Islamic Alliance To Fight Terrorism

The first meeting of the Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism (IMAFT) recently convened in Riyadh. This Saudi Arabia-led coalition comprises 40 nations, representing approximately 60% of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) members. Initially announced in 2015 with 34 members, the alliance notably excludes Iran, Syria, and Iraq. Qatar, despite being a member, did not participate due to the ongoing Saudi Arabia-led boycott.

The IMAFT aims to function as an inter-governmental counter-terrorism alliance focused on combating the spread of ISIS within the region. Its objectives include offering military support and coordinating efforts with member countries to counter terrorism, with the overarching goal of dissociating Islam from acts of terror. The OIC, an inter-governmental organization with 57 member states spanning four continents, aims to safeguard the interests of the Muslim world while promoting international peace and harmony; India is not a member.

The Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism: A Deep Dive into Regional Security Dynamics

The year 2018 marked a significant development in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East with the inaugural meeting of the Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism (IMAFT) in Riyadh. This Saudi Arabia-led initiative, comprising 40 nations, signaled a concerted effort within the Islamic world to address the pervasive threat of terrorism. The formation of IMAFT and its subsequent activities are deeply intertwined with the complex web of regional rivalries, sectarian divisions, and the global fight against extremism. Understanding the nuances of this alliance requires a thorough examination of its origins, objectives, key players, and the broader implications for the region and beyond.

Genesis and Rationale

The announcement of the IMAFT in December 2015 initially with 34 members came at a time when the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) was at its zenith, controlling vast swathes of territory in both countries and inspiring a wave of terror attacks across the globe. The rise of ISIS presented a multifaceted challenge to the international community. Firstly, it posed a direct threat to regional stability, particularly in countries bordering ISIS-controlled territories. Secondly, the group's brutal tactics and extremist ideology served as a potent recruitment tool, attracting foreign fighters from across the world. Thirdly, ISIS's claim to represent a true Islamic caliphate threatened to delegitimize existing Muslim-majority governments and exacerbate sectarian tensions.

Against this backdrop, Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of King Salman and his son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, sought to assert its leadership role in the Islamic world and demonstrate its commitment to combating terrorism. The Kingdom had itself been a target of numerous terrorist attacks, including those carried out by al-Qaeda in the 2000s. Furthermore, the Saudi leadership recognized the need to counter the narrative that linked Islam with terrorism, a narrative that was being exploited by extremist groups to justify their violence.

The formation of the IMAFT was thus driven by a combination of factors, including the need to address the immediate threat posed by ISIS, the desire to enhance Saudi Arabia's regional influence, and the imperative to disassociate Islam from terrorism. The alliance was presented as a unified front against extremism, representing a broad spectrum of Muslim-majority countries committed to working together to defeat terrorism.

Objectives and Structure

The stated objectives of the IMAFT are multifaceted, encompassing military, intelligence, and ideological dimensions. The alliance aims to:

• Coordinate military efforts: This includes providing military support to member countries facing terrorist threats, conducting joint military exercises, and sharing best practices in counter-terrorism operations.
• Enhance intelligence sharing: The IMAFT seeks to improve the flow of intelligence among member states, enabling them to better track and disrupt terrorist networks.
• Counter extremist ideology: The alliance aims to combat the spread of extremist ideology by promoting moderate Islamic teachings and engaging in counter-narrative campaigns.
• Build capacity: The IMAFT seeks to build the capacity of member states to counter terrorism by providing training and resources to law enforcement and security agencies.

The structure of the IMAFT is centered around a joint command center in Riyadh, which serves as the hub for coordinating the alliance's activities. The command center is staffed by representatives from member countries and is responsible for developing and implementing counter-terrorism strategies. The alliance also includes a number of specialized committees focused on specific areas, such as military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and counter-ideology.

Membership and Exclusions

The initial announcement of the IMAFT in 2015 included 34 member states, primarily from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Over time, the alliance has expanded to include 40 countries. Key members include Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates. These countries represent a diverse range of political systems, military capabilities, and counter-terrorism experiences.

