Anil Gupta
The recent declaration of a Caliphate by the Sunni jihadi outfit Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) should ring alarm bells all over. By this announcement the jihadi outfit seeks to erase borders from Mediterranean to Gulf and undermine the authority of Iraqi and Syrian governments as well as challenge the legitimacy of other Muslim states in the region. It has also appointed its terrorist leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi as the Caliph. ISIS has also called upon Jihadis worldwide to pledge their allegiance to the Caliphate. The idea of Caliphates dates back to the medieval era of Caliphs who succeeded the Prophet Mohammad as political and military leaders of the Muslims. Ottoman Empire of Turkey was the last Caliphate and was abolished in 1924.
This poses a direct challenge to Al Qaeda, which was till recently considered as an umbrella and the unquestioned leader of the global  jihadi terrorist outfits. Is Al Qaeda losing its supremacy? By declaring Al Baghdadi as Caliph, ISIS is trying to eclipse al Qaeda and its supremo Ayman al -Zawahari. The announcement of the Caliphate and call for allegiance to it is the most significant event in jihadi history since 9/11. Moreover, ISIS also claims to lead 1.5 billion Muslims around the world and its area of focus is not just Iraq and Syria but the entire world.
Al-Qaeda versus ISIS
Ever since the elimination of Osama Bin Laden, al-Qaeda has been lying low and trying to regroup, recoup and recover under its new leader al Zawahiri.  ISIS also has its origin as Al Qaeda in Iraq, when in October 2004, the group’s then leader al Zarqawi swore loyalty to Osama bin Laden. ISIS was formally disowned by al-Qaeda in February this year after refusing to accept al-Zawahiri’s decree to cease operations in Syria in favour of another al-Qaeda affiliate Jabarat al Nusra or Nusra in short. Al-Qaeda declared ISIS as its non-affiliate and announced that it has nothing to do with their activities and does not share any organisational relationship with ISIS.
Establishment of a Caliphate was the cherished dream of Osama Bin Laden as well. But al-Qaeda was unable to translate his dream into reality. But for a few towns it captured and controlled for a few months in Southern Yemen, Al-Qaeda never controlled swathes of territory like the ISIS. ISIS has not only walked the talk but in fact also has talked the talk. By announcing that it is removing the last two letters from acronym ISIS and calling itself ‘Islamic State’ as well as by declaring al Baghdadi as its Khalifah with a new name Khalifah Ibrahim, ISIS has posed a direct challenge to al-Zawahiri. ISIS spokesperson al-Adnani made the group’s intentions clear when he said, “it is now incumbent upon all Muslims to pledge allegiance to the Khalifah Ibrahim and support him. He is the Imam and Caliph for Muslims everywhere.” The bugle for turf war has been sounded.
ISIS is the richest terrorist outfit in the world. It not only controls swathes of territory in Syria and Iraq, it has its well defined system of governance. It levies taxes and generates revenue through sale of oil. Extortion is another common method of revenue generation. Its ideology is barbaric and extremist and there is no room tolerance. Its cadre is ruthless and not people friendly. Recently released photos and videos displaying ethnic executions and destruction of holy places are ample evidence of its philosophy and mind-set of its cadre. Financially, al-Qaeda today is no match to ISIS, a factor that may influence many splinter jihadi groups to gravitate towards ISIS.
ISIS also does not have any dearth of manpower. Apart from the disgruntled Iraqi Sunni youth, it has significant number of fighters from Syria and other Arab countries on its rolls. It reportedly also has fighters from UK and Australia in its ranks. So far, there is no evidence of any Indians having joined the ISIS. The recent offensive by Pak Army in North Waziristan may force more jihadis to move to the Caliphate for a safe sanctuary. Thus, ISIS ranks may also swell with Uzbeks, Chechens and the Uighurs. If this monster is not reined in time, it could pose a serious challenge to global peace and acts of terror worldwide may increase. Undoubtedly, al-Qaeda is on the decline but not finished as yet.
