And Who's the 'Wahhabi' Now?

https://www.kavkazr.com/a/i-kto-teper-vahhabist/28482519.html

[my tr.]

Secretary General of the World Islamic League allows the thing that made Kadyrov terribly unhappy

Remove the hijab or leave the country. That was the difficult choice faced by observant Muslims outside their native regions, Secretary General of the World Islamic League Sheikh Muhammad Al-Issa said in his speech in Brussels.

It's interesting that a sheikh from a Wahhabi state, Saudi Arabia, allows both options. And this at a time when some Russian officials fighting Islamic extremism do not accept rejection of the hijab under the pressure of secular law.

“A Muslim must respect the constitutions and laws and culture of the countries in which they live,” the Sheikh said in his address, and also in a series of tweets on Twitter.

“Should the laws not allow head-covering, a request to wear the hijab must only be made through the proper and legal channels and if such a request is rejected, Muslim residents have the option either to abide by the state’s regulations or leave the country.”

Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov has not yet commented on the appeal of his good friend, who presented him with a gift during his December visit to Grozny.

The Location of Terror

Yulia Latynina (ej.ru), on the Boston bombers: 

Как сказал в одной из своих проповедей Саид Бурятский, который до того как стать исламистом-моджахедом, был простым русским парнем Александром Тихомировым из Улан-Удэ, «прошли те времена, когда мы сражались за свободу Чечни, за это языческое понятие. Теперь мы сражаемся за Аллаха. Прошли те времена, когда каждый чеченец был нам брат. Теперь русский, если он моджахед, нам брат, а чеченец, если он кяфир, наш злейший враг».

То есть то, что Царнаевы чеченцы – это не удивительно, но это совершенно неважно, так же, как неважно, что Троцкий – еврей. В Бостоне они сражались не за свободу Чечни. Они сражались за всемирный Халифат.

Они вели оборонительный джихад.

As Said Buryatsky, who before becoming an Islamist mujahid was an ordinary Russian guy, Alexander Tikhomirov from Ulan-Ude, said in one of his sermons: "Gone are the days when we fought for the freedom of Chechnya, for that pagan  idea. Now we are fighting for Allah. Gone are the days when every Chechen was our brother. Now the Russian, if he's a muhajid, is our brother, and the Chechen, if  he's a kafir, our worst enemy. "

So the fact that the Tsarnaevs are Chechens is not surprising. but it is totally unimportant, just as unimportant as the fact that Trotsky was Jewish. What they were fighting for in Boston was not the freedom of Chechnya. They were fighting for a worldwide Caliphate.

They were waging defensive jihad

Russian cleric demands Palestinian state

Via PressTV:

Russian and world Muslims demand the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, says Chief of the Council of Russian Muftis Sheikh Rawi Ayn al-Din.

The chief of Russia's highest Islamic institution made the remarks during a Friday prayer sermon in Moscow also attended by Iran's ambassador to Russia and an accompanying delegation.

Umarov doesn’t step down

Via Moscow Times.

(hat tip: Stephen Smith)

Umarov steps down

Via BBC

British blinkers

Julie Burchill, on the curious but predictable attitude of British media to the flotilla crisis:

Not once did I hear a British interviewer ask any of the so-called secular radicals participating in the flotilla why they are allied with Islamic supremacists who subjugate women, persecute gays, oppress non-Islamic minorities and seek to impose Islam globally.

Shalev: Lebanese ships will be stopped

Israel's UN Ambassador Gabriela Shalev has said in a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the Security Council that the attempt by flotilla organizers to sail from Lebanon to Gaza could escalate tensions and affect peace and security in the region, the Lebanese portal Naharnet reports. The ambassador also said that Israel would exercise its right under international law to “use all necessary means” to prevent the ships from breaking the naval blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip.

New IHH flotilla to sail in late July

Via Ynetnews:

The next flotilla is due to sail in the second half of July, IHH said. The group invited the international media to inspect all goods on board before the convoy sails to "demonstrate their commitment to total transparency".

Israel says the IHH has links to Muslim militants, which the group denies.

Gaza links

Some links and headlines from the media and blogosphere:

• The Irish-owned MV Rachel Corrie is still headed for Gaza.
• Turkish newspapers have reported that three of the four Turkish jihadis killed during the boarding of the Mavi Marmara by IDF troops had declared their readiness to become shaheeds, or martyrs.
• IDF footage of demonstrators aboard the Mavi Marmara preparing and initiating the armed confrontation.

• At Standpoint, Joshua Rozenberg has republished an IDF document which gives an assessment of the legality of Israel’s military operations off Gaza this week.
• US Vice President Joe Biden has said that Israel has the right to stop the ships bound for Gaza.
• The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report is publishing intelligence digests and articles about the flotilla, which it says is largely composed of organizations tied to the GMB.
• The former commander of British forces in Afghanistan has said that Israeli troops should not be blamed for the deaths of activists on the Mavi Marmara.

