Sunday, December 04, 2005
Sharia and the al Qaeda guide to kidnapping
Der Spiegel Online has published an article on the "Al Qaeda Guide to Kidnapping," a web document published on jihadi web sites last year. The author, Abdul Aziz al-Muqrin, was the head of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia before he was killed last year. Al-Muqrin was one of al Qaeda's Afghanistan generation, and claimed organizational responsibility for the Riyadh housing complex attacks in November 2003.
The al Qaeda kidnapping protocol is both a "how to" guide and a philosophical argument for kidnapping as a legitimate tool of jihadi public policy. Kidnapping, which al-Muqrin describes as "the arrest of one or more people of the opponents' side," should serve one of the following purposes:
One wonders, of course, how al-Muqrin defines "opponents." His followers in Iraq have most recently kidnapped four peace activists. Since these victims were campaigning in support of one of al Qaeda's victory conditions -- the withdrawal of the United States from Iraq -- these people could only be considered "opponents" because they are Christian (two of the four are from Canada, which has opposed the Coalition project in Iraq from the beginning). So, either al Qaeda is now ignoring its own kidnapping guidelines, or it is defining its "opponents" rather more expansively than Western pacifists would care to admit.
The instructions suggest that the successful political kidnapping will use interlocking teams that back one another up, and a carefully prepared safe house:
There is also a long section on rules for interacting with hostages, including guidelines for searching them, separating them, and avoiding physical and emotional entanglements. Al-Mugrin specifically calls out the requirement that "treatment of the hostages shall be based on the Sharia."
It is fascinating to me that the Sharia even contemplates the treatment of hostages. Are there any Islamic scholars out there who care to comment?
The al Qaeda kidnapping protocol is both a "how to" guide and a philosophical argument for kidnapping as a legitimate tool of jihadi public policy. Kidnapping, which al-Muqrin describes as "the arrest of one or more people of the opponents' side," should serve one of the following purposes:
1. Force the government or opponent to fulfill a specific set of demands.
2. Create a difficult situation for a government in its relations with the countries where the kidnapped persons come from.
3. Obtain important information from the hostages.
4. Obtain ransom money -- as, for example, our brothers in the Philippines, Chechnya and Algeria made happen and as our brothers in "Mohammed's Army" in Kashmir did when they obtained $2 million in ransom. This money can then serve as financial support for an organization.
5. To draw attention to a specific concern -- as occurred at the start of the Chechnya question or in Algeria, when our brothers hijacked a French plane.
Though the paper does not name killing hostages as a goal of kidnapping, it does not rule out the acceptance of ransom money -- indeed, it encourages it.
One wonders, of course, how al-Muqrin defines "opponents." His followers in Iraq have most recently kidnapped four peace activists. Since these victims were campaigning in support of one of al Qaeda's victory conditions -- the withdrawal of the United States from Iraq -- these people could only be considered "opponents" because they are Christian (two of the four are from Canada, which has opposed the Coalition project in Iraq from the beginning). So, either al Qaeda is now ignoring its own kidnapping guidelines, or it is defining its "opponents" rather more expansively than Western pacifists would care to admit.
The instructions suggest that the successful political kidnapping will use interlocking teams that back one another up, and a carefully prepared safe house:
Al-Muqrin offers no shortage of practical advice for would-be kidnappers to make their work more efficient and safer. A group in charge of conducting kidnapping should also split up into smaller subgroups -- each with their own responsibilities.Early reconnaissance group. They inform the kidnappers about the movements of the targert, for example if it has already reached the requisite location."
Protection group. They organize the protection of the kidnappers from all outside dangers (...).
Kidnapping group. They transport the hostages and transfer them to the group that is responsible for security.
Take-down group. Its responsibility is to take down possible pursuers or defend the kidnappings from outsiders who seek to expose them."
The hostages, al-Muqrin writes, should be housed in a place that can't be seen by the "eyes of the state." The hiding spot should be "far away from other neighborhoods" but not so desolate that it would "draw attention." In addition, it must have several exits and be an advantageous location for a possible gun battle.
There is also a long section on rules for interacting with hostages, including guidelines for searching them, separating them, and avoiding physical and emotional entanglements. Al-Mugrin specifically calls out the requirement that "treatment of the hostages shall be based on the Sharia."
It is fascinating to me that the Sharia even contemplates the treatment of hostages. Are there any Islamic scholars out there who care to comment?
1 Comments:
By 
Papa Ray, at
Mon Dec 05, 12:25:00 AM:
Maybe the Sharia is only against kidnapping when the hostages are french.
Papa Ray
