WHICH UNTOLD STORY By Ghassan Kadi 31 October 2014

WHICH UNTOLD STORY By Ghassan Kadi, 31 October 2014
Introduction: Written for the well-known and respected  Facebook group "The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story". Ghassan from 2011 until late 2014 wrote specially for the group which comprised of mainly non-Syrians who had joined  to learn about Syria and support her. From 2011 until late 2014  his wife Intibah Kadi had been an administrator of the group.

WHICH UNTOLD STORY

When the “War On Syria” started, the world media were reporting that there was a revolution in Syria, a revolution that was inspired by the so-called “Arab Spring” seeking reform, democracy and freedom of expression, among other things that the West considers as “hip”. Syrian patriots and their friends knew well from the very beginning that Syria was neither having a revolution nor a civil war. They realized that Syria was under a vicious attack that was targeting its people, secular system, economy, history, infrastructure, and sovereignty with the ultimate purpose of destroying its central role in the Axis of Resistance. That attack was concocted by a myriad of nations and organizations of diverse backgrounds and interests; united only by their hatred to Syria.

That was the untold story then, and it had to be told for the world to hear.

But the untold story of Syria is a dynamic on-going saga that should be retold in accordance with the changes in and within Syria’s enemies.

 

As the “War On Syria” unfolds and reshapes itself, Syria faces new enemies, and the major new enemy today is the Islamic State (IS). And even though Islamic fundamentalism was one of the original major elements in the Anti-Syrian Cocktail that started the “War On Syria” in 2011, the monster is changing its form and reach. For Syria to win its new/old fight, it would need more than military prowess; it needs updated information strategies.

The turn in the war is due to the fact that “War On Syria” did not proceed in accordance with the plot of the Anti-Syrian Cocktail.

Owing to the great achievements of the gallant Syrian Army, the coalition broke apart by the individual interests of its members, some of whom are now fighting each other. United by hatred, dismantled by individual greed, members of the original Anti-Syrian Cocktail are scrambling, each trying to scavenge a win while he can, if he can. A quick and brief look at the developments of the last three years can clearly reveal at least all of the following:

1. The Qataris and the Saudis are at odds and in a conflict that may escalate.

2. The FSA is now almost non-existent and fighting Al-Nusra and ISIS.

3. The Syrian Army continues to score victories in the Damascus, Hama, and Aleppo Provinces.

4. The Syrian Army continues to fight the Islamic State in Deir Ezzur.

5. There is a growing division within the ranks of the Saudi royals.

6. There is a world-wide awakening that the Islamic State is a global danger.

7. The Americans, British and French are bombing the Islamic State.

8. Even the Saudis and Qataris are bombing the Islamic State.

9. Turkey is refusing to come to the party of global effort against the Islamic State.

10. There is growing dissent within Saudi Arabia against the royal family and its recent involvement in the war against the Islamic State.

One would wonder what unity is realistically left in this once united coalition.

The obvious strategy behind the American strikes on the oil refineries and other infrastructure that has fallen under the Islamic State is a means to cripple the IS by cutting off its lifeline and supplies that give it independence. The strikes also attempt to coerce the Islamists back into submission. These are the simple and most plausible reasons behind the strikes on IS. However, most of the analyses seem to avoid the obvious and focus on theories that make the Americans appear as acting “according to plan”. This cannot be further from the truth, because reality clearly reveals that nothing has happened according to plan.

With all of the changes and Syria’s achievements, one could argue that the untold story of three years ago has already been told. There is little strategic gain in continuing to retell it in its original form.

The world is now boiling and raging with anti-IS passion. The IS is now seen, worldwide, as a vicious and rather primitive force that is threatening humanity. And whilst no one wishes for more terrorist attacks akin to the recent Ottawa attack, such actions are bolstering the Western Anti-IS resolve and moving public opinion more and more towards confronting it.

Furthermore, if we keep reiterating that the “War On Syria” is all conducted according to a stepwise elaborate plan that is fully orchestrated by the USA and executed to the finest detail by all members of the Anti-Syrian Cocktail, we would be portraying the enemies of Syria as the winners, and clearly they are not. As a matter of fact, the enemies of Syria are neither smart enough to conjure up such a plan nor capable of fulfilling it.

