In 1988, a dreaded terrorist by the name Osama Bin Laden formed a group by the name al-Qaeda. The primary focus of the group was to fight foreign interference in the Arab countries. After the invasion, the group realigned their goals into fighting against persons or states, which the members perceived as enemies of Islam. The team launched attacks in East Africa in 1998 and the United States in 2001 leading to massive loss of lives and damages to property. On the other hand, ISIS is a militant group from a proto-state in Iraq. The target for the group was to make the country a homogenous state by eliminating marginalized ethnic groups with smaller numbers. In 2014, the group engaged the Iraq forces pushing them from major cities in the country. The primary function of this paper is to analyze the similarities and differences between the two groups concerning ideologies and beliefs in extremism.
ISIS and al-Qaeda form their policies and ideologies from the Salafi Jihadist. The teachings insist on the notion of a pure society filled with Muslims. The two groups perceive the persons who are pursuing different religious practices as enemies of their group. Secondly, Salafi teachings dictate that violence in attaining their goal is their sacred duty. The force might involve the killing of innocent people or beheading of children and women. However, it all contributes to their religious obligation of making the society a homogenous entity by whatever means possible (Wiktorowicz and John 80.). However, it is worth noting that the enemies of the group are not necessarily those of other religions. Any person who practices Islam but befriends or protects an outsider is also a big enemy. Such enemies include countries such as Egypt and Turkey. Therefore, as the western countries paint Osama bin Laden as a terrorist, both al-Qaeda and ISIS idolized him.
ISIS and al-Qaeda hold the perception that all Muslims who do not take part in Jihad are hypocrites. Their ideologies dictate that all followers must resist the western invasion violently. For example, the team believes that nothing good comes from the western countries. More so, the groups intend to convert or eliminate all people bearing different ideologies to make the whole world homogenous as well as using a single currency from the Middle East. For them, dying in the line of duty is a great privilege with massive rewards in heaven. The struggle is more of religious commitment as opposed to terrorism. Both groups do not appreciate the rights of women in society. The militants believe that women are similar to earthly possessions, which are available for the gratification of the needs of men. Therefore, their primary role is assisting the men and bringing up the children.
One of the outstanding differences between the two groups revolves in their primary targets. The focus of ISIS is the establishment of a government with a perfect sense of leadership in Iraq. In the government, each of the citizens contributes to the stability of the government through their own professionalism. Therefore, most of their activities occur within their region of dominance and involves militant groups (Patel 5). Al-Qaeda, on the other hand, goes beyond the borders of the country. The team utilizes the assistance of trained members with extreme knowledge of weapons and combat. The al-Qaeda uses terrorist cells in various countries and uses them during the time of the attack. The team seeks to revenge the atrocities committed by the western states in their homes. By bringing the fight to the international level, al-Qaeda demonstrates their experience in covert operations.
ISIS believes in instant results. For example, the team expands the region under their control by fighting the government forces and evicting them from the process. Therefore, the consequences of their actions are instant but with minimal effect. Al-Qaeda uses a different mode of attack on their quest. The group uses dramatic attacks with a large-scale outcome, which take extended periods to plan. The plans involve getting the agents to the intended countries and formulating a plan of hitting the target for the most significant effect (Mishal and Maoz 280). In the leadership, al-Qaeda operates under the direction of one man. However, his only role is ensuring that communication runs clearly to all members of the team through the council and committees that oversee financing and arming of the group. In ISIS, the leader must coordinate all the attacks personally or through the deputies. The direct command differs from that of al-Qaeda where any member of the team can coordinate an attack provided they inform the leadership of the plan.
The inability to offer direct command for al-Qaeda originates from the diverse networks of the group on the global scale. Therefore, the members are free to maximize any opportunity available and inflict the highest damage possible. More so, the structure of the leadership accommodates coordinated attacks in various parts of the world concurrently. Al-Qaeda has various councils that coordinate funding for the group, weapons acquisition as well as sharing of information. Therefore, the team does not rely on the direct orders from the leader to act. On the other hand, the region of operation for ISIS is minimal. Therefore, a leadership structure composed of the leader and the two deputies is enough to keep the entire team in check. Despite the differences, ISIS and al-Qaeda intend to eliminate any opposition to Islam through violent means with massive damage to lives and property.
Works Cited
Mishal, Shaul, and Maoz Rosenthal. "Al Qaeda as a dune organization: Toward a typology of Islamic terrorist organizations." Studies in Conflict " Terrorism 28.4 (2005): 275-293.
Patel, David Siddhartha. "ISIS in Iraq: What we get wrong and why 2015 is not 2007 redux." Middle East Brief 87 (2015): 1-8.
Wiktorowicz, Quintan, and John Kaltner. "Killing in the name of Islam: Al‐Qaeda's justification for September 11." Middle East Policy 10.2 (2003): 76-92.
