Either way, the horrific situation in France, and the far-more horrific situation in Nigeria are more examples of why I prefer to use the word “jihadi” when referring to the perpetrators of such vile acts.
The trail of bloodshed in France, starting at the Paris office of a satirical magazine that continued with the killing of two police and ended in two separate hostage takings, and the even bloodier rampage in the Nigerian town of Baga were both engineered and carried out by those who profess to be acting in the name of Allah.
But in both France and Nigeria, though Christians and Jews were the targets, Muslims, too, were among the victims, as are the vast majority of those slaughtered by Islamic State.
And in Paris, it was a Muslim who helped save Jewish lives at the Kosher deli that became one of two deadly hostage sites after the Charlie Hebdo murderers were on the loose.
Which brings me to “jihadi.”
I come back to him often, but Sun Tzu explains why I prefer that term.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
It is not Islam. It is those who kill in the name of the religion. Those who wreak havoc and misery and claim it to be part of their jihad, who are seeking to subjugate non-believers, who want to spread Sharia throughout the Ummah, or greater world. To sum it up, jihadis.
It is important to know the enemy, because as Gen. Sun pointed out, there are no acceptable outcomes if we don’t. For every victory a defeat — the best-case scenario — is not a ratio to which we should ever aspire. A prime example of the folly of our misunderstanding can be found today in Iraq and Syria.
The answer to who the enemy is can also be found in what they do.
Killing 12 people (including Ahmed Merabet, a Muslim police officer who worked in the neighborhood) in an attack on a newspaper that repeatedly offended Islam was more than just a revenge hit, more than just a terroristic act to silence unbelievers and blasphemers (even though, according to many Muslim clerics, the concept of depicting the prophet Muhammad outside a mosque is not blasphemy, not haram. The prohibition is against depicting a person, inside the mosque).
It was, much like 9/11 was, an act of war, albeit on a far smaller scale. No doubt killing Stephane Charbonnier, Jean Cabut, Georges Wolinski, Bernard Verlhac, Philippe Honore, Bernard Maris, Elsa Cayat, Mustapha Ourrad, Michel Renaud, Frederic Boisseau and Brigadier Franck Brinsolaro in addition to Merabet at or just outside the magazine was retribution and an attempt to send a message. But it was also something far greater. It was, in my view, an attempt not just to intimidate, but to incite, to excite the base and to draw France, and its allies, deeper into the quagmire of the conflicts in the Middle East.
That was Osama bin Laden’s objective for the 9/11 attacks, and I can’t help but think a similar motive exists here.
And there’s another factor. In the hyper-factionalized post-bin-Laden jihadi world, there are many jihadi groups competing for the same resources of money and martyrs. What better way to brand your franchise and attract more of each than to pull off an attack like the ones that took place in France last week? At this point, there is some confusion about the killers’ loyalty. Though brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi and Amedy Coulibay all worked with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, according to published reports, Coulibay, in an interview with French TV during the height of the siege on the Kosher grocery, expressed fealty to the Yemen-based group’s rival Islamic State.
The bottom line is that even as masses rally against what transpired in Paris, Europe is bracing for further attacks, which are already underway. The Hamburger Morgenpost, a German regional newspaper, was firebombed after it reprinted Charlie Hebdo cartoons mocking the prophet. Given the small footprint required to pull these attacks off, it is only a matter of if, not when, they take place here.
There is no negotiating with this enemy, that’s why it is so important to know who that is.
❖ ❖ ❖
The carnage wrought by the three jihadis in France pales in comparison to what Boko Haram is doing in Nigeria, where the jihadi group just wiped out as many as 2,000 people in one village in its Borg-like quest to create its own caliphate. Put in perspective, that’s about two-thirds of those killed on 9/11 in a country long riven by ethnic and religious bloodshed.
A recent story in the Washington Post captured the insanity of the group that gained notoriety for kidnapping school girls.
One man who escaped with his family told Agence France-Presse he had to navigate through “many dead bodies on the ground” and that the “whole town was on fire.” Another man told Reuters he “escaped with my family in the car after seeing how Boko Haram was killing people … I saw bodies in the street. Children and women, some were crying for help.” He added: Bodies were “littered on the streets and surrounding bushes.” …It’s hard to find contemporary precedent for the delight Boko Haram takes in killing. Even the Islamic State, which has killed thousands and purposely targets minorities, doesn’t seem to be as wanton in its acts of carnage. It appears everyone — Muslim, Christian, Cameroonian, Nigerian — is a target for Boko Haram.
Again, Boko Haram is not killing just to create terror. As with their ideological doppelganger Islamic State and the other jihadi groups, for them terror is a tactic, not a strategy. Which is why I prefer jihadi to terrorist as a description.
One of the most fascinating aspects of recent events, from a cold, clinical point of view, is the position staked out by Hassan Nasrallah, head of the Iranian-backed Hizballah, a group hardly known as being the Girl Scouts of the Middle East.
Nasrallah, according to the New York Times, said in a televised address that extremists’ beheadings and massacres hurt the Prophet Muhammad more than mocking him in books, films or drawings.
His statements, as the New York Times points out, make sense in the context of his neighborhood. As an ally of Iran who has supported the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, for Nasrallah, both al-Qaida and Islamic State are enemies. Though he would still happily wipe out his southern neighbor, Israel, Nasrallah and his Shiite base want to distance themselves from intrareligious bloodletting of the Sunni groups. (Even though the Shia militias are doing a fine job of shedding Sunni blood in Iraq). And his statement comes at a time when Iran and the U.S. are, if not allies, at least coordinating through the Baghdad government in battling Islamic State. All while Iran would like to see the end of the U.S.-led sanctions (imposed to thwart that nation’s nuclear ambitions).
❖ ❖ ❖
I am not Charlie Hebdo in that my thing is not making fun of other people’s religions. Though when, as in the case of them and South Park, of which I am a big fan, I am not offended when everyone is a target. The equal-opportunity lampooning makes me laugh. Besides, the French have a different vibe about many things, including satire. Vive la différence!
But I am Charlie Hebdo in this regard.
As a journalist, no religion, not mine, not yours, gets to tell me what to write, or not to write. My choice not to mock Mohammed is my own, Not out of fear, but because I was raised to respect the beliefs of others, a core ethos no jihadi can goad me into changing.
The world is a dangerous place for my fellow journalists. There were 72 media workers killed last year, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. More than 1,100 since 1992 according to the organization. But to those who think they can scare us into silence, that fact will not be a deterrent.
I stand in support of those who speak truth to power and for their right to do so, regardless of the cost.
La liberté de la presse n’est pas sans prix.
❖ ❖ ❖
The Pentagon announced no new deaths in ongoing operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
There have been three U.S. troop deaths in support of Operation Inherent Resolve and none in support of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.