America can neither control nor guarantee what will happen tomorrow; let alone next year or decade. It is ridden with huge economic crises, decaying infra-structure, failed foreign policies and wars; among other serious problems.

This is a rather golden opportunity for Syria friends to use in order to put a concerted effort on portraying the true image of Syria as THE state that has been and continues fight terrorism for nearly four years. A proper pro-Syrian propaganda campaign can even rightfully make the proclamation that Syria’s war with the Islamists is 40 years old, thereby making Syria the forefront expert of dealing with this mode of terrorism. In reality however, little is done in this regard and the message is definitely not reaching the globe.

In this respect, telling the new untold story to the English-speaking world should now be a much easier job than the one that English-speaking Syrian support groups embarked upon some three years ago. Three years ago Syria’s untold story had very little in common with the general knowledge and interests of Westerners, and yet, members of such groups worked relentlessly and successfully managed to rally up a great deal of awareness and support for Syria.

Three years ago, I humbly embarked on this journey of telling this untold story and I was privileged to join the ranks of many much more informed and intelligent people than myself. I now feel that this narrative has run its course and that it is time to move on. I have done my utmost to reason with some old comrades, but it is obvious that they do not recognise the change. It is time for me to move on and leave this group and bid it farewell.

Chapter Two of the untold story is upon us. The world seems ready to listen. It is up to us to choose to do the telling of the new story, and this is what I intend to do with a lot of help from my old and new friends.

WITH RUSSIA'S HELP SYRIAN ARMY WILL SOON RESTORE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE By Ghassan Kadi 6 February 2016

WITH RUSSIA'S HELP SYRIAN ARMY WILL SOON RESTORE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE

By Ghassan Kadi
6 February 2016


http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160206/1034340831/russian-syrian-army-will-soon-restore-sovereignty-throughout-syria.html

With Russia's Help Syrian Army Will Soon Restore Sovereignty of the State

17:00 GMT 06.02.2016 (Updated: 10:44 GMT 06.08.2022)

© Sputnik / Michael Alaeddin

 / 

Go to the mediabank

Subscribe

International

India

Africa

Ekaterina Blinova

All materialsWrite to the author

With the help of the Russian Air Force, the Syrian Army will be able to regain Syria's sovereignty, Ghassan Kadi, an expert in Mideast affairs told Sputnik, adding that the prospects of the Russo-Syrian military operation on the ground are good and looking good.

In an exclusive interview with Sputnik, Ghassan Kadi, a Syrian political analyst and expert in Mideast affairs, shared his views on the 100th anniversary of the Sykes-Picot agreement, and the role the Muslim Brotherhood is playing in the Syrian civil war, and the prospects of the Russo-Syrian military campaign

"I believe that with the help of Russia, the Syrian Army will be able to restore sovereignty throughout Syria," Kadi pointed out while answering the question on whether Bashar al-Assad has enough power and political tools to settle the conflict.

Erratic Erdogan

"Militarily speaking, the prospects on the ground are good and looking good. If [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan does not take another crazy gamble and does not widen the compass of this military conflict, then at least this phase of fighting Islamism militarily, and specifically in Syria, will probably come to an end soon," the expert told Sputnik.

Turkey's Invasion of Syria? Moscow Keeping an Eye on Ankara's Moves

5 February 2016, 16:12 GMT

Kadi's concerns are justified: the Russian Ministry of Defense has recently reported that it "registers a growing number of signs of hidden preparation of the Turkish Armed Forces for active actions on the territory of Syria."

Despite Washington's guarantees to Russia that the US-led coalition forces would follow the terms of Memorandum on Air Safety in Syria, inked on October 20, 2015, Turkey refused to confirm its commitment to the agreement, Russia's Deputy Minister of Defense Anatoly Antonov noted in an official statement.

​Previously, the Turkish Ministry of Defense refused to allow Russian specialists to carry out an observation flight over the territory of Turkey in accordance with Treaty on Open Skies, apparently to conceal illegal military activity on the Turkish-Syrian border.

