![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
The development of radical Islamist strategic thinking and the impact of post-modern, Western styles of thought upon the ideology that informs that strategy is often overlooked in conventional discussions of homegrown threats from jihadist militants. The propensity to discount the ideology informing both al-Qaeda and nominally non-violent Islamist movements with an analogous political philosophy like Hizb ut-Tahrir neglects the influence that critical Western modes of thought exercise upon their strategic thinking especially in the context of homegrown radicalization. Drawing selectively on non-liberal tendencies in the Western ideological canon has, in fact, endowed Khilaafaism (caliphism) with both a distinctive theoretical style and strategic practice. In particular, it derives intellectual sustenance from a post-Marxist Frankfurt School of critical thinking that in combination with an “English” School of international relations idealism holds that epistemological claims are socially determined, subjective, and serve the interests of dominant power relations. This critical, normative, and constructivist approach to international relations seeks not only to explain the historical emergence of the global order, but also to transcend it. This transformative agenda bears comparison with radical Islamist critiques of Western ontology and is of interest to Islamism's political and strategic thinking. In this regard, the relativist and critical approaches that have come to dominate the academic social sciences since the 1990s not only reflect a loss of faith in Western values in a way that undermines the prospects for a liberal and pluralist polity, but also, through a critical process facilitated by much international relations orthodoxy, promotes the strategic and ideological agenda of radical Islam. It is this curious strategic and ideological evolution that this paper explores.
Notes
Peter R. Neumann, “Europe's Jihadist Dilemma,” Survival 48, no. 2 (2006), 71.
Lorenzo Vidino, Al-Qaeda in Europe (Amhurst, NY: Prometheus, 2005), 368.
See David Kilcullen, “Subversion and Counter Subversion in the Campaign against Terrorism in Europe,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 30, no. 8 (2006), 653.
The use of the term Islamism in this article refers to the radical belief that Islam is not merely a faith but a system of political thought that can regulate all aspects of society in accordance with Islamic principles. It does not inherently connote a belief in violent extremism and is not to be conflated with Islam as a revealed religion.
Robert Pape, Dying to Win: The Logic of Suicide Terrorism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).
Mitchell D. Silber and Arvin Batt, Radicalization in the West: The Home Grown Threat (New York: New York City Police Department 2007), 5.
David Kilcullen, a former Australian army colonel and a PhD graduate of the University of New South Wales, is today probably the most influential terrorism and insurgency analyst in Washington. His work, for instance, his advocacy of “Disaggregation” as the basis of a global counterinsurgency strategy, has informed the evolution of much U.S. counter-terrorism strategy in recent years. See for example, David J. Kilcullen, “Countering Global Insurgency,” Journal of Strategic Studies 28, no. 4 (Aug. 2005), 597–617.
Kilcullen (see note 3 above), 658.
Ibid., 649.
Ibid., 652.
Mark Lilla, “A New, Political Saint Paul,” New York Review of Books 55, no. 16, 23 October 2008.
See Radicalization, Extremism and Islamism: Realities and Myths in the War on Terror: A Report by Hizb-ut- Tahrir, Britain (London: al-Khilafah, 2007), 14.
Rohan Gunaratna, “Ideology in Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism Lessons from combating al-Qaeda and Al Jemaah al Islamiyah in Southeast Asia,” in Abdul Halim bin Kader, ed., Fighting Terrorism: The Singapore Perspective (Singapore: Taman Bacaan, 2007), 95.
Stephen Ulph, Al Qaeda's Enemy Within, available at: (http://bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmmes/analysis/transcripts/07_08-08.txt).
Ekaterina Stepanova, Terrorism in Asymmetrical Conflict: Ideological and Structural Aspects, SIPRI Research Report 23 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 20.
Ibid., 25.
Ibid., 66. Stepanova also makes the point that while jihadist activists may not be recognized intellectuals or in the case of religious terrorists advanced theologians “does not mean that theologians are not ideologically driven,” 25.
Khilaffah is the term that Hizb ut-Tahrir uses in its various works advocating their preferred outcome for the political organization of the Muslim world. Khilaffaism is perhaps the most appropriate coinage to express the ideology. The alternative is the anglicized term “caliphism” which we also use in this article.
Olivier Roy, “Euro-Islam: The Jihad Within,” The National Interest 71 (Spring 2003), 67.
Taqiuddin Nabhani, The System of Islam Nidham al-Islam (London: al-Khilafah, 2002); Thought al-Tafkeer (London: al-Khilafah, 2004); Islamic Personality al-Shaksiyyah al-Islamiyyah (London: al-Khilafah, 2005).
