The establishment of control over Baghouz by the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces — the infantry of the Western coalition, and only with its massive firepower support, was considered by the «civilized world» as a case where «Paris is worth a lot». The final humanitarian tragedy in this case was the storming, or rather the destruction, of the last territorial stronghold of ISIS* in Syria, which resulted in the death of, according to various estimates, between 1,000 and 3,000 people, including a significant number of women and children who were family members of those who had nowhere else to retreat.
For some Muslims, this humanitarian tragedy was the focus of their attention. Others watched it as one watches the fate of a person who confidently sticks two fingers in the socket, urges others to do the same, and threatens to slit the throats of those who refuse to follow his example. Yes, such an analogy is quite appropriate, considering that the ruins of Baghouz buried those who not long ago, in dozens of their films, hundreds of performances, and thousands of comments from their followers around the world, confidently promised to overthrow the coalition of 80 countries under Dabiq, then take Rome and enslave the local men while turning the women into their concubines.
For years, these people clamored for the U.S. to come and fight them, and to speed up the process, they cut off the heads of American journalists on camera, burned Jordanian pilots, and then carried out attacks in Western cities. Well, the Americans came, as did their allies, but first, somewhat mundanely, Dabiq fell, which their propaganda promised would be the site of an epic battle, and then, just as mundanely, one city after another fell until the last one, Baghouz. Fingers stuck in the socket, as those they called murtads and sahawat warned them, predictably led to an electric shock and the incineration of the experimenter, rather than the destruction of the socket and the collapse of the wall, as he assured everyone. But will any lessons be learned?
Probably not for the fanatical followers of the unfulfilled miracle, as they continue to write in the comments that the shock did not occur because putting one’s fingers in both holes of the socket gives one an electric shock, but because the person who did it supposedly lacked conviction, had committed sins, or had not received applause while doing it… But for those who think, for those who recognize the laws of creation established by Allah and given to man to understand by reason, this will be a suitable cause for reflection.
After all, it all began so promisingly. By 2014, an area larger than the territories of many neighboring countries combined had come under the control of the rapidly forming state in the ruins of Iraq and Syria. Along with it came mountains of weapons and hundreds of millions of dollars captured as trophies, and most importantly, oil reserves and a ready-made oil industry capable of sustaining the newly formed state. What was happening seemed truly miraculous — for the first time in decades, a state appeared before astonished friends and enemies that declared itself to be not the land of a nation or a local population, but an all-Islamic state open to all Muslims. Is it surprising, then, that tens of thousands of them, especially from places where Muslim nations live under the oppression of non-Muslim states, flocked to it in search of protection and hope?
However, the proclamation of the caliphate, in the form and understanding in which it was made on July 1, 2014, turned out to be the first step towards disaster. In principle, if it had been made as a proposal — to take advantage of the opportunity offered to the entire Ummah and voluntarily join it — things might have been different. But from the beginning, it was not a proposal but a demand — based on the principle that «those who are not with us are against us» — to declare war on the rest of the world, both non-Muslim and Muslim.
Even at this stage, it was explained to the nascent Khalifatists that in order for the Caliphate to truly hold such a status for all Muslims under modern conditions, it must be supported by a significant number of authoritative people from the entire Ummah, be they Islamic scholars, political leaders, knowledgeable individuals, influential individuals, or people with power. Supporters of the new state objected, saying that according to Sharia law, there is another way — an Islamic state is considered valid and legitimate if it is established by force necessary and sufficient for that purpose.
And this was a catastrophic mistake in understanding the realities of the modern world and, therefore, the corresponding position of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). A mistake that was most vividly manifested in the understanding of this particular group, but in principle was inherent in the followers of other similar groups in one way or another. As it turned out, in the modern world, even the possession of the territory of a state the size of large European countries does not provide sufficient strength to overthrow the entire international order, as was proclaimed. Neither tens of thousands of fighters, nor thousands of pickup trucks on which they carried out their spectacular parades, nor hundreds of tanks and cannons at their disposal, nor tens of millions of dollars from smuggling cheap oil on the black market.
As subsequent events have shown, all this apparent power can be crushed within a few years by those with far greater military, technical, human, and financial capabilities — true world powers. And this is exactly what happened. The course of hostilities showed that, for all their fearlessness, knowledge of the terrain, and talent of individual military commanders, the firepower of the Western coalition, led by the United States, was the hammer that could not be broken by any whip in a head-on collision.
The announced format of the state, which promised not only to hold out but also to expand (baqiya wa tatamaddad), implied precisely a head-on collision, not guerrilla warfare as in Yemen or Afghanistan. About the latter, by the way. Against the backdrop of ISIS’s catastrophe, the Taliban’s military and political successes, which were regularly reported on our website, became a vivid illustration of effective strategy and tactics. After the defeat of their state, provoked by their predecessors and inspirers of ISIS, who also challenged superior force, the Taliban not only transformed themselves into a popular-religious guerrilla movement, but also significantly improved their image and won the support of the local population by combining firmness in matters of order with flexibility towards people.
Moreover, even in the face of isolation by other Muslim states and even their involvement in the fight against them, they did not declare war on them all, but sought to win them over and use their mediating potential, as was the case with the creation of a negotiation platform and a Taliban contact office in Qatar. No, it cannot be said that this has led the Taliban to a final victory in 2019. Moreover, they continue to fight, and their fighters shed their blood daily in this struggle, including through suicide attacks. And it is precisely this strength that undoubtedly forces potential opponents to enter into political negotiations with them and discuss with them the format of transferring power to them in the country or their entry into power as a significant participant. And other states, not only Muslim ones, with which the Taliban maintains relations, provide mediatory support for these negotiations.
In contrast to ISIS, no one negotiated with the Islamic State, primarily because its stated goals, its methods, and its entire behavior toward the rest of the world did not allow for such a possibility — simply put, there was nothing to talk about! Here was a case where everyone who was not with them disagreed on only one issue — «land». And Baghouz became a vivid and further illustration of how such disagreements are resolved in the modern world by those who really have power.
The conclusion of all this, in our view, is obvious. Muslims must realize that there are «wishes» that are justified by manipulations with the Hadith, and there is the real world, the understanding of which requires the systematic application of both classical Islamic wisdom and knowledge and the methods of modern political, economic, military, social, and other analysis. «Wishes» usually make groups of ruwaibida, who lack understanding of the laws of both religion and reality, the basis of their actions, and the entire Ummah, and especially its sons and daughters who trusted them, pay a high price for them.
Responsible leaders of this Ummah, each in his own sphere and place, must not proclaim such ambitious slogans or assert themselves through flashy PR campaigns, but help their peoples and communities to accomplish realistic tasks and accumulate strength for future growth.
* banned in Russia