Turkey's role in the Gaza conflict

Israeli sources say it appears likely that the demonstrators who used knives. clubs and other weapons to attack IDF soldiers aboard the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara are themselves Turkish nationals, and belong to an Islamist group connected with global jihadi networks. In fact, around 400 of the 700 people who sailed in the 6-vessel convoy were Turks. A recent TIP release notes that

The IHH (Insani Yardim Vakfi - “humanitarian relief fund”)…has provided financial support to Iran-backed Hamas and has ties to global jihadi networks and the Muslim Brotherhood – a global umbrella Islamic organization of which Hamas is a branch – as well as mujahideen groups in Afghanistan.

In 2006, a study conducted by the Danish Institute for International Studies showed that the IHH was involved in planning an al-Qaeda attack against Los Angeles International Airport in 1999. IHH reportedly acquired forged documents, enlisted operatives and delivered weapons to al-Qaeda in preparation for the attack, which was ultimately foiled.[6]

The Danish study also cites a French intelligence report which stated that in the mid-1990s the IHH sent a number of operatives into war zones in Muslim countries to get combat experience. The report said that IHH transferred money and “caches of firearms, knives and pre-fabricated explosives” to Muslim fighters in those countries.[7]

Israeli officials have expressed concern that Islamist groups that endanger Israeli national security now have considerable influence within the Free Gaza movement, the group that organized the flotilla. According to the group’s own mission statement, “We agree to adhere to the principles of nonviolence and nonviolent resistance in word and deed at all times.”[8]

6] “IHH, which plays a central role in organizing the flotilla to the Gaza Strip, is a Turkish humanitarian relief fund with a radical Islamic anti-Western orientation,” Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, May 26, 2010, http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/hamas_e105.htm

[7] “IHH, which plays a central role in organizing the flotilla to the Gaza Strip, is a Turkish humanitarian relief fund with a radical Islamic anti-Western orientation,” Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, May 26, 2010, http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/hamas_e105.htm

[8] “Our Mission,” Free Gaza Movement Web site, Jan. 30, 2009, http://www.freegaza.org/en/about-us/mission

[9] Wilson, Scott, “Israel says Free Gaza Movement poses threat to Jewish state,” The Washington Post, June 1, 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/31/AR2010053103445.html

The release goes on to stress the links that are believed to exist between the IHH and Turkey’s ruling party, the AKP, observing that in recent years the Turkish government has moved away from cooperation with Israel and has adopted a less friendly stance on several issues, including a conciliatory approach to Iran on the question of sanctions and the Iranian nuclear program.

While in themselves the actions and statements of a self-styled humanitarian organization might not be thought to present a significant challenge to the security of other states, including Israel, the IHH group’s connections both with militant Islamists and with the Turkish government party do give considerable cause for concern. In particular, the news that the Turkish Navy is reported to be considering sending a naval escort for the next two boats carrying pro-Palestinian demonstrators presents the possibility that such an action could spark a major conflict between Turkey and Israel. That the Mavi Marmara incident was a deliberate provocation there seems little doubt – hopefully it did not mark the first stage in a planned series of escalations. Western peace activists who have joined the convoys need to be careful that their activities do not end in starting a regional war.

Update (4.25pm): Turkey’s foreign minister Ahmet Davutogu has said in Ankara that “it’s time calm replaces anger”.

A hard choice

In Commentary, James Kirchick laments how backing for an authoritarian leader in Russia's backyard may have cost the U.S. support from a natural ally in the war against terror. Excerpt:

the simple fact is that the war against the Taliban would be made immeasurably more difficult were the Manas air base to close. Insofar as the Taliban returning to power in Afghanistan would be a disaster for the people of that country and present a haven for al-Qaeda, ensuring a stable government there is not just an American concern but also a global one. And Bishkek has its own national interests in this realm as well. In the immediate years prior to 9/11, militants from the Islamist Movement of Uzbekistan, a terrorist group sheltered by the Taliban, launched multiple attacks into southern Kyrgyzstan. That doesn't mean that the domestic problems of Kyrgyzstan are not important. But fixing them (something that is largely the responsibility of the Kyrgyz people themselves and beyond the seemingly awesome powers of the United States) cannot come at the expense of eliminating a vital supply line to Afghanistan.

