fed the sense of Sunni victimisation that the Assad regime’s violence against Sunnis next door exacerbated.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Iraq: Falluja’s Faustian Bargain, op. cit.Hide Footnote  Zarqawi’s successors by then had regrouped and, learning from his experience, prioritised their base in the Sunni community. The group had become predominantly Iraqi, partly because many foreigners had abandoned it for Syria, partly through tightening links with remnants of Saddam’s regime, many of whom had radicalised, with networks strengthened in U.S. and Iraqi jails.[fn]Weiss and Hassan, ISIS, op. cit.Hide Footnote  It replenished its ranks and leadership via jailbreaks, then by paying disaffected tribesmen well. By mid-2014, it had infiltrated most Iraqi Sunni-majority cities. Though dynamics varied, local military councils and ex-insurgent factions often allied with jihadists, whose military superiority then translated into dominance. When the renamed IS captured Mosul and the Sunni heartlands in June 2014, the Iraqi army, hollowed out by corruption and incompetence and seen as a Shiite occupation force, mostly melted away. That many inhabitants of IS-captured areas celebrated “liberation”, despite the memories left by Zarqawi’s militants a few years earlier, showed the decay of their relations with the state.[fn]Crisis Group Middle East Briefing N°38, Iraq’s Jihadi Jack-in-the-Box, 20 June 2014.Hide Footnote

Crisis Group Middle East Reports N°s 34, What Can the U.S. Do in Iraq?,  22 December 2004; 50, In Their Own Words: Reading the Iraqi Insurgency, 15 February 2006; and 52, The Next Iraqi War? Sectarianism and Civil Conflict, 27 February 2006.Hide Footnote

Zarqawi’s approach was based on his deep hatred of Shia, but also cold strategic logic, given the reversal of Sunni fortunes.

Zarqawi’s successors by then had regrouped and, learning from his experience, prioritised their base in the Sunni community. The group had become predominantly Iraqi, partly because many foreigners had abandoned it for Syria, partly through tightening links with remnants of Saddam’s regime, many of whom had radicalised, with networks strengthened in U.S. and Iraqi jails.[fn]Weiss and Hassan, ISIS, op. cit.Hide Footnote  It replenished its ranks and leadership via jailbreaks, then by paying disaffected tribesmen well. By mid-2014, it had infiltrated most Iraqi Sunni-majority cities. Though dynamics varied, local military councils and ex-insurgent factions often allied with jihadists, whose military superiority then translated into dominance. When the renamed IS captured Mosul and the Sunni heartlands in June 2014, the Iraqi army, hollowed out by corruption and incompetence and seen as a Shiite occupation force, mostly melted away. That many inhabitants of IS-captured areas celebrated “liberation”, despite the memories left by Zarqawi’s militants a few years earlier, showed the decay of their relations with the state.[fn]Crisis Group Middle East Briefing N°38, Iraq’s Jihadi Jack-in-the-Box, 20 June 2014.Hide Footnote

Developments within the Sunni community as much as its distrust of Baghdad aided IS’s advance. The broken promises to the Awakening destroyed or discredited much of the non-jihadist Sunni opposition that had gambled on working with the U.S. and the Iraqi state and distanced Sunnis from their elites. With the help of ex-officials of Saddam Hussein’s regime skilled in the repressive tactics of an authoritarian state, IS faced little resistance as it fragmented social and political structures that it feared could some day resist its rule. The most notorious way it did this was ruthlessness with potential rivals, particularly those involved in the Awakening who refused to join. No less crucially, however, it provided an avenue for social mobility to Sunnis who lacked a champion within their community.

IS has thus weaved a web of marginalised groups and classes whose interests, if not beliefs, align with its own. Its “Tribal Bureau” exploits tribal divisions, peeling off support, empowering younger leaders or weaker clans and turning clans against each other. Many youths, especially but not only within tribes, backed it to protest their elders’ enrichment by Maliki’s patronage. Some business people, former bureaucrats and others in the middle classes in places like Mosul, whose livelihoods were upended after Saddam Hussein’s overthrow, could recover their standing and profit under IS. Rural classes found in it a way to strike back at what they saw as exploitative urban elites. Paradoxically for a group that promotes an uncompromisingly austere vision of Islam, IS leaders initially showed, at least in Iraq, some flexibility in enforcement of religious codes, depending on what they believed the local market would bear.[fn]Crisis Group telephone interviews, residents of IS-controlled areas, October 2015-January 2016.Hide Footnote

Of course, even those who benefit live under painful strictures: movement restrictions, imposed in early 2015, which create a sense of isolation; a war economy’s deprivations; and an escalating bombing campaign. But some have profited, and for many IS still inspires less resentment than Baghdad. Plus, many Iraqis are inured to repressive rule stretching back decades.

The story is different in Syria, into which what was becoming IS expanded in 2011. Baghdadi deployed Jolani, a top lieutenant, who quietly built Jabhat al-Nusra into a large insurgency, thanks partly to IS financing but mostly by working with others, keeping al-Qaeda ties quiet, winning support through his movement’s relative discipline and profiting from the war’s radicalisation. In April 2013, Baghdadi announced IS would subsume al-Nusra. Jolani rejected the merger and pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. After a failed attempt to mediate, Zawahiri ruled that the Iraqi and Syrian branches would be separate al-Qaeda affiliates, in effect siding with Jolani. Baghdadi rejected this.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs, op. cit. Though the clash between Baghdadi and Jolani was the spark, the split between al-Qaeda and IS had long been brewing. As far back as 1990s Afghanistan, relations between Zarqawi and al-Qaeda leaders had been strained. His tactics in Iraq drew regular criticism from Zawahiri and leading al-Qaeda ideologues, who questioned his brutality against other Muslims and focus on killing Shia and capturing territory rather than targeting the U.S. No IS leader since Zarqawi appears to have pledged allegiance to either bin Laden or Zawahiri. See Hanieh and Rumman, The “Islamic State” Organisation, op. cit.Hide Footnote  The schism has since played out in public recriminations and aggressive IS efforts to win over al-Qaeda loyalists elsewhere. In Syria, many Iraqi and other foreign jihadists defected to IS, radicalising it further. Though some al-Qaeda veterans stayed with it, al-Nusra became increasingly Syrian, and most of its rank-and-file, if not leaders, focus on Syrian, not transnational concerns.

IS initially targeted not the regime but rebel-held areas, trying to conquer the Sunni opposition in Syria as it had in Iraq. The regime left it mostly undisturbed and escalated against rebels, viewing them as a graver threat and IS’s expansion as an opportunity to portray all opposition as terrorist. Fractious rebel groups at first veered between subordinating to IS and confronting it, but by early 2014, IS’s actions, including killing popular rebel leaders, led to more coordinated opposition. Initially al-Nusra stayed out of the fray, but was drawn in against IS. Beaten back from the north west around Aleppo, IS was forced to retreat to eastern Syria, but this also freed up resources for its dramatic capture of Mosul and expansion in Iraq.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs, op. cit.Hide Footnote

Thus, although its de-facto capital is Raqqa, connected since ancient times to Iraq by Euphrates River trade, IS’s Syrian roots are shallower. Within Iraq’s Sunni minority, it has eradicated opposition, empowered marginal groups, invested in governance and shown flexibility. In Syria, where Sunnis are a majority and powerful alternatives exist, it controls only some Sunni-majority areas and relies more on force, despite forming some alliances and often operating by persuasion or bribery. These differences notwithstanding, its defeat in either country appears remote. Though unlikely to advance into Iraq’s Shia or Kurdish heartlands or mount a serious assault on Damascus or Syria’s Alawite regions, it appears resilient in core areas – partly thanks to its military prowess and ties to elements of the Sunni community, partly, as described, because its foes are divided.

The degree to which, over time, it can maintain support or acquiescence, particularly in Iraq, is uncertain. Dwindling revenues might tip its balance of coercion/co-option toward the former, which could fray its roots in communities. However, it is as embedded in the local economy as in society. It generates part of its revenue through oil production, looted banks, gold mines, wheat farming and sale of antiquities, but most now comes from taxes of various sorts, confiscation and extortion, all hard for international sanctions to squeeze without inflicting wide suffering. Even as it has faced greater military pressure and lost territory over the past year, it appears durable.