Meanwhile, on Thursday, Saudi Arabia signaled its willingness to unleash a ground military operation in Syria, followed by statements from Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates supporting the initiative.

In response, Damascus announced that any ground intervention in Syria without the official agreement of the Syrian legitimate democratically-elected government would be seen as an act of military aggression.

The 100th Anniversary of the Sykes-Picot Agreement

US hawks are pressuring the Obama administration into launching an all-out military campaign in Syria and Iraq, and to open a "third" front in the war against Daesh (Islamic State/ISIL) in Libya.

"In a recent article I wrote which has not been published yet, I am predicting that the US will not help Erdogan if he decides to invade Syria and Iraq. If the US is indeed foolish enough to take this step with Russia on the scene, it would be risking a war between the superpowers, a war that will not only have effects on Baghdad and Damascus, but the entire world," Kadi told Sputnik.

"On the other hand, and going back to your first question here, if hopefully such a serious development does not eventuate and Syria and Iraq rise victorious, then it will be entirely up to them to decide their own destiny," the expert underscored.

Indeed, a hundred years ago the destiny of the Arab world was decided in London and Paris: under the notorious Sykes-Picot agreement the Middle Eastern borders were redefined by Europeans against Arabs' will.

Sykes-Picot agreement map

© Flickr / Paolo Porsia

Is it fair to say that it was the betrayal of the Arabs by Britain and France back in 1916 that resulted in the Syrian crisis? Or is the current Middle Eastern turmoil a result of a modern-day "conspiracy" aimed at redrawing the borders in favor of neo-colonialists?

"The simple answers to both of your questions are yes and yes, and I am not trying to evade answering your questions as asked, but Arabs must take responsibility for their actions and stop blaming their fate and misfortunes on 'external conspiracies'," Ghassan Kadi stresses.

It is time for the Syrians and the Iraqis to take their future in their own hands and protect their sovereignty, so that they cannot later blame the West or other external powers, the expert pointed out.

Daesh, Islamism and Sunni-Shiite Divide

'Moderate' Islamism? Washington, Brussels Playing With Fire in Syria, Iraq

12 December 2015, 14:42 GMT

There are lots of conflicts still simmering in the Muslim Arab world, including the Sunni-Shiite divide and violent Islamism. Some groups are fanning the flames to gain more power over their fellow believers.

One glaring example is the Muslim Brotherhood, an international Sunni Islamist organization.

According to a 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) document, the Muslim Brotherhood, along with al-Qaeda in Iraq and Salafists, instigated the Syrian crisis back in 2011 being one of the driving forces of the Syrian insurgency.

 What role is the Muslim Brotherhood playing in the Syrian conflict and elsewhere?

"This depends on what you mean by Muslim Brotherhood," Kadi noted.

"If you mean the organization that is rooted in Egypt, and which has later on established bases in the entire Levant including Syria and Lebanon, then one can say that the seemingly placid role that this organization has played created the foundation of indoctrination, which in itself was not violent, but one that lends itself to violence, needing only a tiny mutation," he elaborated.

"Without the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda and Daesh would not have come into existence. And whilst the organization named Muslim Brotherhood has always been at odds with its Wahhabi Salafist Saudi-based counterpart, they are all united by a Muslim Brotherhood, which inadvertently manifests itself by seeing members changing the organizations they belong to like changing socks. After all, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, the current al-Qaeda leader, was once a prominent Muslim Brotherhood member," the Syrian expert pointed out.

Fighters from Al-Qaeda's Syrian affiliate Al-Nusra Front drive in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo.

© AFP 2023 / AMC / FADI AL-HALABI

Remarkably, the Brotherhood played a huge role in the Arab Spring and continues to affect Arab world affairs.

The Islamist group hijacked the revolutionary movement in Egypt in 2011 and temporarily took power in the country. The Brotherhood's traces could be also found in Libya's violent uprising that resulted in the murder of Muammar Gaddafi.

It was a Muslim Brotherhood-led coalition "Libya Dawn" that seized the capital city of Tripoli, Libya, after being defeated in the country's 2014 parliamentary elections, and dragged the country into a protracted political crisis.