Implications of Declaration of Caliphate
While the Shia led Iraqi government has out rightly rejected the idea of Caliphate, its acceptance in Syria is also doubtful. Even some of the Sunni groups supporting ISIS in Iraq are against the idea of caliphate and oppose it. “The strategic goal of Baathists is capture of Baghdad, not the establishment of Caliphate. ISIS’s pronouncement will most likely intensify intra-jihadist struggle and widen the split between ISIS and its insurgent Sunni allies in Iraq”, says FawasGerges, a Middle East expert. While in Syria, a number of small groups have pledged allegiance to Caliphate, the cadre of Nusra is divided on the issue. The Syrian Opposition Council in Eastern Ghouta and the Free Syrian Army are opposed to the idea of Caliphate. “There are millions of Syrians who are not with ISIS so how they can speak about a caliphate in our land”, announced Free Syrian Army spokesperson Omar Abu Leila. The idea of caliphate is not finding universal acceptance in both Iraq and Syria, the two immediately effected states. This section of the society needs to be bolstered to bring to halt the evil design of ISIS.
Now there is an evident divide between al Qaeda and ISIS. The jihadi groups world over would have to decide between either of the two. Thus, a vertical divide amongst jihadi groups would now pose a twin threat to global peace. The global war on terror would now have to get ISIS as well on its cross hair. In fact, ISIS now poses a bigger and tougher challenge than al Qaeda and should be designated as number one enemy for the global war on terror.
Buoyed by its lightening success and in pursuance of its ‘Dream Map’ released a couple of weeks back, ISIS may be encouraged to make forays into Afghanistan, Pakistan and Kashmir. This would pose a serious threat to regional security. It would be in the best interest of South Asian peace for India and Pakistan to replace their policy of ‘Confrontation’ with that of ‘Cooperation’, to ward off the threat of terror, a common enemy. The region is volatile and the ISIS only needs to add fuel to the fire. How the al Qaeda backed groups like Afghan Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, Haqqani Group, JEM, LET and JuD react in this changing scenario would to a large extent determine the success or failure of ISIS in the region.
Recommendations
* In interest of global peace and to supress the monster in form of ISIS, the international community needs to unite once again and face the challenge head on. The centre of gravity of global war on terror must now shift to Iraq and Syria.
*  The Iraqi Army needs to be strengthened and reinforced. US and Iran must bury their differences and come together to rejuvenate the battered and demoralised Iraqi Army. Iran must immediately send in its elite troops. The US must intensify the drone and air strikes on the captured territory.
*  International peace must take precedence over regional politics. US must revisit its policies in Syria and Iran. India, Afghanistan and Pakistan must cooperate and put the zero-sum game in Afghanistan on the back burner.
*  The Iraqi Kurds must be given moral and material support to prevent the move of ISIS into Kurdish territory.
*  The international media particularly in the Middle East must expose the barbaric and draconian acts of the ISIS to portray it as the enemy of the Islamic world.
* A well-conceived and orchestrated psy warfare campaign needs to be launched world over to alienate the moderate Sunni groups and draw a wedge between them and the ISIS. They must be made to believe that ISIS would marginalise them. Also, the rift between al-Qaeda and ISIS should be exploited to own advantage.
Conclusion
No modern progressive nation including in the Muslim world is willing to return to the medieval era. The concept of Caliphate does not find favour amongst the international community. The global war on terror is not yet over. A bigger threat than al-Qaeda has emerged and needs to be eliminated for the sake of global peace.
(The author is a retired Brigadier. He is a political commentator, security and strategic analyst)

Vishal Sharma
Bhartiya Janta Party ( BJP) has set for itself an ambitious target of 44+ assembly seats in the ensuing elections in J&K. The race for 44+ majority in the State assembly is modeled on the Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s  famous 272+ poll pitch in the just concluded Lok Sabha elections. Both the poll pitches ride on unbridled ambition. But that is where the similarity ends.
Modi’s success was indeed spectacular. But his campaign had followed a different trajectory. It was fuelled by hopes and aspirations of a country that had seen them progressively atrophied over the course of a decade.  His pitch was also built on the template of proven achievements in a state. His repeated invocations that given a chance he would scale up the Gujarat model at the national level liberated the political discourse from the abysmal ‘normal’ typified by the UPA’s failures and lack of alternatives.
Where’s the comparison? Is the BJP second best alternative electorally in the state? Has it ever been? Does it have a pan state presence? Does it have any proven track record of governance or a proper opposition for that matter? What is it on offer from its side that can potentially tickle the fancy of the electorate?