Melanie Phillips, Londonistan (New York: Encounter, 2006), 14–17.
See (http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/english/english.html) accessed 22 Aug. 2005.
Ed Husain, The Islamist (London: Penguin, 2007), 83–110.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, The Method to Re-establish the Khilifah (London: Al-Khilifah, 2000), 1.
Ibid., 105–106.
For a survey see Anthony Glees and Chris Pope, When Students Turn to Terror: Terrorist and Extremist Activity on British University Campuses (London: Social Affairs Unit, 2005).
Husain (see note 23 above), 108.
Ibid., 102.
Ibid., 73.
Hassan Butt, “My Plea to Fellow Muslims: You Must Renounce Terror,” The Observer, 1 July 2007. See also Shiraz Maher, “How I Escaped Islamism,” Sunday Times, 12 Aug. 2007; Maajid Nawaz and Dawud Masieh, In and Out of Islamism (London: Quilliam Foundation, 2008). Butt's testimony concerning the jihadi network is unreliable. See Vikram Dodd, “Al-Qaida Fantasist Tells Court: I'm a Professional Liar,” The Guardian, 9 Feb. 2009. Nevertheless, despite his propensity to lie for money, Butt was the spokesman for Omar Bakri Mohammed's al Mujahiroun in the 1990s, and as Manchester Police acknowledge, had links to a number of convicted terrorists. Muslim radicals have also questioned the role that both Husain and Nawaz played in Hizb ut-Tahrir. The attempt to traduce the reputation of former brothers is a familiar feature of radical sectarian politics. Moreover, the aspersions cast upon Husain and Nawaz's credentials also reflects the fact that their think-tank the Quilliam Foundation is prominently engaged in counter radicalization strategies. Nawaz was in fact gaoled in Egypt in 2001 for his membership of Hizb.
For Qutb after the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate no country had replaced Turkey as the Islamic world's centre. To bring about a new caliphate governed by God's law there must be a revival in one Muslim country, enabling it to attain that status. Significantly, after the Taliban took Kabul in 1996 and established an Islamic state governed by sharia law, in the view of bin Laden and others, Afghanistan became the strongest candidate for the core of the new caliphate. See “Interview with Nida'ul Islam” in Bruce Lawrence, ed., Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden (London: Verso, 2005), 42.
Ibid., 121.
Ibid., 41–42.
Ayman al-Zawahiri letter to Musab al-Zakarwi, 9 July 2005, available at: (http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2005/zawahiri-zarqawi-letter_9jul2005.htm).
Abu Hamza quoted in James Brandon, Virtual Caliphate: Islamic Extremists and their Websites (London: Centre for Social Cohesion, 2008), 3. Abdullah Faisal also described democracy as shirk, 6.
Cited in ibid., 14.
Al-Qaeda Training Manual, 9. The full text is available from the U.S. Department of Justice at: (http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/trainingmanual.htm).
Mahan Abedin, “Al Muhajiroun in the UK an Interview with Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed,” Spotlight on Terror 2 no. 5, 22 March 2004, at: (http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=290), accessed 29 September 2009.
Ibid. However, former leading Hizb ut-Tahrir member Maajid Nawaz stated in a BBC Newsnight interview on 13 September 2007 that the organization “secretly believes that the killing of millions” to “expand the caliphate would be justified.” The interview is available at: (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/2007/09).
For example, nearly all Hizb ut-Tahrir texts make some form of reference to the Khalifah as the ultimate source of salvation. See for instance some of the organization's press statements such as: “Only the return of the Khilafah will silence those who attack Islam,” 4 April 2008 (http://www.hizb.org.uk/hizb/press-centre/press-release/only-the-return-of-the-khilafah-will-silence-those-who-attack-islam.html); “Hizb ut-Tahrir Calls For Replacing the Israeli Apartheid State with Khilafah,” 19 May 2008; (http://www.hizb.org.uk/hizb/press-centre/press-release/hundreds-attend-palestine-meeting-marking-60-years-of-occupation-and-oppression.html), accessed 1 June 2008.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, Iraq: A New Way Forward at <www.hizb.org.uk> accessed 7 Nov. 2007. See also Radicalism, Extremism and Islamism (note 12 above), ch. 3 which explores the caliphatic system, 20ff.
Iraq: A New Way Forward (see note 41 above), 50–55.
See Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, The System of Islam (London: al-Khilafah, 2002). This is a Hizb ut-Tahrir translation of al-Nabhani's system written in Jordan in the 1950s.
Radicalism, Extremism and Islamism (see note 12 above), 20–21.
Iraq: A New Way Forward (see note 41 above), 52.
The similarity between Islamist thinking and Western styles of illiberal thought was a point initially observed and developed by Paul Berman, Terror and Liberalism (New York: Norton, 2003), esp. 53–153.
Husain (see note 23 above), 161.
Ibid., 162.
Ibid., 163.
Paul Rogers, Global Security and the War on Terror: Elite Power and the Illusion of Control (Routledge: London, 2008), 82.
Ken Booth, “The Human Faces of Terror: Reflections in a Cracked Looking-Glass,” Critical Studies on Terrorism 1, no. 1 (April 2008), 75.
Rogers (see note 50 above), 33.
Osama bin Laden, video 7 September 2007 at: (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070907_bin_laden_transcript.pdf), accessed 29 May 2008.
Andrew Linklater and Hidegami Suganami, The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 246–272.
See Roy E. Jones, “The English School of International Relations: A Case for Closure,” Review of International Studies 7, no. 1 (1981), 1–13.
Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School (London: Macmillan, 1998), 5–11.
David Held and Anthony McGrew, “The End of the Old Order? Globalization and the Prospects for World Order,” Review of International Studies 24, no. 3 (1998), 232.
Roger Epp, “The English School and the Frontiers of International Society,” Review of International Studies 24, no. 3 (1998), 49.
Barry Buzan, “The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR,” Review of International Studies 27, no. 3 (July 2001), 472.
See Richard Little, “English School vs. American Realism: A Meeting of Minds or Divided by a Common Language?” Review of International Studies 29, no. 3 (Oct. 2003), 443–460.
Buzan (see note 59 above), 472.
See Dale C. Copeland, “A Realist Critique of the English School,” Review of International Studies 29, no. 3 (2003), 430.
Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977).
Martin Wight did write of the three approaches that he felt characterized the study of the international system (realism, rationalism, and revolutionism), see Martin Wight, International Relations: The Three Traditions (eds. Brian Porter and Garbriele Wight) (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1991). However, whether this constitutes the English School tradition, let alone represents Wight's own position on the question of the underlying factors that govern the international system (which appear to be classically realist) is rather questionable. See for example, Martin Wight, Power Politics (London: Penguin, 1978).
Copeland (see note 62 above), 430.
Nicholas J. Wheeler, Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
Andrew Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1990), 8–9.
See Andrew Linklater, “Dialogue, Dialectic and Emancipation in International Relations at the End of the Post-War Age,” Millennium 23, no. 1 (1994), 119–131.
See Richard Devatek, “The Project of Modernity and International Relations Theory,” Millennium 24, no. 1 (1995), 37–38.
Ken Booth, “Security in Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice,” International Affairs 67, no. 3 (1991), 539.
Booth (see note 51 above), 65.
Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey, “The Post-Colonial Moment in Security Studies,” Review of International Studies 32, no. 2 (April 2006), 329.
Ken Booth, “Security and Emancipation,” Review of International Studies 17, no. 4 (1991), 313–326; Bikhu Parekh, “The Cultural Particularity of Liberal Democracy,” in David Held, ed., Prospects for Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993), 156–175; and Steve Smith, “The Self-Images of a Discipline: A Genealogy of a International Relations Theory,” in Ken Booth and Steve Smith, eds., International Relations Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996), 9–11.
Taraq Barkawi, “On the Pedagogy of ‘Small Wars,‘” International Affairs 80, no. 1 (Jan. 2004), 28.
Ibid., 27.
Barkawi and Laffey (see note 72 above), 330.
Richard Jackson, “Language, Policy and the Construction of a Torture Culture in the War on Terrorism,” Review of International Studies 33, no. 3 (2007), 353–371.
Michael Stohl, “Old Myths, New Fantasies and the Enduring Realities of Terrorism,” Critical Studies on Terrorism 1, no. 1 (April 2008), 11–12.
Richard Jackson, “Genealogy, Ideology and Counter-Terrorism: Writing Wars on Terrorism from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush Jr,” Studies in Language and Capitalism 1 (2006), 172.
Booth (see note 51 above), 77.
Ken Booth (see note 70 above), 539.
Marie Breen-Smyth, Jeroen Gunning, Richard Jackson, George Kassimeris, and Piers Robinson, “Critical Terrorism Studies – An Introduction,” Critical Studies on Terrorism 1, no. 1 (April 2008), 2.