B. The Expanding Caliphate?

The Limits of the Islamic State in Libya

After returning from the frontlines, Crisis Group’s Libya Senior Analyst Claudia Gazzini speaks to our Director of Communications and Outreach Hugh Pope to report her major findings on the presence of the Islamic State in the country. CRISIS GROUP

IS aims to expand beyond its regional base by establishing provinces (wilayaat) through aggressive recruitment and luring in other groups. It appears less discerning in allowing groups to join than al-Qaeda is about accepting new affiliates.[fn]See, for example, Barak Mendelsohn, The al-Qaeda Franchise: The Expansion of al-Qaeda and Its Consequences (Oxford, 2016).Hide Footnote  It has had some success elsewhere but nothing like in Iraq – perhaps unsurprising given its strong Iraqi identity and roots in conditions there.[fn]A recent UN report argues that by mid-December 2015, 34 groups had declared their affiliation to IS. “Report of the Secretary-General on the threat posed by ISIL (Da’esh) to international peace and security and the range of United Nations efforts in support of Member States in countering the threat”, United Nations Security Council, 29 January 2016. This report treats only the largest.Hide Footnote

In Libya, around the coastal town of Sirte, a former stronghold of the Qadhafi regime, and nearby towns, IS recruited from the local Ansar al-Sharia branch, taking advantage of a security vacuum. Although consisting of only a few hundred men, it made inroads by brokering deals with local leaders who had nowhere else to turn for protection; the area has no significant militias of its own, as most residents are former regime loyalists “defeated” in the 2011 war. Over 2015, IS won control of a 200-300km coastal stretch between Sirte and Ben Jawwad. Its emissaries appeared in greater numbers after June 2015, both Libyan returnees from Syria and foreigners, including notable Iraqi IS commanders.[fn]Until early 2015, most local IS leaders were Libyan, but over time the flow of foreigners increased. Crisis Group interviews, Sirte and Harawa residents, Harawa, March 2015; refugees from Sirte, al-Bayda, November 2015.Hide Footnote

Initially, IS did not impose strict rules on residents, provided women were veiled, and local groups did not attempt to take up arms against it. Killing primarily targeted foreigners, especially Christian refugees. But over time, especially after a group of Sirte residents (led by a Salafi imam) tried to rise against it in summer 2015, repression became more violent. Militants began to publicly execute security officials and residents accused of spying or engaging in un-Islamic practices; demand young girls be handed over for forced marriage and de-facto rape; and, at checkpoints along Libya’s main coastal road, arrest individuals identified as state employees or oil sector workers.[fn]Crisis Group telephone interviews Ben Jawwad and Brega residents, January 2016; interviews, Sirte residents, al-Bayda, November 2015.Hide Footnote  IS funding sources in Libya are murky but appear to include local taxation (including on smuggling), extortion, looting of banks, kidnapping and wealthy sponsors. The group ransacked oil fields and attacked ports and refineries, but there is no evidence that it smuggles oil.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, residents and security guards, Harawa, March 2015; telephone interviews, residents and security guards, Sidra, January 2016.Hide Footnote

The Libya branch appears to have the closest operational ties of all IS-linked groups to the leadership in the Levant. The longer it can hold on, and the more Iraq and Syria veterans and foreigners flow in, the more dangerous it will become. In early 2016, it expanded east, tightening its grip on Ben Jawwad (the last town before major oil facilities on the coast) and attacked oil and gas infrastructure around Sidra. Its expansion westward is checked by the Misrata-aligned revolutionary brigades, which are distrusted by Sirte locals but could perhaps oust IS were their leaders not reluctant to lose men or risk being outflanked in their hometowns.

Although Libya is not torn along the sectarian fault lines of Iraq or Syria, IS can exploit rifts between the state and communities associated with the former regime

Elsewhere in Libya, IS has not made significant progress. It has a limited, static presence in Benghazi (where it is believed to have coordinated with the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries, a mostly non-jihadist coalition fighting against forces under the command of General Khalifa Haftar).[fn]General Khalifa Haftar commands Operation Dignity, an offensive led by army units and other armed groups aligned to the Tobruk-based government against Islamist armed groups in Benghazi. Haftar and his supporters purport to be fighting terrorist groups; critics accuse them of also attacking non-radical groups.Hide Footnote  It has been pushed out of Derna, another city with a history of jihadist activity, where Ansar al-Sharia and some al-Qaeda-linked groups dominate. Libya is not torn along the sectarian fault lines of Iraq or Syria, and its chaotic and fluid militia scene is more difficult for IS to exploit, although some Iraq dynamics, notably the rifts between the state and communities associated with the former regime, are evident.

In Egypt’s Sinai region, Ansar Bayet al-Maqdis (ABM), a mostly Bedouin group rooted in the area’s radicalisation in the early 2000s (partly the result of the second Palestinian intifada) and a wave of repression in 2005-2007 that followed terrorist attacks on tourist resorts in Taba, Dahab and Sharm al-Sheikh, declared allegiance to IS in November 2014.[fn]The neglect of the Sinai’s populated north east, security and intelligence services’ heavy-handed tactics, the Gaza blockade and smuggling economy it encouraged that distorted the local economy, the weakening of traditional tribal authority and the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood all helped create the social conditions in which armed groups thrive. Crisis Group interviews, Sinai residents, al-Arish and Sheikh Zuwayed, May and July 2015.Hide Footnote  IS-Sinai recruits mostly locally, as it did while still ABM, but can draw on militants from the Nile Valley, as well as carry out major attacks there, including in Cairo. In north-eastern Sinai, it has mounted a significant challenge to the Egyptian military through truck bombings against security installations, the wide­spread use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and at times large-scale battles in towns. Some of its expertise may have come from veterans of Syria or Iraq. It has advanced weaponry – having used MANPADS (man-portable air defence systems) at least once in 2014 and Russian-made anti-tank Kornet missiles in 2015 – and claimed responsibility for the downing of a Russian civilian airliner in October 2015.[fn]Ibid. Also Crisis Group interviews, Egyptian and foreign military officials, Cairo, 2014-2015; “Notice Regarding Egypt Sinai Peninsula”, U.S. Federal Aviation Authority, 5 November 2014; and Jeremy Binnie, “Sinai militants attack Egyptian patrol boat”, IHS Jane’s Navy International, 19 July 2015.Hide Footnote

In Yemen, IS, which announced itself in November 2014, has to contend with a well-established and strong al-Qaeda movement that has demonstrated its staying power. Still, various old al-Qaeda and other militants have pledged loyalty to Baghdadi, most prominently Jalal Mohsen Saeed Baleedi, a former AQAP member from Abyan, who was killed in a suspected U.S. drone strike in February 2016. IS appears strongest in Hadramout, Aden and Lahj, with a growing presence in Abyan. It is more brutal and less concerned about heeding local norms and forging local alliances than al-Qaeda but recruits from the south’s disillusioned and impoverished youth. Attacks on holy sites of Zaydis, the Shiite Islam sect to which Huthis belong, appear aimed at stoking sectarian divisions so IS can present itself as the protector of Sunnis, tactics that serve it well in Iraq. Al­though for now fighting is not only along sectarian lines, and traditionally primary identities in Yemen have been tribe, clan, region or political affiliation rather than sect, deepening sectarian polarisation may play into IS’s hands.

Some former Pakistani Taliban commanders, traditionally more sectarian than their Afghan counterparts, established IS in Afghanistan’s easternmost provinces. Throughout 2015, Taliban splinter groups also sporadically re-hatted for diverse reasons.[fn]These include discontent with the Pakistan-based Taliban leadership, IS recruiters offering higher salaries, competition over drug or extortion routes and ties to Salafism, among others. See, for example, Antonio Giustozzi, “A Gathering Storm? The Islamic State campaign in Eastern Afghanistan”, Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Monitor, 13 November 2015; “Why Taliban special forces are fighting Islamic State”, BBC World Service, 18 December 2015; and Hekmatullah Azamy and James Weir, “Islamic State and Jihadi realignments in Khorasan”, The Diplomat, 8 May 2015.Hide Footnote  Some districts have seen fierce fighting between Taliban and IS militias. The Taliban conglomerate, however, remains the preeminent armed opposition, with deep roots in parts of Pashtun society and growing reach in the north.[fn]The Taliban insurgency combines various Afghan factions, joined by Pakistani militants like Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan in August 2015 announced it had declared allegiance to IS, but appears to have fought alongside the Taliban in its Kunduz offensive in early 2015. The Taliban now control more territory countrywide than at any point since the U.S.-led intervention, according to the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR)’s 30th Report to Congress (6 January 2016).Hide Footnote  In the southern heartlands, IS’s Salafi-jihadist ideology is alien to the Deobandi and rural Pashtun traditions the insurgency draws from.

Taliban leaders nonetheless appear to take the IS threat seriously. The caliphate declaration, with Baghdadi as “commander of the faithful”, directly challenged the legitimacy of the Taliban’s emirate and Mullah Omar, who was thought to be still alive and to whom al-Qaeda leaders and the Pakistani Taliban had pledged bayat (allegiance, fealty). Though Zawahiri has since pledged bayat to Omar’s successor, Mullah Mansour, the latter enjoys nothing like his predecessor’s prestige or legitimacy.[fn]Al-Qaeda leaders’ bayat to Taliban leaders stems from bin Laden’s pledge of allegiance to Mullah Omar as commander of the faithful in 1990s Afghanistan. Zawahiri also pledged allegiance to Omar and now pledges allegiance to his successor, Mullah Mansour.Hide Footnote  Recent Taliban battlefield successes – in the north east, where it briefly captured a provincial capital, Kun­duz, for the first time since 2001, and then in the southern heartlands – have solidified support for Mansour, but this would weaken if he were to opt, under Pakistani pressure, for a negotiated settlement.

