reflectivepundit

ISIS’s Online “Media Jihad” Survives its Territorial Defeat

 

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Two months ago, in late March, Donald Trump wrote via Twitter, “ISIS uses the internet better than almost anyone, but for all of those susceptible to ISIS propaganda, they are now being beaten badly at every level....”

The U.S. President’s assumption that the demise of the territorial Islamic State meant also the end of its online propaganda machine was wrong.

One month after Trump’s tweet, one of the pro-ISIS online channels posted a rare video of the group’s leader and self-proclaimed Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. An assault rifle next to him in a pose reminiscent

of typical images of Osama bin Laden, al-Baghdadi praised his fighters, took credit for the catastrophic church attacks in Sri Lanka and other terror strikes in various parts of the world, and threatened a continued war against the Crusaders.

After starting as a clandestine terrorist organization in Iraq and morphing into a proto-state on the heels of gaining control over huge territories in both Iraq and Syria the Islamic State was more recently forced to transforming back into a terrorist organization. Without controlling real estate ISIS is today an expanding transnational organization with a growing presence in Africa and South and South-East Asia.

Whether the estimated thousands of remaining, undercover ISIS fighters in Syria and Iraq or their comrades in Afghanistan, the Philippines, or the North African Maghreb—all of the many hubs, cells, and individuals are linked through the organization’s still potent online “Media Jihad.”

To be sure, the loss of the media center in Raqqa and the deaths of dozens of media jihadists responsible for global online and local offline propaganda reduced the daily output significantly. The glitzy online magazines a la Dabiq and Rumiyah are gone and there are no more propaganda films a la “Flames of War.” But, as Rukmini Callimachi told Judy Woodruff on PBS’s News Hour recently,

"Every single day, they are putting out content. And in fact, on Easter Sunday, the same day we had this    horrific attack in Sri Lanka, the group claimed two other attacks, one in Saudi Arabia and one in Kabul,    in Afghanistan. For the one in Saudi Arabia, they released a video showing the attackers pledging    allegiance right before that attack. But that gives you a sense, in three different theaters, thousands of miles apart, you know, from each other, they are able to claim these attacks through their media ministry."

Whether issued directly by Media Diwan, ISIS’s department of propaganda, or by affiliated and independent media jihadists around the globe, whether on social media or on the dark web, the group’s propaganda machine continues to function; it is weakened but not defeated.   

 

Flattering Trump and Avoiding War

 

By Brigitte L. Nacos

There is no doubt the John Bolton, President Trump’s National Security advisor, has been itching to go to war against Iran for decades. And now, he finally sees a very good chance to realize his plan. In a way, the hawkish Bolton in the Trump White House resembles the hawkish Richard Cheney in the George W. Bush White House, where the then Vice-President (along with fellow neo-conservatives) finally got his war against Saddam Hussein and Iraq that they had plotted for years.

So, today, the worries that the Middle East will soon see another war of choice, not a war of necessity, are real. In the current climate, wittingly or unwittingly, hostilities can break out any time.

However, in one respect the build-up to the Iraq invasion was different than the current period of heightened conflict rhetoric.

George W. Bush was different than Donald Trump—especially in one important respect: Contrary to George W. the current president is an extreme narcissist who needs constant admiration, affirmation, and assurances of love.

The mirror-hungry Trump looks day-in and day-out for reflections of complete devotion—on FOX News, during his frequent rallies, in the absolute obedience and service of Republican politicians, his on-their- knees cabinet members, and his White House advisers.

Nothing is feeding his insatiable appetite for compliments more than assurances by his admirers that God send him to be the leader of America.

Obviously, the North Korean leader Kim Jong Um recognized the U.S. president’s narcissistic traits and fed his ego in “lovely” letters and personal encounters.

While the North Korean leader and his minions clash with members of Trump’s cabinet, they never have a bad word for Trump himself. In the words of President Trump, he and Um, “We fell in love!”

In this spirit, the narcissist Trump downplays the missiles that North Korea test-fires now and then as not violating his accord with Um. And never mind they expansive nuclear arsenal.