Interestingly enough, Turkish President Recep Erdogan has been cooperating with the Brotherhood since he assumed the position of prime minister back in 2003. His Justice and Development Party (AKP) established close ties with Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated parties in the Middle East, including Hamas, and the Brotherhood itself in Libya and Egypt.

View From Iran: Saudis 'Will Not Dare' to Send Ground Troops to Syria

6 February 2016, 12:38 GMT

Furthermore, the Brotherhood boasts a network of officially recognized organizations in Europe, including, for instance, Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) in Britain and Union des Organisations Islamiques (UOIF) in France, while the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe is considered to be a grouping of the most important European Brotherhood-led entities.

According to Kadi, the only proper remedy for Islamism and the dangerous divide within the Muslim world is a reform that only Muslims can do.

"There is a huge onus on Muslim clerics from both sides of the divide, to first and foremost reconcile, and secondly to renounce violence and present Islam as it really is, a religion that renounces coercion and violence," the expert told Sputnik.

Daesh's twisted ideology should be treated much in the same vein.

"The terrorist group can be eliminated only when the twisted ideology that feeds it becomes one that all Muslim clerics agree to be deemed as a perversion of Islam. Until this eventuates, if it does, Islamists will continue to embark on a holy transnational project of recruiting Muslim youth with the sole objective of coercing the entire world into either adopting Islam or submission," Kadi emphasized.

"The doctrine of violence cannot be crushed militarily. Nothing will prevent its recurrence or emergence in other parts of the globe other than reform and return to the real message of Islam," he concludes.

DE-BALKANIZATION INWARDLY By Ghassan Kadi 6 April 2016

DE-BALKANIZATION INWARDLY

By Ghassan Kadi
6 April 2016

http://katehon.com/article/de-balkanization-inwardly

THE DAESH CHRONICALS:THE "WE-TOLD-YOU-SO" STORY By Ghassan Kadi 6 April 2016

The Daesh Chronicles: The “We-Told-You-So” Story

  Ghassan Kadi 6 April 2016

http://thesaker.is/the-daesh-chronicles-the-we-told-you-so-story/

The Daesh Chronicles: The “We-Told-You-So” Story

22749 ViewsApril 06, 2016 62 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

When the so-called “Arab Spring” took off, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, son of Muammar Gaddafi, made a televised speech to Libyans warning them, and the world, of what would happen should the central government in Tripoli fall apart.

His predictions included that Al-Qaeda would come in and Libya would be partitioned into at least three states. Apart from being unable to predict that the resurrected Al-Qaeda was going to rename itself as Daesh, he was accurate in every detail. But the West did not listen.

Gaddafi himself warned the EU that should his government be toppled, the EU would end up getting inundated with Jihadists. . “If I go down, Europe will go down” he said, but the West did not listen again.

Before him, the unsavoury ex-Egyptian President Mubarak has made many such similar statements. In his own “after-me-the-flood” warnings, he told his American allies that should he be removed forcefully or by means of a revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) would step in. Even though Mursi was later on deposed, Mubarak’s predictions were indeed accurate to a high degree. And even with the heavy clamp down of current President Sisi on the MB, the spectre of their return to power is very plausible.

When the “Arab Spring” reached Syria, it became clear to the eyes of observers and knowers of the macro and micro politics of Syria that the only way for the enemies of Syria to reach their objective is by mobilizing an Islamist Jihadi sensation.

Syrian officials, including Army officers, diplomats and key personnel were all approached by recruiters offering high sums of money for them to defect and join the so-called “revolution”.

At that point in time, pro-Syria activists did not “exist”. There was no call for their “existence”. When it became clear that there was a struggle within Syria, the first wave of activists came from the pro-Palestine line of activism.

That was a very sad moment of time indeed as some of those “activists”, especially Western ones, were unable to see the forest from the trees. They fell into traps of the Sykes-Picot lie and decided that Palestine should be the first priority up the ladder, not really knowing or caring to learn and know that Palestine is historically and geographically an integral part of Syria, and also not really caring to learn and know that had it not been for official Syrian Government support, the Palestinian cause would have been lost and forgotten. Many of them supported the “revolution”, not seeing that it is primarily a war between sectarianism and secularism. Some of them woke up later on and changed their position but, others kept up their stand, despite the many twists and turns of the war.