However, the composition of the IMAFT has also been a source of controversy. Notably absent from the alliance are Iran, Syria, and Iraq. These countries are all predominantly Shia Muslim and have close ties to Iran. Their exclusion from the IMAFT reflects the deep sectarian divisions within the Middle East and the ongoing rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

The exclusion of these countries has led to accusations that the IMAFT is a sectarian alliance aimed at isolating Iran and its allies. Critics argue that a truly effective counter-terrorism alliance must include all countries affected by terrorism, regardless of their sectarian affiliation. The absence of Iran, Syria, and Iraq undermines the credibility and effectiveness of the IMAFT, they contend.

The case of Qatar is also noteworthy. Qatar was initially included in the IMAFT, but its participation has been limited due to the ongoing diplomatic crisis between Qatar and Saudi Arabia and its allies. In 2017, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt severed diplomatic ties with Qatar, accusing it of supporting terrorism and interfering in their internal affairs. Qatar denies these allegations, but the diplomatic crisis has led to a boycott of Qatar by its neighbors. As a result, Qatar did not participate in the first meeting of the IMAFT in Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia's Leadership Role

Saudi Arabia's leadership role in the IMAFT is undeniable. The Kingdom initiated the alliance, provides the bulk of its funding, and hosts the joint command center in Riyadh. Saudi Arabia's dominant position in the IMAFT reflects its broader ambition to assert its leadership in the Islamic world and counter the influence of Iran.

Saudi Arabia's motivations for leading the IMAFT are complex. Firstly, the Kingdom faces a significant terrorist threat from both ISIS and al-Qaeda. These groups have carried out numerous attacks in Saudi Arabia, targeting both government facilities and civilian targets. Secondly, Saudi Arabia views Iran as a major threat to its national security and regional stability. The two countries are engaged in a proxy war in several countries in the Middle East, including Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon. Thirdly, Saudi Arabia seeks to enhance its international image and demonstrate its commitment to combating terrorism.

Saudi Arabia's leadership of the IMAFT has been both praised and criticized. Supporters argue that the Kingdom has a legitimate interest in combating terrorism and that its leadership is essential for ensuring the alliance's effectiveness. Critics, on the other hand, argue that Saudi Arabia's human rights record and its support for certain Islamist groups undermine its credibility as a leader in the fight against terrorism. They also point to the Kingdom's rivalry with Iran as a potential source of instability and division within the alliance.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) plays a significant role in the context of the IMAFT. The IMAFT comprises approximately 60% of the OIC's member states. The OIC is an inter-governmental organization with 57 member states, representing the collective interests of the Muslim world. It serves as a platform for member states to discuss issues of common concern and coordinate policies.

The OIC's objectives include:

• Promoting solidarity and cooperation among member states.
• Safeguarding the interests of the Muslim world.
• Promoting international peace and harmony.
• Protecting and preserving Islamic holy places.
• Supporting the rights of Muslim minorities in non-member states.

The OIC has been involved in a number of initiatives aimed at combating terrorism, including the adoption of a counter-terrorism convention and the establishment of a counter-terrorism center. The OIC also plays a role in promoting interfaith dialogue and countering extremist ideology.

The relationship between the OIC and the IMAFT is complex. On the one hand, the IMAFT can be seen as a complementary initiative to the OIC's counter-terrorism efforts. The IMAFT provides a more focused and coordinated approach to combating terrorism, while the OIC provides a broader platform for promoting cooperation and dialogue among Muslim-majority countries. On the other hand, the IMAFT's exclusion of certain OIC member states, such as Iran and Syria, has raised concerns about its inclusiveness and its potential to exacerbate sectarian tensions within the Muslim world.

Historical Precedents and Challenges

The IMAFT is not the first attempt to form a unified Islamic military force. Throughout history, there have been numerous efforts to create alliances among Muslim-majority countries, often with the aim of defending against external threats or promoting Islamic unity. However, these alliances have often been short-lived and have faced numerous challenges.

One of the main challenges has been the diverse interests and political rivalries among Muslim-majority countries. These countries often have different priorities and agendas, which can make it difficult to forge a common strategy. Sectarian divisions, such as the rivalry between Sunni and Shia Muslims, have also been a major obstacle to unity.