BJP’s base is only in Jammu division. And it has been for all of its life. This is to do with the denominational and ethnic reasons. If it had revisited its ideological moorings, it would perhaps have grown out of its traditional base. Instead, it has chosen to remain closeted in the frozen chambers of an outdated ideology. Hence, it remains where it is. Stuck in sands even as sands themselves shift with time and circumstances.
It has had its share of glory as well. But this joy ride has been on the whipped up emotions of a crazed electorate. The recent example is its victory at the hustings in the immediate aftermath of the Shri Amarnath land row. It landed a purchase well beyond its expectations. But when came the day of reckoning later to walk the talk, its high decibel ideological noise of the land row days meekly gave way to the inane stupor immediately after.
No one knows what came about during and after the frenzied exchanges amongst those affected during and after the row. Ironically, perhaps, not even the BJP, which bore the flag of the agitation in the garb of its doctrinal mutant-‘Sangarsh Samiti’. It had a faint idea of what it had set out to achieve anyway. Its eyes had lit up at the sight of the steam of protests that had begun to gather; and it positioned itself ahead of it. The outcome and the messaging were treated as incidentals; best devised and manipulated under the diktats of the circumstances. No outcome was achieved for its goal posts kept changing; no message came out for none was ever intended.
Nothing exemplifies its subterfuge more than what was on view during cross voting by its members for election of legislators to the Council. Till today no one knows who were actually involved in it. After much prevarication, an effort was made to hold an inquiry; pronounce a few culpable; sack them and be done with it. The effort, more than anything, bore the stamp of intent to offload the baggage quickly, lest it should become an albatross around its neck. There was no attempt at enduring institutional disinfection. Once again, instead of rewriting the script, it chose, as has been its wont, to rehash it and sell it. This time, though, it appears the muck, unlike in the past, has stuck with it.
The trouble with keeping discourses that impact peoples’ lives relevant is that they need to be constantly reinvented. Dull and drab ones quickly cease to be rallying points. BJP’s failing in the state is that its discourse is horribly out of step with the times it is in. What’s worse those who helm it would have us believe that this is what ticks; and will, in the long run, too. Those, who have warped this discourse beyond correction and in the process hit at the warp and woof of the organization, would have us believe that they can cross 44+ mark. Perhaps, they still believe that their profane article of faith will cause another leap of faith amongst its faithfuls. In doing so, they trust not their intrinsic strength of which the less said the better; but the certitude of the gullibility of the led, alas.
Look at their perfidious maths behind the 44+ mark. They expect a complete sweep in Jammu region and a mild harvest of 5- 6 seats in Kashmir. And what’s the basis of it? Well, simmering anti-congress pitch in Jammu and a strong desire for change in Kashmir. The reasoning may not entirely be off the mark. But in our complex local setting, this reasoning has been taken a little too far.  For, quite simply, how and why would loss of a particular party translate into a gain for BJP? What’s it done to assume it will be so? One view is that the victory at the centre has created enough tailwinds for its ambitions to skyrocket; the chinwag is: people desert the sinking ships just as quickly as they grab an opportunity to jump onto a bandwagon of victors; this is how we are as people. Will this expectancy actualize?   My sense is it will not. It never will.
It may partially. But that would require chopping off the deadwood that is a throwback to the times of deceit and deception. Its present crop of helmsmen has to be eased out and replaced with the new one; one that is not burdened with the baggage of all that characterizes the existing one; one who are not ideologues of the exclusivist kind, but have affinity for an ideology of change and hope and aspirations; one who are not old; effete and have antediluvian mindset, but one who are young; resolute and progressive; one who are not self righteous and self centred, but one who make the wider cause subservient to their personal ones.
Such massive ambition, however, needs to be backed with an honest intent and effort. In a larger sense, BJP needs to craft a more sophisticated response to the challenges confronting it. The contemptuous rejection of a leadership haul and pathological disdain for a new and innovative approach will reduce its chances of even being a player. While even a marginal foray in Kashmir is a wishful thinking, it is in with a chance of improving its tally in Jammu if it could simply reset its organizational and ideological pieces on the political chessboard. With the current leadership bandwidth and the anxieties that guide their worldview, it can only reject the inevitable change, and not deal with it, and, therefore, retreat into a reality that exists, but only for it.