Activists, both Western and indigenous, who were able to see beyond the slogans and the narratives of colour revolutions, knew well, from the early days, that the support that the Syrian anti-government forces were receiving from Western media, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the EU and the USA was not about implementing political reforms in Syria. They were able to see what was behind the very transparent façade.

Some activists alleged that it was the preferential treatment of the “Syrian regime”, one that favoured Alawites against Sunnis, that gave rise to the sectarian tension. Many pro-Syrian activists, including myself, hopelessly tried to explain to those activists (who were mainly Western and did not know much about Syria at all other than what they have read and heard on the Murdoch media) that what was happening was in fact a war between secularism and sectarianism; and neither a civil war, nor a sectarian war, but those Western activists did not want to listen.

Now, the advent of Jihadism into the EU shoots this allegation in the heart. I would like to go back to those activists and see what interpretation they can give for the rise of Jihadi fundamentalism in the secular democratic EU.

As supporters of Syria emerged from nowhere, they made their position known. They made all the communications they could make. They set up Facebook groups. They expressed their understanding and vision. Syrians in Damascus marched in the streets carrying huge flags showing to the world their knowledge of the conspiracy against Syria and their support to her President and government. But the West did not see or hear anything.

We have to stop here for a moment and give real credit to Syrians who took to the streets, if not a salute. Many of them had an axe to grind with their government security apparatus (Mukhabarat). Many others were genuinely seeking political reform including political plurality in the state that had been under a single-party rule for nearly half a century. Many others had grown sick and tired of corruption and cronyism. But when these and those realised that the conspiracy against Syria was bigger than all of those issues, big as they are, they decided to stand behind their nation and against the mass conspiracy.

They told their stories, each in his/her own way and capacity, but the West did not want to listen.

The message that the genuine and savvy people of The Levant wanted to relay to the West was clear. It was a message of warning of dire consequences if the message was not heard and taken to heart. All the cries went out to no avail. The West went deaf and blind.

The West had another agenda in mind. Its agenda was to topple Bashar Assad without giving any consideration to the consequences; none, none so ever. The leaders of the alleged free-world acted like morons. They fell for the trick of the regional anti-Assad Islamist coalition. That coalition that was comprised of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar had no objective other than one that was sectarian, aimed to further promote their business and with Israel’s security in mind. They saw in Assad a threat against Sunnis and an instrument that will serve Iranian expansion. And the West, the stupid West, bought the story of an alleged revolution. It had its own axe to grind with Bashar and had no hesitations to aid and support them and encourage them to create what became ISIS/IS/Daesh.

Later on, President Assad himself warned Europe from the eventual influx of terrorists, but the EU and the rest of the West did not want to listen. The world “warned” has been used so many times in this article. The objective here is to emphasize that the West was made aware again and again of the possible consequences of its actions in Syria, but remained defiant because it did not want to listen

It was as if the West did not learn from Afghanistan, did not learn from Iraq and did not learn from Libya. It was as if the West did not learn from its failed experience with Al-Qaeda. Failure upon failure did not stop the West from embarking on another journey of predestined failure.

The West seems to have an irrevocable contract with stupidity and short-sightedness.

For as long as it adamantly wishes to stick to its guns, the West now deserves to be told by those who tried to nudge it into clear vision: “we told you so”.

On the surface, this will sound like a statement of glee, but it is not.

The recent terror attacks in the EU must have a direct link to the fact that the anti-Syrian coalition, including the EU has 1) ignored all warnings about the rise of Jihadis, 2) facilitated their movement into Syria in the hope of scoring a quick and swift victory against her government, and 3) fell victim to political correctness in accepting refugee swarms that included terrorists that it (ie the EU) have helped create in the first place.