By mid-2015 most of Russia’s North Caucasus insurgency, the Caucasus Emirate, which had loose ties with but was never an affiliate of al-Qaeda, had sworn allegiance to Baghdadi. Shortly thereafter, IS announced creation of its “Wilayaat Kavkaz”. The Caucasus branch, however, has been decimated since Russian security services cracked down in 2013. Together with the allure of fighting in Syria, that appears to have driven many Russian jihadists to the Levant. Militants in the North Caucasus reportedly have also not received the financial support they expected from Raqqa. Thus far, the Caucasus appears less a priority for IS than Libya or South Asia, though IS fighters with roots in the region often call for Muslims there to attack the Russian state in its name.[fn]According to Russian officials, some 5,000 Russian citizens now fight in Syria and Iraq. See, for example, Crisis Group Report, The North Caucasus Insurgency and Syria, op. cit. For background on the Caucasus insurgency see Crisis Group Europe Reports N°s 220 and 221, The North Caucasus: The Challenges of Integration (I), Ethnicity and Conflict, and The North Caucasus: The Challenges of Integration (II), Islam, the Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency, both 19 October 2012.Hide Footnote

Boko Haram’s joining IS in March 2015 appears to have been motivated partly by Shekau’s desire, after suffering territorial losses, for publicity and the legitimacy harnessing the movement to the global jihad might garner. Thus far, little has changed about the organisation’s capability, tactics or identity beyond more polished online promotion. It is not clear that operational ties to Raqqa exist. Although there are fighters from outside the Lake Chad Basin region among its ranks, foreigners are less numerous than in other African jihadist movements.[fn]A Senegalese preacher, arrested by Nigerien authorities in Niamey, admitted the presence of Mauritanians, Senegalese and Sudanese as well as Chadians in Boko Haram’s ranks. Crisis Group’s viewing of police interrogation records, Dakar, October 2015.Hide Footnote  Boko Haram is likely to continue causing tremendous suffering in the hinterlands it plagues and elsewhere, but linking it too directly to the global jihadist movement risks misdiagnosing the threat it poses.

IS’s inability thus far to repeat its Iraq success does not diminish its significance. Understanding its Iraqi roots and armed capability is critical but only partly captures its protean nature: both Iraqi Sunni resistance and transnational millenarian force; a source for some of protection, for others of adventure or identity; a state structure, but also a revolutionary idea. Its resources and military capability and the remote prospects for eradicating it in the near term make it a more difficult challenge than any prior jihadist movement. It nimbly exploits cleavages, particularly along the Sunni-Shia fault line, but also others, like that between Ankara and the Kurds, where its attacks risk contributing to the instability of a country threatened on multiple fronts.[fn]See, for example, Jean-Marie Guéhenno, “Don’t sacrifice Turkey to save Syria”, The Guardian, 29 February 2016.Hide Footnote

The lack of avenues for peaceful dissent and opportunities for young people makes many societies vulnerable to its recruitment, even if it lures only tiny minorities. IS has devised a paradigm of mobilisation both local and opposed to a global establishment. By recruiting online as much as through religious networks that earlier move­ments relied on, and by filling the void left by many states’ failure to provide an alternative, it taps new markets for jihadist recruitment.

C. Al-Qaeda’s Strategic Shift?

As IS has emerged, al-Qaeda has evolved. Drone strikes and military offensives have weakened its core in the Pakistani tribal areas, and Zawahiri’s grainy video sermons appear drab beside IS’s flashy online promotion. But despite IS efforts to win over al-Qaeda affiliates in the Maghreb, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, no top commanders, most of whom rubbed shoulders with bin Laden and Zawahiri in South Asia, have defected. Some affiliates have become more powerful than ever, seizing territory, grafting themselves onto local insurrections and fighting beside rather than seeking to crush or absorb other Sunni movements.

In Syria, as described, Jabhat al-Nusra initially lost out from IS’s rupture with al-Qaeda. Many of its foreign fighters joined IS, but it has regrouped and with a stronger Syrian identity is second in strength among rebels in the north only to Ahrar al-Sham.[fn]Ahrar al-Sham is the most powerful member of the rebel Jaish al-Fatah coalition, with strongholds particularly around Aleppo. See Section III.D. Also Crisis Group Reports, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs and New Approach, both op. cit.Hide Footnote  Even before the split, it was more restrained in attacks on civilians, tempered emphasis on ideology in its governance while attempting to serve the local population, and worked with other rebels, with whom it maintains close operational ties. Its fighters and suicide bombers are the insurgency’s elite attack force, pivotal to offensives around Aleppo and Idlib in summer 2015.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, rebel factions’ officials, Turkey and Jordan, 2013-2015.Hide Footnote

Despite IS efforts to win over al-Qaeda members, no top commanders have defected.

U.S. officials say there are still individuals in the movement with close ties to al-Qaeda’s leadership and who plot against the West.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, U.S. officials, Washington DC 2015; also Crisis Group Report, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs, op. cit.Hide Footnote  A peace process that offered some prospect of Assad’s departure might split the fighting majority, whose priority is a new order in Syria, from those with transnational goals – a cleavage that for now Jolani’s rhetoric tends to straddle.[fn]See, for example, “Nusra leader: Our mission is to defeat Syrian regime”, Al Jazeera America, 28 May 2015; and “For the First Time on Orient News, Comments of the Leader of Jubhat al-Nusra, Abu Mohammad Jolani [English trans.], video, YouTube, 12 December 2015.Hide Footnote  Efforts by rebels to convince al-Nusra’s leadership to end the group’s al-Qaeda affiliation thus far have been unsuccessful. A growing tendency to assert unilateral authority at other rebels’ expense also damages its reputation within the rebellion, as do public criticisms of rebels (including Ahrar al-Sham) for ties to state backers and engagement in UN-sponsored talks.[fn]Crisis Group interviews and communications with rebel officials, Turkey, 2015-2016.Hide Footnote  Yet so long as the war continues, al-Nusra is likely to remain potent and mostly Syria-focused, and other rebels will not confront it for fear of losing its vital contribution against the regime.

In Yemen, AQAP is a main beneficiary of the Saudi-led bombardment. Unlike IS, which is new to the country, it has a long history and an extensive social and family network there. It is ensconced in Hadramout and, following the Huthis’ expulsion, parts of Aden. The group also is now active in Taiz and al-Bayda. After the 2011 revolution, it created a network of affiliates known collectively as Ansar al-Sharia, that are associated with al-Qaeda but have less rigorous membership standards, allowing them to recruit more widely and avoid an explicit al-Qaeda association. It has weathered the death of its leader, Nasir al-Wuhayshi, killed by a drone strike in June 2015. His longtime deputy, Nasir al-Raimi, a trainer in an al-Qaeda camp in the 1990s, appears to have quickly cemented his authority. His personal ties, the movement’s prominence as the affiliate closest to the al-Qaeda leadership – as well as the significance of breaking a pledge of allegiance – mean it is unlikely to abandon al-Qaeda for IS.

For the First Time on Orient News, Comments of the Leader of Jubhat al-Nusra, Abu Mohammad Jolani

Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, the leader of Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria, was interviewed by Orient News in this video posted on YouTube on 12 December 2015. Orient News

Precise relations between AQAP and other anti-Huthi militias in the south, notably the strong, non-Islamist, secessionist Hiraak, are difficult to define. In some places – Aden after its liberation, for example – they already fight each other. In others, such as Taiz, where for now they align against Huthis, these alliances may prove temporary. Clearly, though, the war is a massive boon for al-Qaeda. Even if UN mediation yields a peace deal between the Huthis and their foes – which still appears some way off – ousting it militarily will be tough, especially with the southern question unresolved.