Another challenge has been the lack of resources and capacity in many Muslim-majority countries. These countries often lack the military capabilities and economic resources to effectively counter terrorism. They also face challenges in terms of governance, corruption, and human rights, which can undermine their legitimacy and effectiveness.

The IMAFT faces similar challenges. The alliance is composed of countries with diverse interests and political systems. It also includes countries with varying levels of military capabilities and economic resources. The exclusion of certain countries, such as Iran and Syria, has raised concerns about its inclusiveness and its potential to exacerbate sectarian tensions.

Stakeholder Positions and Perspectives

The IMAFT has been met with a range of reactions from different stakeholders, reflecting the complex geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.

• Saudi Arabia: As the initiator and leader of the IMAFT, Saudi Arabia views the alliance as a crucial tool for combating terrorism and promoting regional stability. The Kingdom sees the IMAFT as a way to enhance its regional influence and counter the influence of Iran. Saudi Arabia also hopes that the alliance will help to improve its international image and demonstrate its commitment to fighting terrorism.
• Member States of the IMAFT: The member states of the IMAFT generally support the alliance's objectives of combating terrorism and promoting regional security. However, their motivations for joining the alliance may vary. Some countries may be primarily concerned with addressing domestic terrorist threats, while others may be more interested in enhancing their military capabilities or strengthening their ties with Saudi Arabia.
• Iran: Iran views the IMAFT with suspicion and hostility. Iranian officials have criticized the alliance as a sectarian initiative aimed at isolating Iran and undermining its influence in the region. Iran argues that a truly effective counter-terrorism alliance must include all countries affected by terrorism, regardless of their sectarian affiliation.
• United States: The United States has generally welcomed the formation of the IMAFT, viewing it as a positive step towards greater regional cooperation in the fight against terrorism. The US has provided support to the IMAFT in the form of training and intelligence sharing. However, the US has also expressed concerns about the alliance's exclusion of certain countries, such as Iran and Syria.
• Other Countries: Other countries in the region and beyond have adopted a wait-and-see approach to the IMAFT. Some countries may be hesitant to join the alliance due to concerns about its sectarian nature or its potential to exacerbate regional tensions. Others may be waiting to see how effective the alliance will be in combating terrorism before committing to it.

Broader Implications and Future Outlook

The formation of the IMAFT has significant implications for the political, diplomatic, and security landscape of the Middle East.

• Political Implications: The IMAFT has the potential to reshape alliances and exacerbate existing tensions in the region. The alliance could lead to closer cooperation among Sunni-majority countries, while further isolating Iran and its allies. The IMAFT could also contribute to the ongoing proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran in countries such as Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon.
• Diplomatic Implications: The IMAFT could lead to increased diplomatic cooperation among member states, particularly in the area of counter-terrorism. However, the alliance could also further isolate countries excluded from the coalition, making it more difficult to resolve regional conflicts.
• Security Implications: The IMAFT aims to enhance regional security by coordinating counter-terrorism efforts and providing military support to member states. However, the alliance could also escalate conflicts if it is perceived as a sectarian alliance or if it intervenes in the internal affairs of other countries.

The future success of the IMAFT depends on a number of factors, including its ability to overcome internal divisions, coordinate effectively, and address the root causes of terrorism. The alliance's impact on regional security will depend on its ability to avoid exacerbating existing tensions and promoting inclusive solutions.

The challenges facing the IMAFT are significant. The alliance is composed of countries with diverse interests and political systems. It also includes countries with varying levels of military capabilities and economic resources. The exclusion of certain countries, such as Iran and Syria, has raised concerns about its inclusiveness and its potential to exacerbate sectarian tensions.

To be successful, the IMAFT must:

• Foster greater unity and cooperation among its member states: This requires addressing the underlying political and sectarian divisions that have historically plagued the region.
• Develop a comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy: This strategy should address not only the military and security aspects of terrorism, but also the ideological, social, and economic factors that contribute to its spread.
• Promote inclusive solutions to regional conflicts: This requires engaging with all stakeholders, including Iran and Syria, to find peaceful resolutions to the conflicts in Syria, Yemen, and other countries.
• Address the root causes of terrorism: This requires addressing issues such as poverty, inequality, and lack of opportunity, which can make individuals more vulnerable to extremist ideologies.

