But now he says that al-Qaeda’s jihad is un-Islamic, without explaining with reference to the Qur’an and the Sunnah why exactly that is so — which is what would need to be done if he hopes to dissuade young Muslims from joining the group. And now he has been granted political asylum in Britain, which apparently never saw a jihadi it didn’t like.
“Algerian who fought beside bin Laden: ‘I wanted to help Muslims,'” by Madeline Roache, Al Jazeera, February 19, 2019:
London, United Kingdom – Abdullah Anas sits upright, smiling and speaking clearly as he recalls his decision to join the “Afghan Arabs” during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (1979-1989).
“I didn’t even know where Afghanistan was on the map,” he says. “I was a country boy from Algeria, all I knew is I wanted to help Muslims.”
For 10 years, Anas was one of the many Arabs who fought against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, alongside the future icons of al-Qaeda’s global war, including the late Abdullah Azzam, Anas’s father-in-law, and Osama bin Laden.
Anas later turned away from their movements, disagreeing with their political interpretations and plans for what they called a “global jihad”. He now lives in London, where he was granted political asylum.
In his new memoir, To the Mountains: My life in Jihad from Algeria to Afghanistan, written with investigative journalist Tam Hussein, Anas traces the rise of this so-called “global jihadism”, beginning with the networks formed during the Soviet-Afghan War.
Anas and Hussein spoke to Al Jazeera about the evolution of this fight and its role in the modern world.
Al Jazeera: Why did you decide to write this book?
Abdullah Anas: I want to challenge the myths and misconceptions around the Afghan jihad.
With my experience, I feel that it’s my responsibility to help anyone – laymen, imams, journalists, academics, politicians – understand the history of the Afghan jihad because it is misunderstood on all levels all over the world. Many people, especially the younger generation, believe jihad started with the Taliban and al-Qaeda in 9/11. This is not true.
I wrote to counter the false narratives that came about after 9/11, which depicted Afghanistan as the training ground for extremists.
After 2001, so-called “experts” cropped up claiming that thousands of foreign extremists had trained in camps in Afghanistan and were returning home to commit terrorism. In reality, there were about 100 Arab Afghans, committed fighters, at any one time.
Al Jazeera: What do you consider “jihad”?
Anas: Jihad essentially means “a morally just war”. It’s Islam’s martial tradition, with a moral and ethical framework.
It’s important to draw a distinction between jihadism – a modern concept that came about after 9/11 – and the original concept of jihad.
The only legitimate jihad was during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan when people fought against colonialism and showed immense moral courage. Everything that came after this, including … 9/11, was not jihad.
Al-Qaeda and ISIS, Boko Haram and other bloody organisations have destroyed this noble concept by committing countless horrific crimes and calling it jihad. I challenge any man to see what good has ever come from al-Qaeda.
Muslims are outraged by these groups that have distorted one of their most sacred concepts, and they are upset by the public’s lack of understanding about jihad. So, many people are understandably fearful, and the media hardly helps, only seeing jihad alongside criminals….
Al Jazeera: How would you characterise the roots of “global jihadism”?
Tam Hussein: The roots of global jihadism are not in Arab culture. They partly stem from an idea of the Afghan jihad, that has been distorted by political convulsions experienced throughout the Arab world in recent times.
The Afghan-Soviet war is a significant symbol in the Arab world because it marks a successful holy war against a foreign aggressor. Although jihad ended when the Soviets left in 1989 and Kabul fell in 1992, by the late 1990s and throughout the noughties, terrorist networks claimed their geneses from Afghanistan. In the noughties, one of the very first videos to go viral amongst jihadists was the beheading of a Russian soldier in Chechnya. This was loaded to jihadi websites and forums, which appropriated Afghan jihad symbols and conflated them with something they were not: global jihad.
I have encountered this conflation time and time again while working as a journalist in Syria, and covering major terror attacks in Europe.
For example, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, a Belgian Moroccan who joined the Syrian battalion and organised the 2015 Paris attacks, tried to emulate the Arab Afghans. He believed they had expelled the Russians from Afghanistan and established Islam, before the West and their allies destabilised the region with democracy. So, when Abaaoud saw Syrians calling for the same (democracy), he dragged their heads along the ground and denounced them as infidels.