Barkawi and Laffey (see note 72 above), 332.
Ibid., 333.
Edward Said, Orientalism (London: Penguin, 1978); Edward Said, Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World (London: Vintage, 1981).
Richard Jackson, “Constructing Enemies: ‘Islamic Terrorism’, in Political and Academic Discourse,” Government and Opposition 42, no. 3 (2007), 399.
Barkawi and Laffey (see note 72 above), 336–347.
Richard Jackson, “Security, Democracy and the Rhetoric of Counter-Terrorism,” Democracy and Security 1, no. 2 (2005), 152.
Ibid., 152.
Barkawi and Laffey (see note 72 above), 347.
Barkawi (see note 74 above), 33.
Jackson (see note 88 above), 152.
Richard Jackson, “An Analysis of EU Counterterrorism Discourse Post-September 11,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 20, no. 2 (June 2007), 243.
Ibid., 243.
Barkawi and Laffey (see note 72 above), 347. See also Anthony Burke, “The End of Terrorism Studies,” Critical Studies on Terrorism 1, no. 1 (2008), 45 which also cites Qutb positively, arguing that his “critique of the West” is “sometimes well observed and converges with elements of critical theory.”
See Fred Halliday, Two Hours that Shook the World – September 11, 2001: Causes and Consequences (London: Saqi, 2002).
Jackson (see note 88 above), 166.
Ibid., 166.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, Radicalization, Extremism and Islamism (see note 12 above), 9.
Ibid., 5.
Ibid., 7.
Ibid., 23–25.
It should be noted here the Hizb ut-Tahrir's objectives are not confined merely to the Middle East but like the Islamist project in general, its agenda is global not regional.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, Iraq: A New Way Forward (see note 41 above), 150–155.
See Jeroen Gunning, “A Case for Critical Terrorism Studies?” Government and Opposition 2, no. 3 (2007), 363–393.
Barkawi (see note 74 above), 29.
Richard Jackson, “Responses,” International Affairs 83, no. 1 (2007), 174.
Ibid., 174–175.
Hizb ut-Tahrir (see note 12 above), 1–36.
Breen-Smith, Gunning, Jackson, Kassimeris, and Robinson (see note 82 above), 2.
Routledge journal proposal for Critical Studies on Terrorism, 2006.
Oceanic Conference on International Studies Conference, University of Melbourne, 5–7 July 2006 (http://www.politics.unimelb.edu.au/ocis/draft.pdf), accessed 2 June 2008.
Oceanic Conference on International Studies Conference, Australian National University, 14–16 July 2004 (http://rspas.anu.edu.au/ir/Oceanic/OCIS%20Final%20Program.pdf), accessed 4 June 2008.
British International Studies Association Annual Conference, University of Cambridge, 17–19 Dec. 2007 (http:// www.bisa.ac.uk/2007/index.htm), accessed 4 June 2008.
“Is it Time for Critical Terrorism Studies,” University of Manchester, 27–28 Oct. 2006, co-sponsored by the British International Studies Working Group on Critical Studies on Terrorism, The Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Contemporary Political Violence, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, the Economic and Social Research Council and the University of Manchester.
Katrina Lee Koo, “Terror Australis: Security, Terror and the ‘War on Terror’ Discourse,” Borderlands 4, no. 1 (2005).
Goldie Osurie, “Regimes of Terror: Contesting the War on Terror,” Borderlands 5, no. 6 (2006).
Koo (see note 116 above), para. 11.
Bill Durodié, “Fear and Terror in a Post Colonial Age,” Government and Opposition 42, no. 2 (2007), 442.
Koo (see note 116 above), para. 33.
Ibid., para. 31.
Jackson (see note 93 above), 244.
Anthony Burke, “Freedom's Freedom: American Enlightenment and Permanent War,” Social Identities 11, no. 4 (2005), 315.
Ibid., 315.
Anthony Burke, “Against the New Internationalism,” Ethics and International Affairs 19, no. 4 (2005), 74.
Anthony Burke, “Reply to Jean Bethke Elshstein: For a Cautious Utopianism,” Ethics and International Affairs 19, no. 4 (2005), 98.
Koo (see note 116 above), para. 31.
Burke (see note 125 above), 74.