Though expelled by French and Chadian forces from towns in northern Mali they controlled for half of 2013, AQIM militants have gained footholds in Libya, which has become a hub for jihadist networks stretching south into the Sahel, west to Tunisia and Algeria and east to the Levant battlefields. Libya’s security vacuum enabled the attack on the Amenas hydrocarbon complex in eastern Algeria in January 2013, carried out under the leadership of former AQIM commander Mokhtar Belmokhtar.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, security officials Derna residents, al-Bayda, Tripoli, 2015.Hide Footnote  In the Sahel’s fragmented militant scene, groups regularly strike alliances and splinter, but for now, Belmokhtar, who has formed a new group (al-Mourabitoun) and AQIM leader Abdelmalik Droukdel, both with Afghan-generation ties to al-Qaeda, look unlikely to switch allegiance to IS. The former has claimed a hand in the recent Bamako and Ouagadougou attacks.[fn]Jason Burke, “Mokhtar Belmokhtar: the ‘uncatchable’ chief of Africa’s Islamic extremists”, The Guardian, 21 January 2016.Hide Footnote

Lastly, al-Shabaab in Somalia has withstood in the past few years offensives by an African Union (AU) mission, the loss of major population centres, ideological attacks from other Islamists, including earlier jihadist leaders, and, in 2013, an internal power struggle. Part of its resilience lies in the weakness of its rivals: the transitional authorities’ inability to develop credible alternative local governance across rural south-central Somalia and AU forces’ often clumsy operations. But it lies also in the movement’s strengths, particularly its roots in parts of that region and its tactical flexibility.[fn]See Crisis Group Africa Report N°99, Somalia: Al-Shabaab – It Will Be a Long War, 26 June 2014; and Africa Briefings N°s 85, Kenyan Somali Islamist Radicalisation, 25 January 2012; and 74, Somalia’s Divided Islamists, 18 May 2010. Since 2008, al-Shabaab blends insurgent tactics with terrorist attacks: besieging towns, breaking supply lines, conducting night raids while striking in urban areas beyond its direct control. It pays fighters well thanks to diverse income sources: donations, extortion, even in parts of Mogadishu, looting, kidnapping and taxing piracy and smuggling. Its outreach is effective; online content targets the Somali diaspora and appeals, like IS’s, to young men’s desire to belong to a group as much as religious credentials. Outreach in villages stresses need to defend Somalia and Islam from invaders. Foreign influence has shaped its ideological and tactical development but not swamped its Somali core. It still aspires to create an East African regional emirate, and much outreach is now in Kiswahili not Somali.Hide Footnote  Over the past six months, it has been launching set piece attacks against AU bases and retaking as many locations as it loses. At least by night, it again controls much of Mogadishu.[fn]Crisis Group observations, interviews and telephone interviews, Mogadishu, January 2016.Hide Footnote  Once erroneously accused of being foreign, it is now the longest-lived force – politically, socially and militarily – in Somalia.

Abdiqadir Mumin, an al-Shabaab ideologue linked to the diaspora and based in northern Somalia, recently defected to IS with a handful of men. However, al-Shabaab’s new leader, Abu Ubeidah, and his top circle look unlikely to break al-Qaeda ties.[fn]Zawahiri accepted al-Shabaab’s allegiance only in 2012 – bin Laden’s Abbottabad letters suggest he viewed it as unruly and a liability – but al-Qaeda links go back to 1990s Afghanistan. Don Rassler, Gabriel Koehler-Derrick, Liam Collins, Muhammad al-Obaidi, and Nelly Lahoud, “Letters from Abbottabad: Bin Ladin Sidelined?”, CTC West Point, 3 May 2012.Hide Footnote  The resurgence in Yemen of AQAP, with which al-Shabaab enjoys close links, also makes a split less likely. The movement’s threat to Kenya is especially worrying. Missteps by the government or security forces, like indiscriminate arrests or violence or scapegoating Somalis, could alienate Muslims, drive them into al-Shabaab’s arms and make parts of that country ungovernable. For now, the appointment of Kenyan Somali national security officers in the north has gone some way to bridge the gap between the state and affected communities, although authorities should work more with elders, resolve local disputes al-Shabaab exploits and improve living conditions. Actions have been clumsier in Coast, another region with many Muslims and at risk of al-Shabaab infiltration.[fn]See Crisis Group Africa Briefing N°114, Kenya’s Somali North East: Devolution and Security, 17 November 2015. Also Crisis Group interviews, Coast province, Kenya, November 2015. A resident of Lamu, for example, said the “year long curfew in Lamu feels like collective punishment”.Hide Footnote

Al-Qaeda’s evolving strategy, documented in letters between affiliate leaders and borne out on the ground, is partly a pragmatic response to new opportunities and the imperative to adapt after the 2011 Arab protests appeared to render it obsolete.[fn]For example, in 2012, then AQAP leader Nasir al-Wuhayshi urged the AQIM emir to “take a gradual approach” regarding the implementation of Sharia. “First letter from Abu Basir to Emir of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb”, Al-Qaida Papers, Associated Press, undated. Droukdel also wrote to his lieutenants urging them not to alienate locals and even lamented their splitting from Tuareg rebels. See Pascale Combelles Siegel, “AQIM’s Playbook in Mali”CTC Sentinel, 27 March 2013; also James Cockayne, Hidden Power: The Strategic Logic of Organized Crime (Hurst, forthcoming July 2016). Hide Footnote  It may also reflect the leadership change to Zawahiri and that the split with IS has allowed him to distance the movement from more extreme tactics. If Zarqawi’s experience and the Awakening taught IS to show even less mercy to potential rivals, some al-Qaeda local branches appear to have drawn different conclusions, all of which make strategic sense: more pragmatism with other militants and communities; more caution about killing Muslims; more sensitivity to local norms and popular opinion.

Whether al-Qaeda’s strategic shift heralds a change in the longer-term aspirations of any affiliate is unclear.

Whether the new strategy heralds a change in the longer-term aspirations of any affiliate is unclear. Some affiliates still attack civilian and predominantly Western targets: AQIM’s recent West Africa hotel attacks, partly aimed at asserting al-Qaeda’s prominence over IS in the region, are an example.[fn]In Bangladesh, a new branch, al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, set up by Zawahiri in September 2014, has announced its presence with attacks mostly on bloggers or activists espousing what it considers atheist ideas.Hide Footnote  Even those showing more pragmatism contain contingents, if small, whose goals stretch beyond existing borders. Local commanders have, however, allowed international humanitarian organisations to provide aid in areas they control.[fn]Crisis Group telephone interviews, humanitarian officials, November 2015.Hide Footnote  Some Qatari officials quietly promote “moderating” al-Nusra – a stretch, but given its strength perhaps worth exploring.[fn]Crisis Group interview, Qatari official, Autumn 2015; Syrian rebels and Islamist political figures, Turkey and Syria, 2015.Hide Footnote  Other engagement is probably happening, too, given the tactical links between local al-Qaeda branches and Sunni forces backed by regional states, though this may be aimed more at co-opting movements as proxies against Iran and its allies than at taming them.

D. Evolving Identities?

An Islamic State fighter records members of his group as they parade in Syria’s northern Raqqa province in June 2014. REUTERS

IS’s emergence and new Arab wars have transformed jihadists’ tactics, strategies and doctrines. A global typology is beyond this report’s scope and would be hard, given the speed at which the scene mutates, groups’ amorphous nature and fluid memberships and the tendency for movements with different ideologies, goals and targets to cooperate. Some debates, nevertheless, have important policy implications. Often framed theologically, they rarely stray far from the strategic: arguments over what Islam permits track closely what works on the ground.

IS and al-Qaeda differences, at least at leadership level, tend to revolve more around tactics and strategy than goals. Both disavow local regimes as un-Islamic and want to expel the West and Russia from Muslim lands and destroy Israel. For both, the aspiration remains a caliphate that upends the international order. Their paths and timeline for getting there, however, diverge sharply, reflecting the contrasting experiences of their leaders and the contexts in which they emerged.

Theologically, the cornerstone of both groups’ armed campaigns is the doctrine of takfir – deeming persons or groups appearing to be Muslim in fact not Muslim, thereby permitting them to be killed with impunity and circumventing the Quranic general prohibition on a Muslim killing another. Takfir can be invoked in three circumstances: against Muslim tyrants; against Muslims serving tyrants or operating in foreign interests; and against Muslims improperly practicing their religion, a provision particularly targeting Shia, who are referred to by so-called takfiris as rawafid (rejectionists of the Sunni-endorsed lines of succession from the Prophet Muhammad). With notable exceptions that jihadists take as inspiration, takfir was used infrequently in Islamic history, was limited to individual cases and had a high juridical bar.[fn]Mohammed M. Hafez, “Takfir and violence against Muslims”, in Moghadam and Fishman (eds.), Fault Lines in Global Jihad, op. cit.Hide Footnote  Recent jihadist ideologues have reversed all three constraints.

While al-Qaeda and IS, in theory at least, share this expansive conception of takfir, their behaviour differs considerably. Al-Qaeda has usually tried to avoid gratuitous Muslim casualties. Zarqawi’s targeting of Shia in Iraq was a departure that in part reflected his personal hatred of the Shia, but also Iraq’s emerging battle lines and the perception of Iran’s ascendance. Takfir legitimised, for those who believed in it, an all-out Sunni assault on Iran’s perceived proxies in Baghdad.