The IMAFT has the potential to play a positive role in combating terrorism and promoting regional stability. However, its success will depend on its ability to overcome the challenges it faces and to adopt a comprehensive and inclusive approach to counter-terrorism. The exclusion of key regional players like Iran, Syria, and initially Qatar also raises serious questions about the alliance's legitimacy and its potential to further exacerbate existing tensions. Only time will tell whether the IMAFT can truly live up to its name and become an effective force for peace and security in the Middle East.

India and the IMAFT: A Delicate Balancing Act

India, with its significant Muslim population and strategic interests in the Middle East, occupies a unique position vis-à-vis the IMAFT. While not a member of the OIC, India has historically maintained close ties with many of the countries that comprise the alliance, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE. However, India's relationship with Iran, a country excluded from the IMAFT, presents a delicate balancing act.

India's approach to the IMAFT is guided by its overarching foreign policy objectives, which include:

• Combating terrorism: India has been a victim of terrorism for decades and has a strong interest in working with other countries to counter this threat.
• Maintaining regional stability: India recognizes that instability in the Middle East can have significant implications for its own security and economic interests.
• Protecting its economic interests: India relies on the Middle East for a significant portion of its energy needs and has substantial trade and investment ties with the region.
• Maintaining good relations with all countries in the region: India seeks to maintain friendly relations with all countries in the Middle East, regardless of their political or sectarian affiliations.

Given these objectives, India has adopted a cautious and pragmatic approach to the IMAFT. While India has not formally endorsed the alliance, it has also not publicly criticized it. Instead, India has focused on strengthening its bilateral counter-terrorism cooperation with individual member states of the IMAFT, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

India's relationship with Iran presents a particular challenge. Iran is a key partner for India in several areas, including energy security and regional connectivity. India is developing the Chabahar Port in Iran, which will provide it with an alternative route to Afghanistan and Central Asia, bypassing Pakistan. India also has a long-standing cultural and historical relationship with Iran.

However, India's relationship with Iran has been complicated by the ongoing tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia. India has sought to maintain a neutral stance in this rivalry, recognizing that both countries are important partners. India has also been careful not to take any actions that could be interpreted as siding with one country over the other.

India's approach to the IMAFT reflects its broader foreign policy strategy of multi-alignment, which involves maintaining good relations with all major powers and avoiding entanglement in regional conflicts. This strategy allows India to pursue its national interests without alienating any particular country or group of countries.

In the future, India's relationship with the IMAFT will likely depend on several factors, including the alliance's effectiveness in combating terrorism, its inclusiveness, and its impact on regional stability. India will also need to carefully manage its relationship with Iran to ensure that it does not undermine its broader foreign policy objectives.

The Shadow of Sectarianism

One of the most persistent criticisms of the IMAFT revolves around the perception that it is a sectarian alliance, primarily aligned with Sunni Muslim interests and designed to counter the influence of Shia-dominated Iran. This perception stems largely from the exclusion of Iran, Syria, and Iraq from the alliance, all countries with significant Shia populations and close ties to Iran.

The exclusion of these countries raises concerns about the IMAFT's ability to effectively address the complex and multifaceted nature of terrorism in the Middle East. Terrorism is not confined to any one sect or religious group, and a truly effective counter-terrorism strategy must involve the cooperation of all stakeholders, regardless of their sectarian affiliation.

Critics argue that the IMAFT's sectarian bias could exacerbate existing tensions and further polarize the region, potentially leading to a deepening of sectarian conflicts. They contend that the alliance could be used as a tool to advance Saudi Arabia's geopolitical interests at the expense of regional stability.

Proponents of the IMAFT, on the other hand, argue that the alliance is not sectarian in nature and that its primary goal is to combat terrorism, regardless of the perpetrators' religious affiliation. They point to the fact that the IMAFT includes countries with diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds, and that its stated objectives are focused on countering extremism and promoting peace and security.