Hat tip: Kejda Gjermani

No rights for terrorists

A senior official at Amnesty International, Gita Sahgal, has gone public and has openly accused the human rights organization of collaborating with terrorist suspects. In the Sunday Times, Richard Kerbaj writes that Sahgal has taken this step because she feels that Amnesty has ignored warnings about the involvement of a prominent British Islamist, Moazzam Begg, in Amnesty's "Counter Terror with Justice" campaign:

“I believe the campaign fundamentally damages Amnesty International’s integrity and, more importantly, constitutes a threat to human rights,” Sahgal wrote in an email to the organisation’s leaders on January 30. “To be appearing on platforms with Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban, whom we treat as a human rights defender, is a gross error of judgment.”

Gita Sahgal has been suspended from her post at Amnesty.

The Islamist tactic of embarrassing and isolating human rights organizations by methods that include infiltration and false propaganda is not a new one. In Eastern Europe organizations like Prague Watchdog, which monitors human rights in Russia's North Caucasus, have long tolerated the unauthorized appropriation of their material by jihadist websites which republish it without attribution, and try forcibly to establish an association in this way. While Prague Watchdog has not yet been infiltrated, it is the object of virulent attacks by sites like Kavkaz Center, which seek to weaken its influence and harm its reputation.

"A cesspit of Islamists"

England is "a cesspit of Islamists", according to the Nobel prizewinning author Wole Soyinka.

See also: US: Britain is an al-Qaeda hub

Censoring the unsayable

In her Spectator blog, Melanie Phillips takes issue with a new study which claims that negative portrayals of Muslims in the British media are leading to a growth in hate crime:

The view that Islamists who, for tactical reasons alone, oppose al Qaeda are not a threat to Britain -- and should indeed be treated as allies against al Qaeda -- is one of the most lethal mistakes that has been made by the British counter-terror world.  One example of such egregious establishment wrong-headedness that I cite in Londonistan is in fact one of the authors of this report, Robert Lambert. A former officer in the Metropolitan Police Counter-Terror Command, who until 2008 ran the Metropolitan Police Muslim Contact Unit, Lambert told a conference organised by the Danish police that terrorism could not be fought by contact with moderate Muslims but through partnerships with the Salafists (radical Islamists) – two of whom were at one stage at least actually officers in his own police department. I wrote:

Lambert believed that this would enable the police to understand the way extremists thought before they committed any acts of terror. But it surely goes without saying that a Salafist officer, who is committed to the overthrow of the west and its replacement by an Islamic society, poses a security risk of the first order. For a police counter-terrorism specialist to be promoting this situation beggars belief.

Now Lambert has co-authored this study which claims that identifying such Islamists as extremists is to incite attacks upon British Muslims. But just look at the organisation behind this study, the European Muslim Research Centre. On its advisory board sit Anas Altikriti of the Muslim Association of Britain, which supports Hamas, and Mohamed Abdul Bari of the Muslim Council of Britain, which supports the Islamisation of Britain and which has a number of Islamist affiliates.  The study also says it drew its information from, amongst others, the Muslim Safety Forum, Islamic Human Rights Commission, Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) UK, the Federation of Islamic Student Societies and the Muslim Council of Britain – all of which are Islamist fronts.

Muslim Russia

It turns out that "Ikramuddin Khan" is the pseudonym of Vadim Sidorov, a Muslim convert also known as Kharum ar-Rushi, head of the National Organization of Russian Muslims.

Many commentators in the West tend to forget that Russia has a steadily growing number of ethnic Russian converts to Islam. Specialist observers have documented the trend, however: in 2007, Paul Goble quoted a figure as large as 20,000, and by now the numbers are likely to be even higher. Daniel Pipes has a useful and interesting survey of the subject on his website, where he quotes President Dmitry Medvedev as saying:

"Russia is a multi-national and multi-confessional country. Russian Muslims have enough respect and influence. Muslim foundations are making an important contribution to promoting peace in society, providing spiritual and moral education for many people, as well as fighting extremism and xenophobia. There are 182 ethnic groups living in Russia, and 57 of them claim Islam as their main religion. This figure speaks for itself."

It does indeed.

Dangers of debate

As one of a series of ongoing projects, the Prague Watchdog website, which formerly directed its attention almost exclusively to the subject of human rights abuses in Chechnya, has now under its new chief editor Andrei Babitsky turned its attention to the subject of Islam. Although the new project, titled "Islam Today", has begun with a contribution from a Russian Muslim cleric, it is not focused solely on the North Caucasus but according to its editor, Mr. Ikramuddin Khan (so far of unknown nationality, but see the next post), will open an international debate on contemporary Islam across the globe.