Zarqawi’s approach was shaped further by new jihadist ideologues, who also borrow from non-Islamic traditions.[fn]In Architect of Global Jihad: The Life of Al-Qaida Strategist Abu Mus’ab al-Suri (London, 2008), Brynar Lia shows that Suri was an eclectic thinker, sometimes sceptical of Salafism’s doctrinal rigidity because of the constraints it imposes on jihadist strategy.Hide Footnote  Abu Bakr al-Naji, the pseudonym of an unknown author, explained in his Management of Savagery how to create and exploit pervasive violence to unseat a tyrant and consolidate power.[fn]The Management of Savagery: The Most Critical Stage Through Which the Umma Will Pass (tr., Will McCants, 2006), John M. Olin Institute for Strategic Studies at Harvard University.Hide Footnote  Abu Abdullah al-Muhajir, building on the work of others, including some with al-Qaeda links, such as Abu Yahya al-Libi, fleshed this out, arguing the propriety and utility of specific tactics, including suicide bombings, collateral damage, kidnapping, assassinations and beheadings.[fn]For more on Abu Abdullah al-Muhajir’s book, Issues in the Fiqh of Jihad, see, “Takfiri literature makes headway in Lebanon”, al-Akhbar English, 11 September 2012. Abdullah Warius and Jarret Brach­man, “Abu Yahya al-Libi’s Human Shields in Modern Jihad”, CTC Sentinel, 15 May 2008. For a helpful discussion of al-Naji’s and al-Muhajir’s contributions to IS, see Hanieh and Rumman, The “Islamic State” Organization, op. cit.Hide Footnote  These writers advocated violence not only to protect a marginalised Sunni community, but also to remake society and give direction to a generation crushed under decades of oppressive governance and an unfriendly global order.

At least in its propaganda, IS aims to extinguish the “grey zone”, what it calls any space for neutrality between the caliphate and heretical regimes and Western powers. Muslims must fight for the former or be seen as non-believers, part of the latter. Local IS commanders have shown occasional pragmatism in Iraq and Syria and are likely to do so elsewhere, given that eradicating all other forms of Sunni opposition would be impossible. Still, IS fights a simultaneous war on all fronts: against primary enemies, Iranian proxies and the Shia; other Sunni rebels; Sunni powers it sees as Western stooges; Russians as infidel supporters of Assad and Iran; Western powers and so forth. It has woven together sectarian, revolutionary and anti-imperialist strands of jihadist thinking.

Al-Qaeda and its affiliates have responded differently to the popular upheaval. AQAP and al-Nusra may fight in sectarian wars and target Huthis and Alawites; and al-Qaeda is hardly shy about killing civilians or cooperating, in Pakistan for example, with deeply sectarian allies.[fn]For al-Qaeda’s cooperation with Pakistani sectarian groups, see Crisis Group Report, Pakistan: The Militant Jihadi Challenge, op. cit.; Moeed Yusuf (ed.), Pakistan’s Counterterrorism Challenge (Washington DC, 2014); and Khaled Ahmed, Sectarian War: Pakistan’s Links to Sunni-Shia Violence and its Links to the Middle East (Karachi, 2012).Hide Footnote  But Zawahiri, like bin Laden before him, tends to maintain that making enemies of Shia as a whole and alienating Muslim public opinion through indiscriminate killing work against the main goals of attacking the West, driving it out of the Muslim world and overthrowing tyrannical local regimes.[fn]“English Translation of Ayman al-Zawahiri’s letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi”, The Weekly Standard, 11 October 2005; and Brian Dodwell, “The Abbottabad Documents: The Quiet Ascent of Adam Gadahn”, CTC Sentinel, 22 May 2012; and The Osama Bin Laden Files: Letters and Documents Discovered by SEAL Team Six during their Raid on Bin Laden’s Compound, The Combating Terrorism Center (West Point, 2012).Hide Footnote  Characteristic was the celebration by some al-Qaeda supporters at the “discretion” shown by not spilling Muslim blood during AQIM’s November 2015 Bamako attack, as compared with IS’s indiscriminate attacks in Paris the previous week (in fact some non-Western casualties in Bamako and Ouagadougou were Muslim).[fn]Liam Stack, “al Qaeda supporters celebrate Mali attack on Twitter”, The New York Times, 20 November 2015; also “Pro-AQ Jihadists Celebrate Bamako Attack, Contrast to IS Tactics”, SITE Intelligence Group Jihadist Threat, 20 November 2015.Hide Footnote  In Syria and Yemen, al-Qaeda also worked with militias backed by powers it claims it wants to overthrow and, as described, has received on occasion help from states.[fn]Crisis Group Reports, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs; and Yemen: Is Peace Possible?, op. cit.Hide Footnote

The debate between “near” and “far” enemies has also shifted. Though al-Qaeda pioneered the switch from “heretical” states in the region to the West in the late 1990s, most affiliates are now fighting locally. Conversely, IS initially, as AQI and in its current guise, focused mostly on Iraq, Syria and other parts of the Muslim world. It appears to have moved over the past year, however, from simply encouraging “lone wolf” attacks elsewhere to actively dedicating resources for blows against the West – like, for example, its coordination of the Paris killing spree. This is partly to sow unrest within Western society and provoke a backlash against the Muslim diaspora that would generate additional supporters; and partly to cement its position as leader of the jihadist movement and bin Laden’s true successor.[fn]See, for example, IS material summary compiled by Aaron Zelin.Hide Footnote  Its focus on Muslim populations in Europe and exploitation of the internet, with multilingual propaganda, have also, to a degree, collapsed the distance between near and far.

Attitudes toward the nation-state system are, in some conflicts, perhaps a variable in determining who can be engaged diplomatically. At their top level, IS and al-Qaeda have transnational goals. Despite its primary identity as an Iraqi insurgency, IS – at least according to its own statements – wants to provoke a war across the Muslim world as a step to expanding its caliphate; Zawahiri and al-Qaeda affiliate leaders view their local struggles as fronts in a wider transnational jihad.

Other movements, including some self-identified as jihadist, espouse national goals: ousting an illegitimate government, fighting foreign “occupiers” or establishing their conception of Sharia (Islamic law). The Taliban has many elements, but its core is nationalist, if mostly Pashtun, dedicated to recovering its emirate in Afghanistan and expelling Western forces. Ahrar Al-Sham repeatedly says it wants to change Syria’s political order, not remake the Muslim world, despite a senior al-Qaeda operative, Abu Khalid al-Suri, being among its founders and its tight battlefield coordination with Jabhat al-Nusra.[fn]Ahrar al-Sham’s Abu Yazan: “It’s our country and our revolution”, Abu al-Jamajem. Since 2014, Ahrar al-Sham has also rejected the Salafi-jihadist label, ibid.
Hide Footnote
 It openly takes Turkish support, and its leaders declare willingness to work with the West to oust Assad. Ansar Dine, which aligned with al-Qaeda in Mali in 2012-2013, and some Ansar al-Sharia factions in Libya similarly appear to aspire to Islamic rule within existing borders.[fn]Crisis Group interviews, Libyan politicians and members of Ansar Sharia, Tripoli and Benghazi, 2014.Hide Footnote  

Even among movements with nationalist goals, few accept political or religious pluralism. The Taliban leadership aspires to a government under the authority of a divinely-appointed emirate. While it appears open to compromise – and in the past some of its leaders have been willing to accept other forms of government – it still insists that any new political order must be based on its version of Sharia; it would have to perform ideological gymnastics to justify power sharing and a government based on the people’s will.[fn]See, for example, Michael Semple, “Rhetoric, Ideology and Organisational Structure of the Taliban Movement”, U.S. Institute for Peace, 2014.Hide Footnote  Ahrar al-Sham leaders, on the other hand, concur since at least mid-2014 with other rebels that Syrians should determine the country’s system of governance and select its leaders. They remain Salafi, define vaguely if at all how popular will would be determined and avoid the word “democracy”, but they agree on the principle, and al-Qaeda ideologues attack them for it.[fn]Crisis Group interviews and communications, current and former senior Ahrar al-Sham officials, Istanbul, March 2014-December 2015; also Crisis Group Report, Rigged Cars and Barrel Bombs, op. cit. For attacks on Ahrar al-Sham from al-Qaeda-linked ideologues, see articles by senior Jab­hat al-Nusra figure Abu Firas al-Shami at and AboFiras.Hide Footnote

Identifying groups’ goals can, of course, be difficult. Official messaging may not reflect positions of the rank-and-file or even the leadership: some are clearly committed to radical ideals; others express them to curry favour with Gulf-based donors or may feign pragmatism to win state backing. To a degree, identities are defined as much by strategy, tactics and sources of funding and support as by longer-term goals, given the often remote nature of those goals. But jihadists’ increasing prominence in war zones and the speed with which some mutate make it vital to monitor ideology, between and, to the extent possible, within movements. What they want, particularly related to the state system, their openness to sharing power and tolerance toward other sects or religious groups, bears on policy. Any sign of evolution or possibility of influencing or splitting them along these lines may open new ways to diminish their threat.

E. Evolving Jihadist Rule?

A Boko Haram flag flies in Damasak in the northeastern Nigerian state of Borno. March 2015. REUTERS/Joe Penney

Controlling territory, among the thorniest challenges for any insurgency, has proven especially hard for jihadists. Their harsh, literal implementation of Sharia has rarely inspired much support. More importantly, most have proven inept rulers. But given the conditions of extreme violence or state collapse that enable them to seize territory, communities may find them better than the alternatives or have little choice but to acquiesce. Also, some movements show signs of learning to govern in ways that avoid fully alienating those under their control.

