“The world cannot afford to stand by and watch as Wahhabis attack not only Christians, Jews, and Shia, but also Sunnis,” warned Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in an op-ed for The New York Times.
Public relations firms that shamelessly accept dirty petrodollars, the Iranian official argued, have found an unprecedented opportunity to amass enormous profits and revenues.
“Their latest project,” Zarif stated, “was to convince us that Al-Nusra, the Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, is no longer a threat. As the Al-Nusra spokesperson announced on CNN, the rebranded armed group, allegedly separated from its parent terrorist organization, has now become ‘moderate opposition.”
NO ONE IS SPARED
Ten years later, events in the Middle East have proven him right. In his seminal text, Zarif concluded:
“Fanaticism from the dark ages has been sold as the ‘shining vision’ of the Middle East in the 21st century. The problem for the wealthy, primarily Arab clients of PR firms who so generously funded Al-Nusra is that the evidence of their devastating policies cannot be photoshopped out of existence. For anyone who doubted, the numerous videos of these ‘rebranded moderates’ beheading 12-year-old boys have been a horrifying return to reality.”
What Zarif wrote about a decade ago has turned out to be profoundly true. Turkey has occupied and handed over Syria to terrorists, altered the specific balance of power in the Arab world, and ushered in a new era of wars and terrorist activities in the region, from which no state will be spared.
THE TYRANNY OF AL-NUSRA
It is true that Sunni countries allied with the Muslim Brotherhood, after numerous terrorist attacks in Europe, Russia, and America, underwent a transformation from militant Wahhabism to a polished version—without abandoning their ideology. Here, no distinction should be made between the Taliban, reincarnations of Al-Qaeda, or the so-called Islamic State (ISIS).
Today, millions of Syrians—Sunni Muslims, Alawites, Christians, and Druze—face the tyranny of Al-Nusra, convinced that its renunciation of Al-Qaeda and terrorism is nothing more than a temporary charade. Past experiences with such masquerades point to a clear goal: ensuring Israel’s security, satisfying Turkey’s neo-Ottoman ambitions, and enabling the secret flow of petrodollars to extremist groups in Syria and the entire region to become overt—possibly even attracting Western governments to support these so-called ‘moderates.’
THE FINAL DESTINATION—IRAN
Estimates suggesting a greater level of security are fundamentally flawed. Anyone who believes that Turkey, as a neo-Ottoman and Islamist state, alongside global terrorist organizations and their mujahideen, offers greater security than a weak and isolated Iran is clearly miscalculating.
The war Turkey launched in Syria demonstrates that its government has abandoned revenge for the attempted overthrow of Erdoğan, offering a platform for cooperation with Western masters. Turkey calculated that in return, they would support its offensive tactics and use of terrorist organizations, which could ultimately further weaken Iran—especially if the Arab world is plunged into chaos.
SHIFT TOWARD SYRIA
Let us go back to 2016 and Zarif’s op-ed titled “Let Us Rid the World of Wahhabism.” Even then, the Iranian official highlighted Saudi Arabia’s intelligence operations related to the “rebranding” of the terrorist organization Al-Nusra. The Americans understood the message and scope of this operation, pressuring Saudi Arabia to cease its funding and control over the organization. As a result, Al-Nusra, with a “geopolitical ribbon,” was embraced by Turkey and Qatar as the most desirable partner for conducting special operations in the Arab world. This was a pivotal moment when the terrorist organization took on a role in Syria, becoming an experiment in media influence on public consciousness. The sudden attack by Turkish special forces and military, aided by fighters from the terrorist organization Jabhat al-Nusra (renamed Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), on Aleppo, Hama, and Homs from the southeast, followed by entry into Damascus after just eleven days, forced Bashar al-Assad’s regime to capitulate and flee the country.
AMERICAN “WINKS”
It is worth recalling that most so-called moderate opposition forces did not accept the U.S.-Russian Geneva agreement, including major Islamist organizations like Ahrar al-Sham and Jaish al-Islam. As a result, during the so-called ceasefire—adhered to only by government forces—hundreds of Syrian soldiers lost their lives. The American side, as is widely acknowledged, failed to fulfill its key obligation under the agreement: the swift separation of “moderate” opposition forces from terrorist organizations. This political logic is unconvincing to those familiar with the situation on the ground in Syria and the broader geopolitical landscape. It is undoubtedly clear that they are well aware of the strategies of each party involved in the Syrian conflict and, fundamentally, who benefits from the absence of peace in these areas at this moment. On the other hand, the main conditions set by the U.S. government concerned Israel’s security (new borders and buffer zones), the recognition of Kurdish autonomy (which shows a tendency toward establishing the first Kurdish state), and the elimination of forces and groups primarily stemming from ISIS structures.
THE WAR IS NOT OVER
When summing up the events, culminating in the fall of Assad’s government, the conclusion is that the war in Syria is not over. What has occurred is a temporary dimming of the Western spotlight on the Middle East, allowing the darkness of Muslim radicalism, illiteracy, and savagery to legitimize new strategic and geopolitical interests while drawing boundaries between Russian and American spheres of influence.
