Two weaknesses of Islamism.

Submitted by Vishu Menon (China), Jan 8, 2016 at 11:44

The weaknesses you mention are inherent in all movements that aim at establishing a new nation based on religion, race, or the byword of both - hatred. Hitler had considerable opposition to his rise to be the Fuhrer. But he became one, destroyed a few million humans, before destroying himself. Daesh has the aim of destroying the entire free humanity and enslaving the rest.

The Islamic rulers of various sheikhdoms, kingdoms and alleged democracies in the Islamic world oppose Daesh not for any ideological reasons. Arguments like 'killing of innocents is not Islam', and Quranic quotes like 'killing one innocent is like the whole humanity' are not all propounded with absolute sincerity. The fact is that none of the current rulers has the claim to be a Quraysh - one who belongs to the tribe of Muhammad, who had laid it down that only one from his tribe can be a Caliph. (He is supposed to be unassuming). Al-Baghdadi, rightly or wrongly, claims to fit that bill.So a Caliphate does not suit the Saudi King or the Supreme Leader of Iran.

The movement, like it or not, finds quiet support among the common believers across the world. If you reckon that one percent of Muslims think a Caliphate of Muslims that could conquer the world, you find yourself up against sixteen million of them, That formidable figure, believe me, could be less than the reality.

Most humans surrender to one belief or another -a promise of heaven with rich pickings (and pickups) is a huge attraction to the young mind - even one that toys with Pascal's wager. On the push side is the fear of a terrible hell that could last till eternity (which, to the feeble mind, simply means a long, long time). Now add that Pascal's wager to the Friday preacher's forceful admonitions and the power of internet, you have a convert even in the midst of non-Muslims. Even 'innocent' Christian (and now, a vegetarian Kashmiri Pundit -Siddharth Dhar - the new Jihadi John) youngsters from church-going families play video games where all that you do is shoot and kill, shoot and kill, with rarely a shot fired back. When, indeed, the 'enemy' fires back, you find 'you' lying in a pool of blood, but you're here, hale and hearty, ready for the next date. The prospect that presents itself in Syria is just like that - you get plenty of chances to kill; even if you get killed, you hope to find yourself alive in a heaven surrounded by divine prostitutes of eternal virginity. That prospect is a terrific fix that no 'narcotic substance can offer. (Nobody tells them that there's a near-eternal waiting period for the judgment day).

Daesh is really a religious cult, something like the Knight Templars of the Middle ages, with powerful weapons that the knights could not dream of. Seventy or so nations joining a fight against this cult - the most powerful among them bombing their hideouts and local military headquarters relentlessly has hardly shown any real dent on the movement. Who supplies them the weapons, the money, the logistics? The same forces that fight them out in the open. Daesh uses more American weapons than Pakistan holds for a possible war with Kaffir India. Saudi Arabia would rather fight Iran than fight Daesh; Turkey offers tacit support by allowing clandestine conduit for men and materials. The United States wants to fight Assad who is the only head of state who is openly fighting the dangerous Cult. The war has been a prospect for making money for the weapon makers. Does anybody, except the European nations that are burdened with refugees (some of whom could be carrying the infection of jihad with them) by the millions?

So there you are. The Daesh is fraught with self-contradictions. To hope that those contradictions would help destroy the cult is like the Americans of 1940's hoping that Kamikaze Pilots of Japan will end up finishing their own Air Force.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".