As for Iran, there is a constant drum beat of rhetorical attacks on Iran although there is no conclusive evidence that Tehran violated the Nuclear Accord that was agreed on by the Obama administration, Europeans, Russia, and China but severed quickly by the Trump White House.

Earlier this year, the National Security Advisor used a YouTube clip to send a message to Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It was not a congratulatory gesture at the 40^th anniversary of the Iranian Revolution in 1989 but rather a threat. Directly addressing the Ayatollah, Bolton ended his message with the sentence, “I don’t think you’ll have many more anniversaries to enjoy.”

But war is not inevitable.

According to reports Trump so far resists Bolton’s anti-Iranian drum beats, is not ready for war.

The Ayatollah and/or Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani could send a “lovely” letter to Mister Trump and exploit his narcissistic needs. Just like the one time Trumpian “rocket man” Um recognized that the U.S. President is a real sucker for flattery, the Iranian leadership could play their cards in similar ways and beat Bolton and other hawks in Washington and elsewhere.  

While the tough words of Iran's leaders do not favor my peace diplomacy I still hope that soft (and clever) power trumps hard power.

 

 

 

The Christchurch Terrorist: The Personified Evil

By Brigitte Nacos

After seeing the most gruesome ISIS videos that showed the meticulously staged executions of hostages, the beheading, the drowning, the burning of victims, I thought that I couldn’t see anything worse, nothing more inhumane.

This morning I was proved wrong.

The video that the Christchurch terrorist shot with a camera seemingly attached to his helmet or cap and streamed on the best known social media platforms during his killing spree is of unspeakable cruelty.

Not only did the killer shoot peaceful, innocent human beings as they were worshiping in a mosque, he aimed at the same people—dead or injured already—again and again.

When he was nearly out of ammunition, he walked back to his car shooting at pedestrians further away to his right and left. He took another handgun from the trunk of the car, walked back into the mosque, and aimed his shots again at the people lying in their blood on the floor.

What I saw was the personified evil devoid of any humanity.

And, no, contrary to the common but false narrative of our time, this terrorist was not a Muslim, not a jihadist affiliated with ISIS or like-minded groups.

He was a White Nationalist, an angry, hateful racist with an Australian passport who wanted to fire the first deadly shots in a war against “invaders” of different religions and races.

When I read the 74-pages of a tract that the mass killer posted online, I was hardly surprised. He expresses the same hate, the same ignorance, the same calls for defending the white race, the same appetite for all-out race war, and the same attacks on humanitarian leaders who opened their countries’ doors to non-white, Christian refugees. On this count, he attacks most of all German Chancellor Angela Merkel.  

These racist outbursts are nothing new; they are central to the regular discourse on white supremacy/neo-Nazi online discussion boards, web sites, and social media accounts. The resemble the message sent by the Alt-Right’s “Unite the Right” march in Charlottesville in 2017 that President Trump could not bring himself to condemn.

The mass killer of Christchurch is at home in the white nationalist online milieu. His primitive declaration that the news media characterized as "manifesto" celebrates among others the Norwegian white nationalist Anders Breivik (who killed 77 people to highlight his anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim agenda) and the American white supremacist Dylan Roof (who in 2016 killed 9 African Americans in a Charleston, S.C., church).

While Facebook and Twitter closed the terrorist’s accounts and thereby tried to block access to the horrific video and the terrorist tract titled “The Great Replacement,” both were readily available on White Supremacy sites.

That alone attests to the fact that the Christchurch terrorist did not think, plan, and act in a vacuum. He is part of a growing international front of White extremism that spans from North America to Europe and Australia and poses just as serious a threat as does Muslim extremism.

A fact that European governments have come to recognize contrary to top-decision-makers in Washington. 

If Howard Schultz Runs in 2020 as an Independent, Could a Boycott of Starbucks Stop Him?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

After the first two years of Trump’s presidency and the recent shut-down of the federal government the number one imperative must be is to vote the MAGA man in 2020 out of office.