In the current constellation, direct clashes between Russian and Turkish forces are virtually ruled out. Moreover, Russia and Iran, despite everything, can use alternative means to restrain potential unplanned Turkish ambitions, avoiding direct military action. Of course, this does not necessarily mean that a total war involving all parties will erupt in Syria today, nor that negotiations won’t eventually resume. However, it is clear to everyone that further conflicts are inevitable. The map of power distribution in the Middle East shows that regional instability will not contribute to containing Iran.
REBRANDING AL-NUSRA
The Wahhabi theological distortion has significantly transformed Islam in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and across the Balkan region. Although it ostensibly attracted only a small portion of Muslims, Wahhabism today represents a destructive and expansive front aggressively targeting the consciousness and emotions of Muslims. Every terrorist group that abuses the name of Islam—from Al-Qaeda and its derivatives like ISIS and Al-Nusra in Syria to Boko Haram in Nigeria and Al-Shabaab in Somalia—is inspired by a cult of death.
Attacks in Madrid, Berlin, Vienna, Nice, Paris, London, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Beslan, and Brussels are proof that the poisonous threat of Wahhabism cannot be ignored, nor can it be rehabilitated or politically pacified. Instead of offering Syria on a geopolitical platter, decisive and concrete action against this form of religious extremism was necessary—not a rehabilitation process.
A BLUFF
Before launching serious actions on this front, the Americans decided to conduct a leadership reshuffle in Al-Nusra. First, the alleged founder of Al-Nusra, Abu Maria al-Kahtani (real name Maisr al-Jabouri), was killed, followed by the removal of his successors, Mohammed Abdel Hamad and Abu Omar Sarakeb—staunch opponents of a pact with the West and rivals of the current leader, Mohammed al-Golani. Analyzing this series of assassinations, Turkish intelligence concluded that the Americans had initiated a rebranding process for the organization. In the same report, they noted that Abu Mohammed al-Golani publicly rejected any possibility of severing ties with Al-Qaeda or renaming the organization at a December 2016 meeting at the “Continental” hotel in Gaziantep, Turkey, leading them to question the ultimate goals of these actions.
Although Turkish and Arab intelligence agents allegedly participated in the meeting to persuade Al-Nusra’s leader to sever ties with Al-Qaeda, Russian intelligence concluded that these “efforts” were nothing more than a bluff by Ankara and Doha. Shortly before Turkey and Al-Nusra terrorists occupied Syria, Golani promised the formal severance of Al-Nusra’s ties with Al-Qaeda, followed by its incorporation or alliance with organizations like Ahrar al-Sham and Jaysh al-Islam. The former operates under the patronage of Ankara and Doha, while the latter is sponsored by Riyadh.
THE GAME OF DOHA AND ANKARA
For years, Turkey and Qatar have been the primary players in supplying material and military aid to Al-Nusra, as everything transpired via Turkish territory—a necessity given the dangers of Syria’s battlefield. Official Riyadh had no choice but to accept Ankara and Doha’s demands for the rebranding of Syria’s strongest anti-government terrorist organization, which allowed them significant control over the war processes in the country. This occupation of Syria, carried out with these forces, ignored the inherent and theoretical exclusivity between exclusive humanism and exclusive Islam, representing a functional deception and the greatest tragedy in its practical political manifestations.
THE BOSNIAN PACT OF AL-QAEDA AND ISIS
It is true that terrorism attracts psychotic and fanatical Islamists. However, it must also be stated that terrorism as a geopolitical tool and military-political action was developed, enhanced, and directed by Western intelligence agencies and governments. The weakness of political systems and states with underdeveloped institutions has allowed the West to exert influence over both the Islamic and Orthodox East. All major geopolitical divisions and conflicts, along with malicious Western propaganda, have been evident in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), reflected in the relationship between Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
For instance, Al-Zawahiri’s first soldier in the Balkans, Nusret Imamović, who has been fighting for Al-Nusra since 2013, pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda and Ayman al-Zawahiri in his “Testimony on the Fitna in Syria,” published on August 13, 2014. Speaking on behalf of all “Bosnian Muslims,” he rejected the Islamic State and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, citing religious reasons for this decision. This testimony can still be found on Al-Qaeda’s portal in BiH, controlled by radical Islamists from Maoča (http://putvjernika.com/).
A “BLUE NOTICE” FOR IMAMOVIĆ
On this portal, which operates without restriction, one can find updates on current events in Syria, statements from Al-Qaeda leaders—Sheikh Abu Qatada, Sheikh Tarifi, Sheikh Muhaysini, Sheikh Ayman, and others—and a declaration on the formation of “Tahrir al-Sham,” along with the endorsement of six sheikhs. The state of BiH has failed to issue a red notice through Interpol for Nusret Imamović, opting instead for a “blue notice,” which only collects information about an individual who could be either a suspect or a witness but is not to be arrested.
Finally, an analysis of this Al-Qaeda-affiliated online platform reveals evidence of American patronage, even though the portal also supports magazines issued by ISIS in Paris (Dar al-Islam). While these organizations are at war with each other and accuse one another of apostasy, as evidenced by Nusret Imamović’s letter, Al-Qaeda’s soldiers understand the importance of promoting American projects and do so openly. Meanwhile, Western structures participate in the promotion of fanaticism and superstition. The consequences of this policy will soon become evident as the war in Syria resumes with renewed intensity.