Sad but true, no one knows when the wave of terror in the EU is going to end and how. No one knows how much further it is going to spread, to what extent and for how long. No one knows how many more innocent people are going to get killed. What we do know is the fact that if the EU Parliament and individual European governments had put any effort, any tiny amount of effort to put facts and logic together, they would now be in a position that would allow them to understand why they are facing the predicament of terror. All indications point towards the direction that they do not intend to take any real and effective steps towards understanding the nature of the huge problem they are facing, let alone making any steps towards resolving it.

Western leaders continue to run around in circles chasing their own tails. With all the tragedies that have hit Europe, they do not seem to have learned yet. They have got one foot inside the door of the fight against Daesh, and the other foot inside the door of the fight against Syrian President Bashar Assad. They are still carrying the “Assad-must-go” banner. They still do not seem to want to know who is fighting Daesh and who is feeding it, and all the while refusing that they were instrumental in creating it.

And even though their alleged strategy to fight Daesh did not yield any outcome, and despite the fact that the collaboration between the Russian air might and the Syrian Army on the ground has yielded amazing results in a relatively short period of time, they continue to sit and ponder about the most effective way to fight Daesh militarily.

But the West is not the only party that did not listen. It is not the only party that should be told: We told you so.

The Muslim World continues to bury its head in the sand and to refuse to address the Daesh syndrome at its core. Many enemies of Daesh are also still refusing to accept that Daesh is a perverted form of Islam that has roots that go back centuries; long before America was discovered, and much longer before Wahhabism was established.

Muslim clerics keep reiterating that Daesh does not represent Islam, and it doesn’t. But those same Muslim clerics are not 1) identifying that the greatest asset Daesh has is based on misinterpretations of the Quran, 2) they are not prepared to accept that their own doctrine is based on those same radical views, 3) they are refusing to reform their views, 4) and last but not least, they are not condemning radical preachers who are recruiting Muslim youth into the ranks of Daesh.

Very few outspoken Muslim journalists have made stands to the above, but their voices are not being heard, and they are seen merely as trouble makers and/or as self-hating Muslims and even apostates.

What will Muslim clerics who are now refusing to face reality do if/when Daesh attains more strength? What will the Saudis do if/when the ideology they fostered threatens their throne? What will Egypt’s Al-Azhar (which is meant to be the most highly respected Sunni Muslim theological institution) have to say if/when it suddenly wakes up to realize that the Daesh doctrine has become mainstream?

The fight goes on, and those on the side of knowing what Daesh is, look at the confused world that is still denying and refusing to define Daesh and say; but we told you so.

THE DAESH CHRONICLES: PART ONE; THE DEFINITION CHALLENGE By Ghassan Kadi 31 March 2016

http://thesaker.is/the-daesh-chronicles-the-definition-challenge/

The Daesh Chronicles: The Definition Challenge

32563 ViewsMarch 31, 2016 170 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi

Islam, real Islam, is a religion of piety, wisdom and peace, and Muslims, real Muslims are not terrorists. Even though all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are “Muslims”, this does not give a blanket description of all Muslims as beings terrorists.

Those who “use” terrorism to spew hatred towards Islam and indiscriminately against all Muslims have their own agenda. These are the true Islamophobes. These people do not need a reason to hate Islam and Muslims. They are now having a field day with the terror issue and using it to feed their hatred and to justify it.

I wanted to start this series of articles with the above statements in order to keep some who will try to put words in my mouth at bay. I had to make my position clear here, because inspired by The Saker, I want to have “my rant”.

In making my position clear and saying the above, I emphasize that we need to be able to discern what is what and what is not when it comes to Islam, Muslims and terrorism. In between the two extremes of 1) turning a total blind eye to the violent segment within Muslim communities in fear of being wrongly and unfairly branded as an Islamophobe and 2) clamping down on all Muslims and persecuting them, there is definitely an elusive fine line that needs to be identified. I am yet to see anyone trying to do this.

The EU has been towing the line of option (1) above. The American presidential hopeful Donald Trump is promising to enact option (2).

Option (1) led to the Paris November 2015 and the Brussel March 2016 attacks. This option is not leaving only the EU poised to suffer more terror, but the entire West. Option (2), if ever enacted, has unforeseeable consequences that I will not even try to imagine and discuss.