I believe that the impeachment route would be merely another irritant and stall in the GOP dominated US Senate. Democracy is best served when the electorate decides.

The biggest hurdle to vote Trump out could well be the candidacy of independent or third party candidates. Think of Jill Stein of the Green Party who might have drawn enough votes in crucial states to deny Hillary Clinton and hand Trump the victory.

Yet, Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, talks now publicly about a possible run in 2020—as an independent candidate.

What makes rich guys like Ross Perot in the 1990s and Schultz now think that they alone can heal all the ills of our political system? A good guess here is that it might be the same arrogance and hubris which motivated in the past and still motivate today the current occupant of the White House.

If Mr. Schultz believes that he is the best candidate for the highest office in the land, he should compete in the primaries of the Democratic Party given his liberal credentials.

Another business man and billionaire, Michael Bloomberg, who did a good job as Mayor of New York City, is not a pure enough liberal to have a chance to win the Democratic nomination.  He seems to recognize the pitfalls of an independent candidacy if the number one goal is to deny Trump a second term.

Schultz should take a page out of Bloomberg’s political playbook informed by experience in an actual public office and common sense.

It is telling that Trump tried this morning to goad Mr. Schultz by posting the following tweet:

Howard Schultz doesn’t have the “guts” to run for President! Watched him on @60Minutes last night and I agree with him that he is not the “smartest person.” Besides, America already has that! I only hope that Starbucks is still paying me their rent in Trump Tower!

Obviously, Trump would love a third candidate in the race who could win enough votes from Independents and Democrats to keep him in office.

While Howard Schultz is no longer running Starbucks he is the single-largest shareholder of Starbucks holding 33 million shares directly and 1.7 million shares indirectly through trusts as of Jun. 26, 2018.

If he runs as an independent, a massive boycott of Starbucks might stop his candidacy.

The “Lone Wolf” in the White House

 

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Typically, I analyze the actions and motivations of “lone wolves” within my long research interest in terrorism and terrorists. But as I try to explain President Trump’s shocking and unexpected decision to withdraw all remaining U.S. forces from Syria, the analogy to “lone wolf” imageries comes instantly to mind.

After all, the commander-in-chief acted without consulting his national security advisers, including Secretary of Defense James Mattis, military commanders in the Middle East, and members of Congress.

According to his tweets, Trump is simply enacting his long-held withdrawal plan. Never mind the opposition within his administration and his own Republican party.

Research reveals that “lone wolf “ terrorists tend to feel being apart from and misunderstood by their respective social circles; they are angry about perceived wrongdoings against their secular or religious beliefs and virtual communities--a dangerous mixture that can eventually lead to what they perceive as revenge against their enemies—often in reaction to particular events.

So what was the trigger event for President Trump to announce out of the blue the cut-and-run decision concerning Syria?

First, there was the disastrous court appearance of General Flynn, Mr. Trump’s former National Security Adviser and the news that the Trump Foundation was forced to close down because of its unsavory practices. This was followed by the realization that Congress was rejecting the president’s multi-billion-dollar request to finance the WALL along the Mexican-American border, his campaign promise—albeit, according to Trump, with Mexico as payer.  

As the judge in the Flynn case and the New York State Attorney General in the shut-down of the Trump Foundation demonstrated, the judicial system still works as it is supposed to—even though our president does not like it. Moreover, even with the shut-down of the U.S. government looming, Congress did not give in to Trump’s WALL fantasies.

So, the “lone wolf” in the White House, rejected and angry, needed to show that he had the power to unleash a shocker with domestic and global consequences: Contrary to the truth, he claimed that the Islamic State (ISIS) was defeated. But he ordered the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. military from Syria in any way.

That rhetorical strike via Twitter assured him what all lone wolves strive for: They want to get attention: media attention, elite attention, public attention.

After the withdrawal bomb was dropped, there was no or little public debate about Flynn,  the Trump Foundation, or the failed WALL promise.

Instead the lone wolf in the White House got a big publicity win—just like lone wolf terrorists always win in terms of media attention.