Interestingly, critical terrorism studies theorists speak endlessly not of plurality or tolerance but of “self-reflexivity” by which they mean “reflecting” exclusively upon the iniquities of the construction of Western knowledge discourses and Western policies. For example, in the first edition of the journal Critical Studies on Terrorism, the two and a half page introduction manages to use the phrase five times. See Breen-Smyth, Gunning, Jackson, Kassimeris and Robinson (note 82 above), 1–3. The phrase crops up regularly in other contributions to the journal. See Burke (note 95 above), 38 and 44; Booth (note 51 above), 71. Elsewhere, Gunning (note 105 above) employs the phrase eight times (370, 379, 382, 389, 392, 392, 393).
Jackson (see note 86 above), 396.
Ibid., 425.
Ibid., 395. See also Jackson (note 88 above), 165; Jackson (note 77 above), 371.
John J. Mearsheimer, “E. H. Carr vs. Idealism: The Battle Rages On,” International Relations 19, no. 2 (2005), 145. Here Mearsheimer is quoting from Tim Dunne and Nicholas J. Wheeler, “‘We the Peoples': Contending Discourses of Security in Human Rights Theory and Practice,” International Relations 18, no. 1 (2004), 9.
David Campbell, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998), 68.
Ibid., 68.
See Azzam Karim, “Islamisms, Globalisation, Religion and Power,” in Ronaldo Munck and Purnaka de Silva, eds., Postmodern Insurgencies: Political Violence, Identity Formation and Peacemaking in Comparative Perspective (London: Macmillan, 2000), 217.
John Esposito, The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 231.
Jackson (see note 86 above), 420.
Jackson, (see note 88 above), 157. Of course, this is a spurious contention as quite evidently there are dangers which are not independent of interpretation. A child playing in the middle of a busy road is objectively in a dangerous situation. The child faces a high probability of being struck by a vehicle irrespective of one's perception of the level of danger.
Meghan Morris, “White Panic or Mad Max and the Sublime,” in Chen Kuan-Hsing, ed., Trajectories: Inter-Asian Cultural Studies (London: Routledge, 1998), 246.
See David Campbell, The Social Basis of Australian and New Zealand Security Policy (Canberra: Pacific Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 1989), 26.
Cited in Simon Philpott, “Fear of the Dark: Indonesia and the Australian National Imagination,” Australian Journal of International Affairs 55, no. 3 (2001), 376.
Jackson (see note 88 above), 166.
Ibid., 157.
Ibid., 166.
It is noteworthy that the “myth” of the suppression of “dissenting” critical viewpoints (when in fact they are more than well represented in both the media and academy) is purveyed to sustain and legitimize the critical voice. For example, Jackson argues: “Already, conservatives have attacked anti-globalization protestors, academics, postmodernists, liberals, pro-choice activists, environmentalists, and gay liberationists as being aligned to terrorism and its inherent evil.” However, he cites no examples, and refers only to the work of David Campbell—a critical theorist himself—as the source of authority as justification for this claim (David Campbell, “Time is Broken: The Return of the Past in the Response to September 11,” Theory and Event 5, no. 4 (2002)). Nor does he appear to see the irony of denouncing others for supposedly de-legitimizing opposing views, while trying to do exactly the same to those who oppose his position. It suggests two things: 1) that “conservative” criticism (or indeed any form of criticism) of the critical voice is for some reason invalid 2) that the notion of the attempted “de-legitimization of dissent” is a conspiracy that is wholly manufactured, or more worryingly, actually believed by critical theorists. Jackson (see note 88 above), 166.
Mearsheimer (see note 133 above), 144.
Richard Jordan, Danial Maliniak, Amy Oaks, Susan Peterson, and Michael Tierney, One Discipline or Many? TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculties in Ten Countries (Willamsburg, VA: Teaching, Research and International Policy (TRIP) Project published by the Institute of the Theory and Practice of International Relations, February 2009). For example Q.26 (pp. 31–32) indicates only 8 percent of UK and 16 percent of Australian international relations scholars approached their subject from a realist perspective.
Anthony Burke, “The Perverse Perseverance of Sovereignty,” Borderlands 1, no. 2 (2002), para. 64.
Butt (see note 30 above).
Stepanova (see note 15 above), 60–72.
The title of Australian Research Council grants DPO558402 and DP0559707.
Ruth Blakeley paper at BISA 2006, subsequently published as Ruth Blakely, “Bringing the State Back into Terrorism Studies,” European Political Science 6, no. 9 (2007), 228–235. See also Ruth Blakeley, “The Elephant in the Room: A Response to John Horgan and Michael J. Boyle,” Critical Studies on Terrorism 1, no. 2 (2008), 153–154.
Leo Strauss, The City and Man (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964), 11.