In between the extremes of fear and hatred, the West finds itself incapable of dealing with the Daesh phenomenon that has infiltrated into its heartland.

The problem with Daesh is certainly not restricted to the West. Its bigger impact is within the Muslim World. Its Western operatives have brought it to infamy in the West, turned the spotlights towards it, but its roots and recruitment base are without any shadow of doubt within the Muslim World.

I have in recent times expressed views about IS/Daesh that go against the grain of the politically-correct mainstream mindset of many friends of Syria. As a result, I had to weather quite a bit of harsh criticism, but this will not silence me.

I have serious concerns about the turn of recent events, and I humbly, but firmly, believe that with my upbringing in a city that became a major hub for Jihadis, having gone to school with and rubbed shoulders with many who became Jihadi leaders, and having been personally targeted as a potential recruit, my opinion is based on a broader-than-average exposure to different angles of the crisis in Syria and the rise of fundamentalism. I am not forcing my views on anyone, and all I am hoping for is that my views, that are based on my actual first-hand experience, can shed more light on the underlying issues behind the IS/Daesh phenomenon.

There seems to be a huge deal of misconception about what Daesh is and who directs it. Some of this is the direct result of the confusion caused by the rather big number of Islamist organizations and sponsors, but the biggest confusion originates from the opinions of analysts (mostly Western) who do not know the roots of the problem, and yet for some mysterious reason, they assume a leading role in the debate.

This confusion will probably go on for a long time, and it may never get resolved. However, I believe that it is time that a proper debate is conducted; a debate in which analysts with opposing views come in and bring their argument with them, if and when they have any.

We are on the cusp of an “enough-is-enough” moment. Whilst this attempt may not succeed, it is however an invitation, a challenge, to put this argument to rest once and for all.

It is easy to get bogged down in the details of which organization, the name of its leader, his association with different sponsors, why and when different leaders and the followers rebunk from one organization to another. All of those complications mask the simple reality behind what the current IS state is all about.

Daesh/IS is a new name, but in reality not different from its Islamic fundamentalist predecessors. The origin can be traced back in recent history to Wahhabism, but on examining the roots, it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran. Such theology is much more ancient than Wahhabism and even European settlement in America. Hence, the United States of America and the CIA cannot be held accountable for its existence.

When Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) was attacked by his own people (Quraish tribe), self-defense weighed in and battles were fought. Later on, as Islam expanded into other regions, for reasons not exactly clear to us now, wars associated with Islam were fought, but that was more than a thousand years ago. Furthermore, that modus operandi was not meant to stick, but it did. It goes against the teaching of the Quran, but to complicate things even more, the Quran was interpreted in a manner that endorses those widely accepted but false interpretations, and consequently, all Quranic translations are based on them. I have written at length and depth about this miscontrued theology before, and there is no real need to repeat the same message.

Wahhabism then adopted and fostered such pre-existing radical views, but it did not “invent” them either. They pre-date Wahhabism. The discovery of oil in Saudi Arabia lubricated the process and gave it a new momentum. Saudis became able to sponsor and finance Islamic schools that taught this perverted version of Islam. The Saudi funds were not spent only on preaching, but also on military training and setting up militia groups in different regions of the world. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the invasion was seen by Islamists as the attack of a “Kafir” (heretic nonbeliever) Communist nation on a Muslim nation. As a result, and in accordance with a Brzezinski-initiated plan, Afghanistan became a fertile ground for Jihadis, Saudi funds and American support.

At that point in time, the Islamists and the Americans found common interests. Even Bin Laden was on America’s side during this stage. This alliance however was not a permanent mark as some insist and refuse to see otherwise. The Al-Qaeda/American alliance broke up when America put boots on Saudi soil leading up to Operation Desert Storm in 1991. To Bin Laden that was a redline. To him, the Muslim Holy Land was not to be desecrated by “Salibyyin” (Crusaders).

