A Tale of Oil and Fire – Part 3: A Furious Crescendo

This piece is Part 3 of a 4 Part series – A Tale of Oil and Fire [Click here for Part 2]

The Making

Before we go onto this ever familiar section, we should examine the mind and ideology that has shaped the 9/11 terrorists and their ilk.

Islamism is an ideology that advocates total Islamic rule over political and social life for the nation (which in turn should be a theocracy). There are a number of scholars who study Islamic applications to the totality of life. Some of these scholars take very extreme interpretations of Islam, like our friend Muhammed ibn Abdul-Wahhab earlier. Both Wahhab and Khomeini have inspired hardline takes on Islam and back them up with a number of scriptural references and interpretations. And it is these interpretations that serve as the fountainheads for almost all terror groups.

On the opposite end, wanton foreign policy decisions along with foreign and local powers vying for dominance have generated thousands of disaffected youth who have seen their lives burnt away to ashes in warfare. Endless conflict generates a group of people intensely loathing of the outside world. They come in contact with extremist mullahs and scholars who speak spirituality suavely to their mind and kindly to their heart yet venomously when concerning adversaries. They give hope and hate – that is the dangerous concoction where terror is born.

With both the Saudis and Iranians exporting their oil-backed extremist views by way of dollar and destruction, adherence to this extremism has exploded across the Islamic world with terror groups blooming whenever conflict inevitably arose. One particular group, we have already discussed: al-Qaeda. And they are the spark that ignites a wildfire.

There and Back Again

Years later, a single day would change the direction of the world forever – 9/11/2001.

A livid and grieving US would put bullet in barrel and begin a war on terrorism. With several of the 9/11 hijackers being Saudi and murmurs of knowledge of the attacks amongst some Saudi royals, Saudi Arabia had to bite the bullet and stay mum as America rampaged across the globe. First stop, Afghanistan.

America would face down their communist killing creation – al-Qaeda, the former ally turned enemy responsible for the most horrible terror attacks in US history. They along with their Afghan sponsors, the Taliban, would be shattered with the mastermind, Osama bin Laden, killed years later in Pakistan. However constant covert support from Pakistan would prove America’s downfall as al-Qaeda, Taliban, and other terror groups would be aided by the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies causing a death by a thousand cuts to US efforts to stabilize Afghanistan. Today we see a “peace process” that has seen a democratically elected Afghan government suffering from almost biweekly terror attacks from a Pakistan sponsored Taliban; while America’s President desperately tries to negotiate a withdrawal, leaving the Afghans to fend off the same monsters that plagued them in 2001. Oh, also ISIS has joined the party as well.

Next up, Iraq.

Saddam Hussein’s iron fist was backed by a Sunni Arab Baathist Party and engaged in systematic oppression of Shias and Kurds. In the post-9/11 bloodlust, America turned their guns towards a supposed WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) armed Iraq. Iraq’s oil fields and geographic location were also fairly enticing. However, the Saudis opposed this move as they understood the inevitable result – implosion.

The problem here was that 15 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. US distrust of the Saudis and the momentum of war pushed a swift invasion of Iraq with Saddam’s regime falling within 3 weeks in 2003. Now Pandora’s Box was truly unleashed.

America would add more gunpowder to the keg by forcing a dissolution of the mostly Sunni Baathist Party of Saddam as well as dismantling the Iraqi Army. The door opened for the majority Shias to exact revenge. Sunni-Shia conflict exploded as Shias campaigned for a Shia state mirroring Iran. Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei was elated with a new potential proxy.

The furious Saudis would come to the aid of Sunnis through covert arming and aid as mass sectarian violence spread through Iraq. Soon enough, Sunni rebel groups would blossom and be joined by the vines of extremism. Al-Qaeda would announce their entry by bombing the dome of the sacred Shia Al Askari Mosque in Samarra. A civil war like situation ensued.

As a finally captured Saddam Hussein was escorted to his hanging, a video would capture the scene. The government brought Saddam’s victims’ relatives to the occasion. Many started chanting “Muqtada,” the name of Shia militant cleric whose father was tortured and killed by Saddam. Saddam would respond saying, “Muqtada? Is this how you show your bravery as men?” The jeering rose through Saddam’s jab as he would refuse a hood and face those he persecuted. His last wish was to read verses of the Quran. The request was granted. The jeering became shrieking. As Saddam would say his last words of the Holy Quran, the lever would be pulled in the middle of verse and Saddam would die with a cacophony of sectarian slogans and insults directed towards Saddam and Sunnis alike. This video would leak, and a brutal dictator would become a Sunni martyr as the Sunni world exploded in anger. More gas added to the fire.

What began now is a new theme of this conflict. The new version of the Saudi-Iran conflict would be defined by Sunni and Shia groups warring in foreign lands causing massive loss of life and obliteration; but no significant loss of Saudi or Iranian lives. The proxy wars had begun.

Kingdoms and Caliphates

Two pacts have defined Saudi Arabia – one with the House of Wahhab and another with the House of Washington. While Wahhab has given Saudi Arabia its ideology, Washington has provided the Saudis with protection and weaponry. A new upstart Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, has recently chosen to tilt towards Washington but still retain much of the ruthlessness of Wahhab, albeit in a more nationalistic tone rather than religious.

Salman has realized that Saudi Arabia’s future could not forever be centered around oil. He pushed investment into finance, tourism, clean energy, and technology amongst various other sectors. He has also pushed liberal reforms for women and laxing of strict Wahhabi social laws. However, Salman has flanked an easing of Wahhabism with the embrace of nationalism and autocracy. He would silence those who protest and criticize him, whether it was the slow pace of reforms (in the case of women’s rights activist Lujain al-Houthlal) or attacking his autocratic nature (such as in the unfortunate case of Jamal Khashoggi, who would pay for his dissidence in blood allegedly on Salman’s order).