In recent history, few radical Islamist movements had held territory before 2011. The Taliban, first as it advanced north and then as the government of most of Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, initially brought some basic law and order, but its puritanical mores, economic mismanagement, sporadic attempts to curb poppy cultivation, forced conscription and war-time atrocities soon alienated many, particularly in cities and towns.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Talking About Talks, op. cit.; and Crisis Group Asia Report N°256, Afghanistan’s Insurgency after the Transition, 12 May 2014.Hide Footnote  Its leaders’ poor performance left them isolated after their rout in 2001 by Northern Alliance and other U.S.-backed forces.

It was, in turn, mostly the failures of the new government and the U.S., its primary sponsor, particularly allowing local powerbrokers to manipulate the U.S. war on terror to abuse or eliminate rivals, that enabled the Taliban, excluded from the new political order and whose leaders had sheltered across the border in Pakistan, to re-emerge as an insurgency, rekindling ties and offering protection. Its courts, often mobile, dispense fast, predictable and enforced, if harsh, justice that by most accounts is reasonably popular, at least outside cities. Its “shadow” state administration operates across much of rural Afghanistan, though is dedicated more to the military campaign than service delivery. In some places, insurgents allow Kabul’s education and health ministries into areas under their control to run schools and clinics, sometimes even shaping the former’s curricula.[fn]For example, Nick Walsh, “Taliban tightens grip on Afghan schools”, CNN, 22 May 2012.Hide Footnote

Similarly, al-Shabaab’s rule at the height of its territorial control (2007-2011) was austere but brought some initial order. Some villagers at first welcomed schools for Quranic education, basic medical services, reasonably predictable tolls on roads, regular, safe market days and local dispute resolution. As an insurgency, al-Shabaab now combines unpopular violence with pragmatism and political acuity. It deals ruthlessly with potential rivals, while mediating between clans or backing weaker ones against rivals and avoiding too close an association with any.[fn]Over recent months al-Shabaab has lost locations mostly where clans have closed ranks, including recently in Middle Shabelle, apparently in reaction to its tax demands for drought victims elsewhere in Somalia. It does best amid outright rivalry between clans or where clans feel frozen out of power. Abdul Khalif and Cedric Barnes, “Why is Al-Shabaab Still a Potent Threat?”, Crisis Group, 11 February 2016.Hide Footnote  Both the Taliban and al-Shabaab have permitted, if uneasily and by no means universally, aid groups to work in areas they control, which involves engagement to agree on terms.[fn]Ashley Jackson, “Negotiating Perceptions: Al-Shabaab and Taliban View of Aid Agencies”, Overseas Development Institute, August 2014; also, Crisis Group interviews, aid workers after the Somali famine, January-March 2011.Hide Footnote

Neither movement is popular. Many villages are caught between their harsh rule and violence and the predation of local government-aligned strongmen; for many, survival hinges on working with whomever holds sway locally. Both, however, deliver some basic public goods and exploit local grievances, conflicts and tribal or clan relations to win support, while playing on intra-tribal or clan tensions between traditional authorities and those marginalised, particularly younger men. They exert their authority in captured territory through an often carefully calibrated mix of coercion and co-option.

Since 2011, more jihadists have seized territory. IS’s rule is difficult to assess given the dearth of information and that it varies considerably across Iraq and Syria, but it is far more sophisticated than that of Zarqawi’s AQI a decade earlier. Its violence raises the cost of dissent, while its leaders have forged closer ties to parts of society. More importantly, in contrast to any past jihadist movement, it appears able to run a state, its recent setbacks notwithstanding. Unlike the Taliban and al-Shabaab, it inherited a largely functioning infrastructure and civil service and has co-opted parts of the local bureaucracy. In most cities and towns, sanitation, rubbish collection, schools and clinics still work. Its law enforcement may be draconian but reportedly is not yet corrupt; its internal revenue generation is often extortive but at least so far appears sustainable. It has, like other movements, emphasised the quick and enforced resolution of often longstanding disputes.[fn]Crisis Group telephone interviews, residents of IS-controlled areas, October 2015. Khales Joumah, “Mean but Clean: Extremists Fix Roads, Make Mosul a Nicer Place”, Niqash, 14 May 2015.Hide Footnote

The evolution in AQAP’s governance in Yemen is as striking. During the 2011 revolution, it overran part of Abyan governorate, including its capital Zinjibar. Army reinforcements took time to deploy – the army split during the revolution, some factions siding with protesters – but then ousted militants swiftly, with local support. This led Nasir al-Wuhayshi, AQAP’s leader at the time and al-Qaeda’s general manager (in effect its number two after Zawahiri), to write to al-Qaeda affiliate leaders elsewhere, notably in Mali, to share his experiences and urge increasing sensitivity to local opinion.[fn]See “First letter”, op. cit. Al-Wuhayshi urged pragmatism to avoiding alienating inhabitants of captured areas, advice that AQIM’s leader, Abdelmalik Droukdel, appears to have heeded, though his commanders followed haphazardly. Their rule again varied across different parts of the country – overall less brutal than Boko Haram, IS or even AQIM’s own splinter, the Movement for Monotheism and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO), but still harsh, with unpopular music and smoking bans, corporal punishment and destruction of Sufi shrines and cultural artefacts. Even so, numerous reports suggest some villagers welcomed AQIM’s and to a degree MUJAO’s ability to enforce their dispute and conflict resolution. Crisis Group interviews, former MUJAO member, Bamako, June 2015; also, residents, Gao, August 2013.Hide Footnote

When AQAP seized parts of Hadramout governorate, including Mukalla, as Yemen’s war escalated in 2015, it appointed a local council headed by prominent elders, including Salafis but not al-Qaeda members. New religious courts are viewed by many locals as fair and swift in contrast to the corrupt and slow official system, which in any case has collapsed. Civil servants are paid, and the city has not suffered the chaos of elsewhere, partly because it is among the few areas not hit by Saudi-coalition bombs. AQAP looted local banks, but the council generates revenue mostly through taxes on goods, particularly fuel. Shipping companies continue to trade with the al-Qaeda controlled town; though wary of docking in its port, they stop in international waters and smaller boats ferry in goods, including gas.[fn]Crisis Group observations and interviews, Mukalla, October 2015.Hide Footnote

AQAP’s fighters make locals uneasy but have reduced petty crime. Its leaders meet representatives of Western aid organisations to coordinate relief, as jihadist leaders did in northern Mali in 2012.[fn]Crisis Group telephone interview, humanitarian representatives, November 2015.Hide Footnote  It has destroyed several Sufi shrines and mausoleums in Hadramout but interfered less with dress norms and has not forced people to pray or pay religious taxes. Selling qat is forbidden, but music and TV are not. It has also responded differently to dissent. In a town just east of Mukalla, after demonstrations against AQAP’s assassinations of religious scholars and its fighters’ behaviour at checkpoints, the local commander met with town leaders and agreed to withdraw most of his men to a nearby military camp.[fn]Crisis Group observations and interviews, Mukalla, October 2015.Hide Footnote

Women lead protests in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, demanding that security forces step up the search for the 276 schoolgirls abducted by Boko Haram militants in April 2014. REUTERS/Afolabi Sotunde

AQAP’s and IS’s evolving governance has certainly not been replicated by all extremists. Boko Haram claims to want to bring Islamic rule to the Lake Chad Basin but pillages captured areas of northern Nigeria, bringing not even the blend of coercion and co-option deployed by some others, let alone any pretence of Sharia.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Boko Haram, op. cit. Also see Alex Thurston, “‘The Disease is Unbelief’: Boko Haram’s Religious and Political Worldview”, The Brookings Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World Analysis Paper, no. 22, January 2016.Hide Footnote Although many in northern Nigeria distrust the state, identify with Boko Haram’s criticisms of its abuses and aspire to a greater governance role for Islam, the movement’s brutality in towns it seized, the havoc it wreaked and the kidnapping of schoolgirls have stripped it of popular support. Its tactics resemble more those of the LRA or other militias plaguing the African Great Lakes than IS or al-Qaeda affiliates.[fn]EJ Hogendoorn, “Boko Haram’s Evolution: How it got this far and how to stop it”, Open Canada, 21 October 2015.Hide Footnote  The disparate tribal militias loosely aligned under the Pakistani Taliban banner perform little better in areas they sporadically seize; any initial support evaporates quickly in the face of their cruelty.[fn]Crisis Group Report, Pakistan: Countering Militancy in PATA, op. cit. Also Abubakr Siddique, The Pashtun Question: The Unresolved Key to the Future of Afghanistan and Pakistan (London, 2014).Hide Footnote

Nor would even the more adept groups be credible alternatives in reasonably functioning states. Conditions must be awful before communities accept them or are forced to do so to survive – illustrating again how war and state collapse create settings in which jihadists thrive. But where their governance is evolving, there are clearly policy implications. It has been common for extremists to win some initial support by bringing basic law and order – especially predictable and enforced dispute resolution – but for that to dissipate fast as their violence becomes arbitrary and their punishments draconian, as they ban music and empower criminals, as services collapse and rubbish piles up. Will that model hold? Can groups be contained geographically in expectation that over time inhabitants will revolt or support their ouster? Or will they hold territory and deliver services in a way that deepens their ties to communities, furthers their agenda and safeguards a haven from which to launch attacks?