Those who were fixated on seeing Bin Laden as an American lackey, especially those who weren’t in a position to understand his many speeches, let alone listened to them, could not understand the underlying nature of the conflict that turned Al-Qaeda from an ally of the Americans to a fierce foe. In all of his speeches, which were never translated in their entirety into English for public broadcast, Bin Laden had one single demand from the Americans, and that was for them to leave Islamic lands in general and the Islamic Holy Land in particular.

This was exactly how Bin Laden recruited Muslim youth. Every time he appeared on Al-Jazeera making his harangues, he reached out to the hearts and minds of those youth and had them flocking in droves to join him. Yes, Al-Jazeera was a huge recruiter playing his messages.

Those who come from the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp find themselves in a logical dilemma that they refuse to see. Even if Bin Laden, Al-Baghdadi and others are indeed CIA operatives and are working under the direct orders of America, even if they are paid by MI6, the KGB, the Peruvian Intelligence or the Zimbabwean underground, this makes no difference at all. For as long as they are using widely-accepted Muslim theology to lure in recruits, a theology that they know cannot be refuted by other Muslims, then this means one and only one thing. It means that they have found in the theology a weakness that they could use as a recruitment drive. For as long as the theology that supports this drive is in existence, then it can be employed again and again, and this is where the problem is.

In the meantime, as many confused adversaries of Daesh continue to reiterate that the USA and the DAESH are one, the latter continues to capitalize on this, and makes itself look like the long-awaited Muslim movement that is going to restore the former ancient Muslim glory, and thus continue to be able to lure more and more recruits.

If anything at all, Jihadists loathe the West and detest Westerners enough to want to kill them all. They regard themselves as pure and all others (especially Westerners) as filth. They will use them, take their money and arms and use their women for their pleasure, but they will never trust them and/or partner with them in any manner, shape or form. It is totally against their doctrine to partner as equals with them.

What is most pertinent here is that fighting DAESH entails nipping its ideology in the bud, where it festers within decayed and ancient fundamentalist Islamist theology. Any diversion from this focal point of attention is dangerous, distractive and divertive.

Now here is the irony. Every time I discuss this subject with a native Arab (mostly Muslim) who is fluent in Arabic and familiar with the history of Islam and current distorted beliefs, I do not find any resistance in expressing the message. Some know all of this already, others may confess that they have never thought about it before, but contend with the fact that the current and archaic Muslim interpretations of the Holy Quran do lend themselves open to violence.

The staunch opposition for this analysis invariably comes from people who don’t speak a word of Arabic, have not studied Islam through Arabic language texts, lack total historical perspective, never lived among Muslims, and do not know the first thing about Muslim theology. How audacious indeed. How would they like the shoe to be on the other foot? For example, how would they like someone from a country and culture so removed from anything American, someone who doesn’t speak a word of English, has never been in the West, never studied its history and never mingled with its people to lecture them, in their own very remote language, about American politics?

The “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp has got to accept the fact that the Muslim world is full of people who give themselves the title of “Da’iyeh”, a term that simplistically translates into “preacher”, but it puts the person on a very high pedestal. A “Da’iyeh” therefore is someone who is a preacher of very high acclaim.

If anyone or any group of people want to take the challenge to prove without any reasonable doubt that the Daesh mentality is only exclusively the works of the CIA, I then invite them to come forward to present one single shred of evidence. The question here is not about the funds. We all know the funds came from Saudi Arabia and the USA and recently from the stolen Iraqi and Syrian oil. It is about the ideology.

If Daesh recruiters are not using archaic Muslim theology, advocates of the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp owe their readers and followers presentation of proof of any alternative ideology those recruiters are using. They will have to listen to Arabic videos, understand them, and have them translated. They will have to learn Muslim theology in order for them to be able to substantiate their claims. There is no other way for them to prove their claims, but this is what they have got themselves into.

In asking for this, I must mention that there are thousands upon thousands of videos on the Internet and YouTube of Muslim preachers misusing the Holy Quran in order to lure Jihadi recruits. Not unless and not before Islam reforms and denounces this theology that lends itself to violence, then that same theology will be used again and again now and in the future.

I can provide the Internet/YouTube evidence, miles and miles of it, and the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp can present their counter evidence. I invite them to take the challenge, put up or shut up.