The Saudis would cultivate a strong relationship with the US in recent years, especially with the increasing intensity of the aforementioned proxy wars.

The most prominent of these recent wars occured in Syria. North of Iraq, Syria has witnessed a despotic rule by Bashar al-Assad, a Shia (Alawite to be precise). The Iran-friendly Assad was faced with mostly secular uprisings to his authoritarian rule, especially in the wake of the Arab Spring. In a mirror of Saddam’s Iraq, Syria contained a large Sunni majority ruled by a Shia minority. As the Saudis caught wind of the rebellion against an Iranian ally, Sunni militant groups came in a gust. Assault rifles manifested in Sunni hands and more extreme groups (such as al-Qaeda with its front, al-Nusra) set up camp. But one particular group would explode from the beginnings of this frenzy – ISIS.

ISIS (The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) originally had roots from disenfranchised Baathists and former Iraqi Army-men. A popular Wahhabi cleric named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi would round up these hardened fighters and administrators to start a movement. A movement to establish a Kingdom of God in a land ravaged by intervention from the infidels. ISIS would use Baathist discipline and aptitude to form an organization that solidified Sunni backlash against a marching Shia tide. Their new age propaganda combined montages of cinematic violence, Sharia law, and interestingly enough – a well functioning society. Baghdadi would end up creating the most devastating terror group in decades that functioned both as a militant group and a state.

This is where ISIS is really interesting and relevant. In the big picture, ISIS has been fairly short lived versus other terror groups and was summarily wiped out by all of its neighbors. With its Caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, recently killed, many believe this is the end of ISIS. But they are wrong. Why? People miss both the unique and common aspects of ISIS:

1. ISIS functioned as state that did a better job of governance and keeping order than many of its predecessors. They had a relatively uncorrupt bureaucracy that efficiently collected taxes, took care of social services, and provided more consistent (though infinitely more cruel) forms of justice than previous regimes – especially giving a glimmer of refuge towards Sunnis.
2. ISIS is based on an even more extreme strain of Wahhabism. Wahhabism and its extremist cognates have an arsenal of scholars who provide ample evidence and scriptural vigor to go toe to toe with any Islamic cleric and provide an unfortunately legitimate interpretation of Islam.

The first point is lost to many who rightfully label the group as savages and monsters. But ISIS and terror groups of its ilk (al-Qaeda/Taliban) sometimes may actually provide better governance than other options. This can occur because of foreign intervention (Iraqi Civil War aftermath of US invasion) or a brutal dictator (repression by Assad in Syria).

The second point is the site of discomfort. Wahhabism does not equal the only true version of Islam; but the problem is how Saudi Arabia has exported it so widely. Wahhabi clerics and their proxies have slowly populated the high council of so many Islamic organizations that extremist scholars have trickled down to populate the podiums of prayer halls. And it is these scholars who have subsequently urged a small subset of ordinary Muslims to engage in a disproportionate level of violence. While ISIS has been territorially decimated, its ideology still lives on across the globe and across the web.

Tipping Points

While Iran had checkmated the Saudis in Syria, a whole new game was unfolding on their southern borders in Yemen. An Iranian-backed Shia rebel group by the name of the Houthis would launch a campaign ending in the toppling of the Yemeni government. Salman would see this as a perfect opportunity to showcase Saudi nationalism and crush a neighbor’s rebellion. The Saudis would use American and European weaponry to attack the Houthis as well as citizens caught in the crossfire. However even amongst widespread famine and cholera outbreaks, the Houthis have somehow held out against Saudi forces, fending off Sunni Yemenis along with their Saudi collaborators.

So let’s take a look at this conflict in the big picture; Iran has so far gained the upper hand in:

1. Iraq by the majority Shias ousting Sunni extremist groups including ISIS.
2. Syria by Assad’s victory over similar Sunni militant groups.
3. Yemen by continued Houthi resistance and political prominence amongst a torrential Saudi military barrage.

Things look fairly rosy for Iran at this point, but this belies the internal situations of both Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Saudi Arabia has faced sporadic attacks from Houthis in the south and recent drone attacks allegedly from Iran in the east; but these attacks have only fueled Saudi nationalism and Muhammed bin Salman’s popularity. Salman’s bet on a new economic path and nationalism over Wahhabism have reaped benefits with Saudi youth. A hunger for American weaponry and technology has led to the strongest US-Saudi relationship in years in an era where the US increasingly looks away from foreign oil. Salman has understood that economic warfare is the way of the future. He has looked east to India investing hundreds of billions into a rising giant and seeks to emulate the UAE’s transformation as a financial and supply chain hub of the world.

Across the gulf, Iran has had wildly opposite fortunes. Constant regime change wars have depleted its economy and angered its people. Secularism has gripped sections of the population (especially youth) who increasingly defy the gaze of the Ayatollah. Protests against Islamic law such as mandatory hijab and theocratic rule are becoming more and more commonplace. In many ways, it seems only a matter of time before a new revolution may sweep Iran. Salman waits in the shadows as American sanctions have taken a toll on Iran, with nations forced to choose between trading resources with Iran or trading tariffs with the US.

But as Iran and Saudi Arabia converge into conflict, the fog of war hides foreign hands and common adversaries. And it is their mechanisms and minds that will bring the Middle East into a new era with familiar violence.

Click here for Part 4: Meditations