However, the perception of sectarianism remains a significant challenge for the IMAFT, and it is essential that the alliance takes steps to address these concerns. This could involve reaching out to countries that have been excluded from the alliance, promoting interfaith dialogue, and ensuring that its counter-terrorism efforts are conducted in a non-discriminatory manner.

Ultimately, the IMAFT's success will depend on its ability to overcome the perception of sectarianism and to build trust and cooperation among all stakeholders in the region. Only then can it truly become an effective force for peace and security in the Middle East.

The Challenge of Defining Terrorism

Another significant challenge facing the IMAFT is the lack of a universally agreed-upon definition of terrorism. Different countries and organizations have different definitions of terrorism, which can make it difficult to coordinate counter-terrorism efforts and to agree on who should be targeted.

For example, some countries may define terrorism as any act of violence that is intended to intimidate or coerce a government or civilian population, while others may limit the definition to acts of violence that are carried out by non-state actors. Some countries may also include acts of resistance against foreign occupation or acts of self-determination within their definition of terrorism.

The lack of a clear and consistent definition of terrorism can lead to disagreements and misunderstandings among member states of the IMAFT. It can also be used as a pretext for targeting political opponents or for suppressing dissent.

To address this challenge, the IMAFT needs to develop a clear and consistent definition of terrorism that is based on international law and human rights principles. This definition should focus on acts of violence that are intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians, and it should exclude acts of legitimate resistance against foreign occupation or acts of self-determination.

The IMAFT also needs to ensure that its counter-terrorism efforts are conducted in accordance with international law and human rights principles. This includes respecting the rights of civilians, ensuring that all suspects are treated fairly, and avoiding the use of torture or other forms of ill-treatment.

The Role of External Actors

The Middle East is a region that has long been influenced by external actors, including the United States, Russia, and European countries. These actors have a variety of interests in the region, including energy security, counter-terrorism, and regional stability.

The involvement of external actors can have both positive and negative consequences for the region. On the one hand, external actors can provide valuable assistance in combating terrorism and promoting economic development. On the other hand, they can also exacerbate regional conflicts and undermine the sovereignty of individual countries.

The IMAFT needs to carefully manage its relationship with external actors to ensure that it does not become a tool for advancing their interests at the expense of regional stability. The alliance should seek to cooperate with external actors on issues of common concern, such as counter-terrorism, but it should also be wary of becoming too dependent on any one country or group of countries.

The IMAFT should also promote greater regional cooperation and self-reliance. The countries of the Middle East need to take greater responsibility for their own security and development. This requires strengthening regional institutions, promoting economic integration, and resolving regional conflicts through peaceful means.

The Importance of Addressing Root Causes

Ultimately, the fight against terrorism cannot be won through military means alone. To effectively counter terrorism, it is essential to address the root causes that contribute to its spread. These root causes include poverty, inequality, lack of opportunity, political repression, and social injustice.

The IMAFT needs to develop a comprehensive strategy that addresses these root causes. This strategy should include promoting economic development, strengthening governance, protecting human rights, and promoting social inclusion.

The IMAFT should also work to counter extremist ideologies by promoting moderate Islamic teachings and engaging in counter-narrative campaigns. This requires working with religious leaders, educators, and civil society organizations to promote tolerance, understanding, and respect for diversity.

By addressing the root causes of terrorism, the IMAFT can help to create a more just and sustainable society in the Middle East, which will ultimately reduce the appeal of extremism and violence.

The Long Road Ahead

The formation of the IMAFT represents a significant step towards greater regional cooperation in the fight against terrorism. However, the alliance faces numerous challenges, including the perception of sectarianism, the lack of a clear definition of terrorism, and the involvement of external actors.

To be successful, the IMAFT must overcome these challenges and adopt a comprehensive and inclusive approach to counter-terrorism. This requires fostering greater unity and cooperation among its member states, developing a clear and consistent definition of terrorism, managing its relationship with external actors, and addressing the root causes of terrorism.

The road ahead will be long and difficult, but the potential rewards are great. By working together, the countries of the Middle East can create a more peaceful, prosperous, and secure future for their people. The IMAFT has the potential to be a valuable tool in this effort, but its success will depend on its ability to overcome the challenges it faces and to live up to its promise of being a truly inclusive and effective force for peace and security.