An Islamic « Caliphate », which ISIS wants simply to be called the « Islamic State », has been proclaimed by the Sunni militant group over the territories it controls. Their intent is to unificate the
Middle East
on religious lines and to make the promotion of the Sunni « ideology » against the Shias. This is the point of proclaiming a « Caliphate » : the Caliph is the successor of Prophet Muhammad in the Sunni lecture of the Coran. The Shias said that this succession should only be granted to descendants (through the family line) of the Prophet. In other words, this is a strong act of propaganda against the Shias. It should be also noted that re-creating an Islamic caliphate recovering the large borders of historical caliphates (Umayyads / Abbasids) is a project that fits well with the ideas of many Islamic leaders. Generally speaking, ISIS says that no Sunni Muslim will ever have any excuse not to support this state.
ISIS has proclaimed a Caliph, his leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, who should now be called “Caliph Ibrahim”, as a reference to his true forename, and should be “leader of the Muslims everywhere”. Every Muslim should declare allegiance to Caliph Ibrahim, according to the organisation, who directed especially this message to the other militant groups. Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is a mysterious person, born perhaps in 1971 in Samarrah, in northern Baghdad, jailed four years in a US detention facility after joining the Iraqi insurgency shortly after the invasion, believed dead in 2005, and “resurrected” in 2010 at the head of the ISI, the future ISIS. He is a rival of his former superior, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of Al-Qaeda, who refused a merger between the Al-Nusra Front and ISI in June 2013.
ISIS has never been truly concerned by popular legitimacy, they only believe in the strength of their organisation. However, in its strongholds like Raqqa in Syria, the population was celebrating the proclamation with gunfire and car horns. The group has enthusiasmed itself over its ability to break-up the Sykes-Picot borders. It is true that this is a marking event for djihadists in the Middle East and for the area in general. There had been no official Caliphate since 1924 and the end of the Ottoman regime. Iraq comes out truly weakened from the proclamation. It may be heading to break-up as the Kurdish may also be enticed by the prospect of a declaration of independence. It is sure that the Sykes-Picot borders did not took into account at all the religious divisions in the area, and that we are watching the consequences of what was drafted one hundred years ago.
But we are also watching the consequence of the bad policies adopted by Nuri Al-Maliki’s government, who excluded the Sunnis from power, and of the general instability of the country since it has been invaded by the USA-led coalition. It is clear that many policies implemented by the US administration, then headed by Proconsul Paul Bremer, destroyed the entire social threshold of the country. Privatizing the 200 biggest state companies of the country, for instance, allowing for 100% foreign ownership of some of them, and more generally implementing neo-liberal free-markets policies, was extremely harsh on the Iraqi citizenry, which revolted first against job losses and social security cuts. These protesters, secular at the beginning, have radicalized and turned to Islamic militancy because of their looking for moral support. Meanwhile, Nuri Al-Maliki has not included the Sunni Iraqis in its policies, probably as some sort of “revenge” against Saddam Hussein’s Sunni-supported regime. The Sunni, coming from the poorest areas, and lacking the oil fields of the Shias, thus especially dis-privileged, have been the prime supporters of Islamism.
The Sunni militants now hope that Muslims will “shake off the dust of humiliation and disgrace”. But even though the region has been the victim of many injustices, one can legitimately doubt a “Caliphate” is the right solution for the Iraqi citizens.
