It is thirteen years ago that the organization of Islamic State in Iraq was established, and it is two years ago that the establishment of Islamic State or Daesh was announced. The time that has elapsed since then has not by itself been sufficient for the Daesh interpretation of the Sharia to spread itself over IS territory. This could only be achieved by resorting to the sword and to beheadings and thereby force such legislation on the people, who have had no chance whatsoever to escape from the areas occupied by Daesh.
Predictably, the edge of the sword has had a clear impact on the ‘commitment’ of the ordinary people to abide by the Daesh laws but it turns out that elements of the organization itself were not fully convinced of their own Daesh ‘Constitution’ either. They started transgressing it, or even began to disregard it entirely, doing so without hesitation, fully confident, as they consider themselves state, law and executive power at the same time.
Tribal and national strife are among the most important things that the organization fights and is trying to weed out in the areas under its control, for fear that these might penetrate and poison the minds of its constituting ‘elements’, These elements indeed used to be separated by nationalism but had found each other in their shared thirst for blood. Apparently these thirsty elements are have reverting to their old ways and are now clustering into separate blocks within the organization, where sons of the same group or country are starting to fight other groups within the organization.
The loss of the city of Tel Abyad has fueled this trend and strengthened the rift that exists between the elements of the organization, where supporters of each party blame the other party for the loss the city, as happened recently in front of the Daesh Police Headquarters in Raqqa when an altercation between Syrian Daesh supporters and immigrants occurred because of the resentment the supporters felt towards the immigrants. The latter had allegedly escaped from the city of Tel Abyad and handed it over to the Kurds, and they might repeat this scenario in case of any progress of the enemies of IS in the direction of Raqqa, so that it is the Syrian IS supporters that have to perform the job of defending the city.
The quarrel did not remain restricted to words this time but evolved into a clash with light weapons being used between a group of fighters of the cities of Deer al Zor and Raqqa and a group of Uzbek fighters who were later joined and supported by a group of French fighters. A real street war broke out between the elements of the organization. which ultimately ended in one Syrian and one Uzbek fighter getting wounded.
The reporter of the website “Raqqa is Being Slaughtered in Silence” writes about tensions between the Syrians and the Daesh immigrants being felt and seen on a daily basis, with each party blaming the other for its supposed mistakes. One of the claims concerns the unequal treatment of the two sides, with Syrians noticing that the foreign elements receive higher salaries and the highest number of allowances while the Syrian fighters are considered merely as outsiders in the organization who do not adhere to its laws and who will thus have a negative effect on the state that the organization aspires to establish.
According to the reporter there are two main reasons for the problems arising between immigrants and supporters First, there is the difference in salaries between locals and immigrants, the latter being paid more. Second, the better houses are granted to members of the organization. While the Syrians have been allocated houses on the outskirts of the city, the migrants are granted houses and places within the city and in residential neighborhoods. For the Syrian elements this betrays a greater concern on the part of the Daesh leadership for the immigrants, the inner city offering better protection against coalition aircraft attacks with the people living there functioning as a human shield.
Daesh is trying to avoid organizational problems and cracks developing on the inside by issuing violent and bloody decrees in order to divert attention from the internal rift and to highlight the strength of the organization, but the blocks which are beginning to evolve within the organization are a warning for an imminent danger threatening the organization – its disintegration into small brigades that do not support each other and which may ultimately lead to the collapse of the toughest terrorist organization in the world.
Arabist Assistant Professor Tilburg University Jan Jaap de Ruiter: “Totalitarian movements always strive to implement a fully worked-out ideology covering all the details of life of its followers and of the people they rule over. It makes internal strife an ever-present danger, as the ideology will most likely not be interpreted in the same way by leadership and followers. When, as is the case with Islamic State, followers or supporters of a movement are treated differently, the danger of disintegration becomes even greater, particularly when there are military setbacks.
The Western world is fighting Islamic State with little success. But the internal quarrels and fights that have broken out between the different factions of IS might well be the beginning of its end. The developments the article reports on may therefore be considered as hopeful signs and maybe they are, but the people suffering under IS occupation will only be worse off when this internal strife leads to –another- internal war in Syria.”