It is too early to say, but more such movements hold land now than ever before, many of the crises that permit them to do so show little sign of abating, and some are learning to calibrate their approach toward those they rule.

IV. Reversing the Fourth Wave

The rebel-held Al-Sukri neighborhood of Aleppo in 2013. MAGNUM/Moises Saman

The extending reach of IS and al-Qaeda-linked groups poses thorny policy dilemmas, especially where they hold territory, but also in places facing an increased risk of terrorist attacks. World leaders ramping up their rhetoric against IS must learn from mistakes, while redoubling efforts to understand evolving dynamics.

Many Western politicians overstate the threat. This is, to a degree, understandable: jihadist attacks target their citizens. But even IS poses no major, let alone existential, peril to their countries. Beyond the human misery it already causes, the gravest risk is that its violence provokes reactions – xenophobia, curtailing of civil liberties, selective policing at home or military adventurism abroad – that aggravate the conditions that enabled its rise, open new opportunities for it in the Muslim world and facilitate recruitment in the West.

Over the past few years, however, jihadist movements have become more powerful than ever before. Standard counter-terrorism toolkits – designations, financial sanctions, travel bans, targeted killings and special forces’ operations, for example – are insufficient against movements that control cities, towns and supply lines, provide public goods, generate revenue locally and have tens of thousands of fighters. Some of their leaders’ ideology and aspirations complicate engaging them politically, but there is scant modern precedent for defeating an entrenched insurgent movement through military means alone. Sri Lanka’s approach to the Tamils, for example, even leaving aside its law-of-war abuses and horrific human cost, would not work in much of the belt from West Africa to South Asia, given porous borders, wars’ often proxy nature and states that have collapsed or have limited writ in hinterlands. Similarly, replicating in Syria Russia’s scorched-earth tactics in Chechnya would more likely bolster the ranks of IS than defeat it; in any case, Russian airstrikes have primarily targeted other rebels, not IS. Elsewhere, military gains have often merely relocated the problem.[fn]Operations against Boko Haram, for example, have dispersed its fighters across the border. Algeria’s campaign against the remnants of the GSPC, which became AQIM, pushed militants into the Sahel; French operations in turn appear to have shifted many to Libya. The U.S. ousting of the Taliban largely displaced its leadership and much of the al-Qaeda top leadership to Pakistan. Russian operations in the North Caucasus have partly caused many jihadists to go to the Levant.Hide Footnote

What makes the fourth wave so perilous, however, is less the groups’ strength than the geopolitical upheaval that they profit from.[fn]See also Darryl Li, “A Jihadist Anti-Primer”, Middle East Research and Information Project 276, Fall 2015.Hide Footnote  First, decisively reversing jihadist gains often requires ending the wars they fight in. In Yemen, without a peace deal between the Huthis and loyalists of former President Saleh on the one hand and forces aligned to the Saudi-led coalition, prospects of ousting al-Qaeda from the territories it controls are bleak. The longer it brings a semblance of order amid chaos, the stronger it will grow. Even with a peace deal, it may have deepened local ties to such a degree and Yemeni security forces may have become so debilitated that they will struggle to oust violent jihadists as they did in 2012. A deal would further fracture the anti-Huthi alliance of which AQAP is part, though what the net effect of that on the movement would be is unclear: it might simply reshuffle alliances and mark the start of the war’s next phase.

Similarly, reversing jihadist gains in Libya will depend on resolving rivalries between other local forces and persuading them to collaborate against IS. It will depend, too, on giving areas associated with the Qadhafi regime, which are most vulnerable to IS recruitment, a stronger position in the national fabric and probably also self-defence opportunities.[fn]For how to do this, see Issandr El Amrani, “How much of Libya does the Islamic State control?”, Foreign Policy (online), 18 February 2016.Hide Footnote  A bombing campaign could hamper IS operations, especially near oil facilities, and degrade its materiel; in Libya such targeted strikes may make sense. But so long as rivalries between its enemies persist, it will continue to hold the area around Sirte and may extend further east. If the U.S. or others decide – mistakenly – to press ahead with heavier bombing, better they do so without demanding that the fledging, contested unity government invite or endorse foreign military action, notwithstanding the legal obstacles that would create, lest that further diminish its credibility. More can also be done to engage with diverse Libyan security actors – and promote contact between them – to both build support for the political process and find potential partners against IS.

The best starting point against IS would be a grand bargain that dials back the Iran-Saudi rivalry that drives Shia and Sunni radicalism across the region.

Secondly, much as smaller groups profit from the Libya and Yemen wars, so IS profits in Iraq and Syria from its enemies’ regional confrontation. The best starting point against it would be a grand bargain to dial back the Iran-Saudi rivalry that drives both Sunni and Shia radicalism, is a principal obstacle to ending crises across the region and poses a graver threat to global stability than jihadists. Prospects appear bleak, but urging an entente should be as vital a priority as fighting IS. Without it there is risk of mounting confrontation, with Syria its epicentre and both sides describing their violence as counter-terrorism, that pits an Iran-Baghdad-Damascus-Hizbollah axis, with Russia joining opportunistically, against the mostly Sunni powers in the new Saudi alliance, backed uneasily in the West. Efforts to narrow other fault lines that open space for jihadists, – between, for example, conservative Arab regimes and the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey and Kurdish armed groups, now Turkey and Russia and India and Pakistan, should also be redoubled – even if rapprochement seems remote.

Thirdly, there is the nature of many affected states. The largest movements have filled vacuums left by state collapse in Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen and, to a degree, Afghanistan. Jihadists thrive, too, in parts of more capable states like Egypt, Mali, Pakistan, Russia and those around the Lake Chad Basin where the government’s writ has traditionally been limited. In many vulnerable states and those at war, government behaviour is a main source of grievances driving support for jihadist movements or provoking crises they profit from. Capable, resilient states should be the foundation of efforts against extremism. However, the outlook for recovery, reform and regeneration, particularly in the Arab world, is gloomy. Little suggests that governments largely responsible for the fourth wave are ready to adapt in ways needed to counter it.

Fourthly, leaders in many of the countries most affected simply view the threat differently than their Western counterparts. Some, as described, are more focused on regional rivalries or may fear that action against jihadists would anger religious establishments. Others see opposition movements as graver threats to their rule or jihadists as useful leverage with the West and a pretext for repressing other rivals.[fn]Former Yemeni President Saleh, for example, co-opted mujahidin returning from Afghanistan as he battled in the south for power in newly-unified Yemen. He then gave government posts to some, while sidelining others, even if often retaining ties to them through intelligence services. Throughout the last two decades of his rule, he used the jihadist threat to win Western support, receiving training and weapons to fight al-Qaeda. Despite sporadic crackdowns, usually under U.S. pressure – particularly after the attack on the naval ship USS Cole in the Aden harbour (2000) and 9/11 the next year – his dealings with Sunni radicals, al-Qaeda in particular, tended to be guided by his divide-and-rule approach to politics in general.Hide Footnote  The variance in jihadists’ targets – Western powers, local regimes and Shia – means that governments in affected areas confront dilemmas different from those facing Western powers, which are threatened, for the most part, from afar: cracking down can stir a hornets’ nest, shift jihadists’ anger at foreign powers homewards and increase local terrorism. Some states, notably Pakistan, have badly miscalculated this balancing act, a mistake Turkey may have replicated in Syria. But contrasting incentives mean anti-jihadist alliances tend to be flimsy, and the U.S. and European focus on the threat to the West, while understandable, can have a distortive local impact.

There is, of course, no single solution. The diversity of groups and the wars they fight in mean that any approach must be developed case-by-case, with accurate diagnoses of the relevant movement’s strength, goals and relationship to communities, of those communities’ grievances, the motives of governments, militaries and outside powers and of whether a credible force exists that can act without making matters worse and is not distracted by rivals.

Options against groups like those that captured northern Mali, for example, – that initially enjoyed shallow support, fled when confronted by a serious force and some of which appear to have had transnational goals – differ from those against the Afghan Taliban, which is firmly entrenched in the Pashtun heartlands, largely nationalist, enjoys at least intelligence support and safe havens in Pakistan and has weathered U.S. troop numbers in the six figures. Tackling unpopular Boko Haram, which can hide in the vast desert and bush around Lake Chad but against which regional governments are now reasonably united, requires a very different strategy than in Libya against militants in Benghazi and Derna that other revolutionary brigades view as allies and many residents more as wayward youth than hardened extremists. Understanding local dynamics is critical. Each movement should be tackled individually, not as a global phenomenon.