Many others have gone to Syria, thinking they were taking part in a divinely sanctioned jihad when they were actually taking part in a grubby civil war between Islamist factions.
Al Jazeera: What attracts people to join “jihadism”?
Hussein: There are many complex reasons for this. A lot of people believe in the foundational myths of al-Qaeda that are historically inaccurate. Some people are intellectually immature, from broken families, they lack the education and the necessary critical tools let alone able to distinguish between sophistry and rhetoric….
mortimer says
The Islamic MIRACLE of RE-INTERPRETATION … take any classical, authoritative hadith or tafsir and RE-INTERPRET it for modernity so it doesn’t sound so harsh. Then, when jihad becomes in fashion with Muslims DUST OFF THE ORIGINAL, AUTHENTIC interpretation and go right back to JIHADIC TERRORISM as before.
Easy. RE-INTERPRETATION fools the kafirs EVERY time.
Jan says
Mortimer. What can I say… We are not called kafirs for nothing!
We are Indeed jahil (ignorant, stupid)
One can get fooled once or twice
But If he gets fooled all the time then he deserves all the names he is called.
All the time an apologist comes along, the damage is already done and by him the risk of more damage gets even higher.
First terrorize.
Second. Give the kafir peace of mind before you get on your next move.
It has been like this all through the centuries.
Kafirs are like birds who keep on getting caught by a shotgun, unable to optain a collectieve long run solid method to mislead the hunter!
gravenimage says
We *used* to understand the threat of Islam. It is only in recent decades that so many Kafir have been in denial.
b.a. freeman says
it probably helped that the saudi barbarians *bought* their way into western universities, either setting up or taking over “middle east studies” and “islamic studies” programs; providing money and liars (excuse me, “experts”) helped them drown out the real experts. it is truly breathtaking to see the extent of the success of the islamic invasion.
gravenimage says
That is indeed part of the problem, b.a. freema.
The other is cultural relativism and “political correctness”. Too many in the West are incapable of believing than any creed can be truly evil.
gravenimage says
Sorry for the typo in your name, b.a. freeman.
mortimer says
Congratulations and a big thump on the back for Jan! You really GET IT. With 1,000 more WELL-INFORMED POLEMICISTS like you, Jan, we can convince the country and 10,000 we can convince the world.
Somebody says
Robert,
Thank you for all you do.
Remember, taught.
Teach.
Tell the wizard to call down. This is all good, believe.
Worse before better.
gravenimage says
Muslim who fought beside bin Laden: “I wanted to help Muslims”
………………………….
And how do pious Mohammedans “help Muslims”? Why, by slaughtering Infidels.
Abdullah Anas does not make a case that his slaughtering Infidels in Afghanistan is any different from Muslims slaughtering Infidels in Chechnya or Paris or any other place.
That Britain let him in was suicidal insanity.
Jayell says
I seem to have missed something here. The article doesn’t seem to state exactly how and why Anas has any importance in the issue of universal human rights nor how his life was in such mortal danger that he needed to be granted political asylum at all, let alone the UK, since his avowed aim was to ‘help muslims’ (not ‘humanity’) and the UK is not supposed to be an international repository for the defence and promotion of any particular creed – and certainly NOT islam, which is demonstrably opposed to UK democratic and human values. The UK authorities also have some answering to do, as to (1) why it was apparently inappropriate to refuse asylum to three Egyptian bishops whose Christian credentials were in accordance with UK values and whose lives WERE in danger, and (2) to a certain christian called Ms Bibi from Pakistan who is still in danger in that excuse for a ‘country’, and (3) to a certain pakistani christian gentleman (name escapes me) whose request for asylum was refused out of hand when it was clear to all that he faced serious problems if sent back. And I find it abdolutely laughable that in Anas we apparently have someone denouncing ‘intellectual immaturity’, ‘lack of critical tools’ and ‘inability to distiguish between sophistry and rhetoric’ whilst promoting islam, one of the greatest intellectual frauds of all time!
ntesdorf says
Years ago, people knew exactly how dangerous Islam was. However years of leftist dominated education has robbed them of the power to think rationally and to remember. Kaffirs are now generally in denial.
Terra Nova says
Any other muslim “in mortal danger” pls, get asylum in the UK, Germany, or France, your best bet, but first let your name be known in the media, the you really did something wonderful for that country or the kaffirs.(sarc)