As PW's English-language editor I've expressed some doubts about this plan. It seems to me that if Prague Watchdog loses its Russia-North Caucasus focus it is likely to find itself to some extent adrift, especially on a highly inflammable subject like the nature of Islam. The comments section in the Russian-language version of PW's site has already on occasion been taken over by vocal and militant Islamists of the Kavkaz Center and Kavkazan Haamash (Caucasus Emirate) variety, and I wouldn't like to see this tendency spread to PW's English-language comments. There are already enough discussion forums on the Web that deal with Muslim politics, Jihad, Islam, Islamic terrorism and related subjects. Some of those forums are dominated by extremist Muslim opinion, while others, like Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch, present an alternative and opposing view from a Western, non-Muslim perspective. They all, in my experience, tend to attract posters who seem anxious to engage in debates that are often bitter and recriminatory, and sometimes downright scurrilous.

My own view is that PW would do better to concentrate on what it has done so well in the past, namely the analysis and reporting of current events in Chechnya and the North Caucasus, in which religion is only one feature of a constantly changing ethnic, political and ideological landscape. While some of the material PW now publishes fits this description, there has been a marked increase in the number of polemical and op-ed articles which are subjective in the extreme. The addition of a debate about Islam could worsen that trend quite a bit, in my view. So for the time being the "Islam forum", with its accompanying newsletter-bulletin,  will not be appearing in an English-language version. Though if some of the prospective articles turn out to be of general interest, I will translate them for PW and post links to them here.

US: Britain is an Al Qaeda hub

A recent U.S. intelligence assessment points to the high level of support for Al Qaeda among Britain's Muslims and expresses concern that the U.K. now presents a major security threat to the West. Con Coughlin in the Telegraph has the details.

From today's correspondence

Dear David,

Thank you for your response. I would only add that Zakaev (whom I admire a lot) himself stated that "Chechen Islamism" is Lubyanka plot to destroy the Chechen resistance and to split the Chechen society. Of course the resistance had to turn to some Islamic identity but to call them "Islamofascists" is, on my opinion, a big exaggeration and misunderstanding that even undeliberately plays to benefit the Russian-Kadyrov regime. I wouldn't support such kind of propaganda. Also, Andrei Babitsky himself had been in Afghanistan to investigate "Chechen ghost" stories and did not find a tiny evidence that support such claims.

Sincerely,

Nadezhda

 

Dear Nadezhda,

Well, I for my part would only add that if the [North Caucasus] Islamic resistance wants to avoid the Islamofascist label, its members need to stop writing and behaving like Islamofascists. Many of the statements that are published on their websites are outrageous, and could be classified as hate crime.

On the other hand, I'm sure that very many of the stories about Chechens in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere are untrue, and are engineered for Moscow's propaganda purposes. My suggestion - and I believe it's a moderate and reasonable one - is simply that these stories need to be looked into and analysed, and the results made publicly available.

Regards,

David

Chechen ghosts

The uneasy relation between the various interest groups among those, both in the North Caucasus and outside it, who have tried to see a way through the problematic political and social landscape of this troubled part of the world, came to the fore again recently on Norbert Strade's long-lived Chechnya Short List. Norbert has once again posted one of his periodic  "Chechen ghosts" items, this time a clipping from the Independent newspaper - an article by a British journalist who quoted a Western bomb disposal expert as saying that a new type of IED being used by the Taleban in Afghanistan was based on expertise "coming from foreign fighters from places such as Chechnya".

According to the received wisdom in a certain section of the Chechnya human rights community, Chechens cannot be found in places such as Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan. Even though Chechnya's Islamic fundamentalists - who act separately from the increasingly out-of-favour nationalists - are as opposed to the U.S., Israel and the West as their Taleban counterparts, by a section of the human rights campaigners  they are thought to be exclusively focused on eliminating Russian control of the region. This approach seemingly ignores the fact that on websites such as Kavkaz Center and Kavkazan Haamash,  Chechen, Dagestani and Ingush Islamists routinely issue anti-Western statements. It would surely not be surprising if one or two Chechens ended up on the Afghan front lines, though the numbers can be disputed. There is also the complicating factor that such participation can be used by the Russian government in its ongoing campaign against Chechnya, which seeks to tar all Chechens with the brush of Islamic extremism.

To point out that it might be kinder and more realistic to treat Chechens as fallible human beings who might fall into political extremism either deliberately or as a result of being duped,   rather than as paragons of national-revolutionary virtue who can do no wrong, is not a popular line to take in Norbert Strade's forum. I have already been attacked by the recently-reappeared Mikael Storsjö (who has done much in word and deed to support the Islamic fighters and their ideologists in Chechnya and elsewhere in the North Caucasus), and other responses have been equally hostile. In the end one is forced to conclude that what really drives the opinions of these avowed pro-Chechens is an antipathy to Western political and military influence per se - as well as to the Kremlin's foreign policy. For if sites like Kavkaz Center are really just projects of the unreformed Russian/Soviet KGB, then why give them any support?

Islam4UK proscribed under terror laws

Government to ban Islam4UK under terror laws (BBC)