That said, many pose similar dilemmas. First is on the use of force. Where jiha­dists have seized territory, does military action to oust them make sense; if so how and by whom; and, most importantly, what local administration follows? Secondly, does the targeted killing of leaders help reduce the threat, either locally or to the West? Thirdly, what engagement is feasible, what ends should it serve and what risks does it entail? And lastly, as jihadists’ ability to profit from war and state collapse brings new urgency to efforts to prevent crises that may open opportunities for them, what role can the emerging agenda of countering violent extremism (CVE) play in shoring up states’ resilience?

A. A More Strategic Use of Force

1. Against IS in Iraq and Syria

A plume of smoke rises above a building in Tikrit during an air strike in March 2015. REUTERS/Thaier Al-Sudani

Part of IS’s allure rests on its momentum, its ability, in its own words, to “remain and expand”, to portray itself as having assumed the mantle of Sunni leadership across the region. The longer it holds a swathe of Iraq and Syria, the stronger its aura of invincibility and the greater its appeal will be. Ousting it or at least putting it on the back foot should thus be a priority.

But IS also thrives in chaos. Woven within its narrative are both its inexorable advance and a strand of apocalyptic thinking that envisages an eventual final battle with Western forces. Most importantly, it is a product of Sunnis’ suffering and, in Iraq, their struggle, after Saddam Hussein’s ouster, to forge a new political identity. Reclaiming territory is vital, but doing so at the cost of further alienating Sunnis – having already lost them in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion and then by a betrayal of the Awakening – would be counterproductive. The lynchpin of any approach and that must shape any use of force has to be a political strategy to win over the communities in which IS is embedded.

Bombs alone will not do the job. Disrupting IS’s service delivery risks harming communities as much as jihadists; history shows that affected communities tend to rally behind local oppressors against external attackers. Pounding Raqqa after the Paris attacks had no strategic value; further flattening and driving more residents from homes risks playing into the hands of extremists as much as weakening them. Airstrikes, even if intensified, only work if they reinforce allies on the ground, which raises the question of which forces can lead offensives.

Even when the U.S. was deployed in Iraq in large numbers – a height of some 160,000 troops during the Surge – it was effective against IS only in partnership with local forces. During the Awakening, the U.S. backstopped the tribal “Sons of Iraq” by giving structure to their formations, providing rudimentary training, reinforcing them when necessary, paying salaries and running interference with the Iraqi state.[fn]Peter R. Mansour, Surge: My Journey with General David Petraeus and the Remaking of the Iraq War (New Haven and London, 2013), p. 140.Hide Footnote

Replicating that today would be hard, for many reasons. Even hawks in the U.S. have little appetite for a massive redeployment and with good reason. Committing larger numbers of Western (or Russian) ground forces would reinforce IS’s narrative of infidel crusaders, accelerate its intake of fighters, foreign and local, and play to its apocalyptic narrative. Even a more limited Western deployment, as some recommend – in numbers ranging up to 25,000, including military advisers, Special Forces and Quick Reaction Forces – to back local and regional elements would pose enormous hazards for an uncertain return.[fn]U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, among others, call for U.S. ground troops in Syria. Stephen Kalin, “U.S. senators call for 20,000 troops in Syria and Iraq”, Reuters, 29 November 2015. Kimberly Kagan, Fredrick Kagan and Jessica D. Lewis estimated the needs of a first phase alone at 25,000. “A Strategy to Defeat the Islamic State”, Institute for the Study of War, September 2014.Hide Footnote  Russian involvement in Syria means a risk of global escalation; even were that danger somehow eliminated, the U.S. has no state ally to work with in Syria and would risk getting sucked into fighting simultaneously IS, al-Qaeda, its rebel allies and regime loyalists.

In Iraq, the U.S. has to worry less about Russian involvement, but Iran and Shia politics in Baghdad could prove no less daunting. Even during its eight-year occupation, the U.S. failed to convert the eventual military success of the Awakening into a political one by brokering a deal between its Sunni allies and the Iraqi state – and that was when it had more troops on the ground than anyone contemplates today, Iran’s influence was weaker, and Shia militias were less active.

Marshalling local and regional forces for the U.S. to back would also be challenging. Other rebels and their al-Qaeda allies have done the most in Syria against IS, repelling it from the north west, but they cannot fight it successfully in the east while hemmed in by the regime and pounded by Russian airstrikes. So long as the war between regime and rebels rages, training the latter to fight only jihadists has no chance, as shown by the dismal results of U.S. attempts to do so at a time when rebel prospects were much less bleak than today.[fn]Many trained at significant cost were quickly captured or killed by al-Nusra and their weapons confiscated. Noah Bonsey, “Turkey and the U.S. in Syria: Time for Some Hard Choices”, Crisis Group blog, 10 August 2015.Hide Footnote  In Iraq, Kurdish and Shia militias are among the most capable, but neither appears keen to fight for the Sunni heartlands or has local support there; to the contrary, their involvement would aggravate tensions with local communities, potentially driving them further into IS’s arms. The same is true of the Kurdish YPG in Syria. Arming militias also further degrades the Iraqi state.

Most important, while Baghdad and the U.S. have in places raised Sunni allies against IS, another uprising like the Awakening looks remote. Tribes joined against AQI only after being convinced that the U.S. would be a reliable ally. Their bitter experience in the aftermath means that any foreign force would face an uphill battle to win their trust. Their suffering at the hands of Baghdad and IS’s infiltration of local social structures and crushing of its opponents have heightened the local population’s belief that jihadists will be around long after foreign forces eventually leave. Unless Western states make an open-ended commitment of troops at far higher levels than seem possible, it will be hard to win back former allies.

With a U.S. re-invasion off the table, the campaign against IS has been conducted on a more limited scale. Recent offensives have involved warnings to civilians to leave towns and massive airstrikes to oust militants, followed by the Iraqi government, in cooperation with para-state forces, advancing a patchwork of small units – including counter-terrorism forces, retrained Sunni local and federal police and Kurdish forces – to retake territory. Former Sunni political leaders, displaced by IS, are waiting out the fighting in Baghdad and elsewhere, hoping to recover their legitimacy and reestablish their authority by rebuilding the infrastructure the offensive against IS destroys. The Iraqi government, with the support of the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Turkey, is pushing for decentralisation, with a Sunni-majority enclave centred in Anbar province and extending to Mosul, whence Gulf countries and Turkey would support the local Sunni leadership and assist with reconstruction funds.[fn]“The U.S. will fully support the plan endorsed by the [Iraqi] Council of Ministers on May 19 for the liberation of Anbar, as well as the Iraqi government’s priority of de-centralization to empower local communities in line with the Iraqi Constitution. This ‘functional federalism’ effort being pursued by the Iraqi government is integral to ensuring that ISIL – once defeated – can never again return to Iraqi soil”. Statement by the White House press secretary on “Additional U.S. Steps in the Counter ISIL-Effort”, 10 June 2015.Hide Footnote

This strategy is unlikely to succeed. Iran and, to a degree, Russia oppose any devolution that could empower Sunnis. Decentralisation would need to be defined along administrative rather than sectarian lines and relate to all provinces and districts, not just Sunni areas, to undercut Iranian resistance, provide flexibility to other provinces that resist Baghdad’s tight control and, hopefully, start to reverse the communal logic of Iraqi governance.[fn]Divisions within the Shia and Kurdish parties and loss of support among their constituents could lead to more fragmentation but might also help break community-based politics and force the formation of cross-communitarian alliances.Hide Footnote

More importantly, the anti-IS strategy, which largely concerns the mechanics of governance, does not in itself address the Sunni community’s anomie, which, alongside its marginalisation, IS feeds off. Renovating the structure of governance will not necessarily imbue it with substance. The key to broad Sunni re-engagement is narrowing the gap between the Sunni leadership and its constituents, particularly young people. This is especially so if non-ideological supporters of IS are to be prised from its ideologically motivated core, which would not disappear even if ousted from towns. Massive destruction and backing largely discredited leaders who abandoned Sunni areas after the Awakening would be a weak base on which to build a new Sunni political project.

Attempting to replicate in Mosul the 2015 capture of Anbar province’s Tikrit and Ramadi, which all but destroyed the cities in the name of saving them, will be far riskier. The Sunni character of Anbar is undisputed, but the longstanding regional competition over the multi-ethnic and strategically located Mosul will complicate stabilising the city in the wake of any campaign, which itself will be more complex than any previous ones against IS. Turkey, the Iraqi government, Iran and Shia militias, and the Kurds (including both the Kurdish Democratic Party and PKK, themselves at odds with one another) are all determined to secure their own interests and, perhaps more important, deny their rivals the same.

What, then, is the alternative? If territory cannot be usefully won because of the difficulty of also winning over its in