Iraq: A brief history of ISIS and its brutal ways

The Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) has caught the world’s attention by the pace and brutality of its takeover of many Iraqi towns, especially Mosul and Tikrit over the last week.
But the Sunni terrorist organisation has been around for more than a decade. Earlier known as the al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), it sided with Osama bin Laden and was noticed for its beheadings to rampant bombings all over Iraq. The AQI was instrumental in fanning the Iraqi civil war.
In 2006, because of its extreme violence, a section among Sunnis joined the US forces in defeating AQI. Thereafter, it became the ISIS and focused on Syria until it turned to Iraq.

The aim of the ISIS is to spread a Sunni Islamic state — and a radical one — throughout the Levant (from the southern tip of Turkey to Egypt and from Israel to Iraq).
It has been active in opposing Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and has captured many parts of Syria where it administers its radical form of governance. From the latter part of last year the group was protesting in many towns in Iraq against the ways of the Nouri al-Maliki government.
News that ISIS fighters are being welcomed in many Iraqi towns rings similar to the jubilation that was seen in many parts of Afghanistan when the Taliban took over. However, it will face resistance from a demoralised Iraqi security force and Iran, which is helping the   government protect vital areas close to its border. The Kurds are also attacking the Sunni militants.
The group has used social media and the Internet to spread its message of fear. It released The Clanging of the Swords, a propaganda video series in which soldiers are killed and tanks are destroyed.
For India the concern has been manifold. Other than the upward spiral of oil prices, the Narendra Modi government’s immediate concern is the safety of Indians in Iraq, around 40 of whom have been kidnapped.
(This appeared as an article in the Hindustan Times on June 19)

Obama’s New Team Set to Give India the Jitters

Statements by Charles Timothy ‘Chuck’ Hagel, the new United States Defence Secretary, that “India has over the years financed problems for Pakistan on that side of the border” and “used Afghanistan as a second front” are bizarre to say the least. Hagel’s speech, made at Oklahoma’s Cameron University in 2011, which was uploaded by Washington Free Beacon recently, also gave Pakistan a clean chit. It goes without saying that Hagel’s statements are the much-required fuel to run the anti-India mills in our neighbourhood.

Hagel’s comments are contrary to the US stand on India’s commitment to rebuilding Afghanistan. India’s role was appreciated in a statement released by the US embassy in New Delhi, which distanced itself from Hagel’s views. Whether Hagel is fit for the demanding job or not is a different question but what should be concerning the mandarins in New Delhi is that such a comment is coming from a top authority in the Obama administration at a time when the Manmohan Singh-led United Progressive Alliance government is turning to the United States to protect Indian interests in Afghanistan. These comments by Hagel, when seen with Secretary of State John Kerry’s January statement that “I don’t think the Pakistanis have frankly gotten credit, sufficiently, for the fact that they were helpful” in catching Osama bin Laden, poses serious questions on what course Indo-US ties will take at this crucial juncture.
New Delhi will have to work overtime to ensure that the new ring of leaders in the Obama administration are on the same page as its immediate predecessors and that they talk in one voice about India’s support to US goals in Afghanistan. It should impress upon Washington to see through Islamabad’s double game of hunting with the hounds and running with the hares. It will, however, be prudent to not rely heavily on a United States that is waiting to board the last plane out of Afghanistan.
(This appeared as an edit in The New Indian Express on February 28)