Despite his importance as a senior Al-Qaeda spokesman, no detailed examination exists of Adam Yahiye Gadahn’s employment of fiqh al-jihad—that branch of Islamic jurisprudence regulating the lawful waging of jihad—to condemn or condone violence committed in the name of Al-Qaeda. This article first provides a detailed exposition of Gadahn’s sharia-based critique of affiliates’ conduct deemed by him in violation of Islamic law and involving the commission of major sins. Second, Gadahn’s conception of fiqh al-jihad is contextualized and contrasted with the comprehensive fiqh al-jihad-based critiques produced by respected militant Islamist scholars. A key finding here is that Gadahn (unlike these scholars) illicitly truncates the application of fiqh al-jihad with the result that he demands sharia-compliance when criticizing intra-Islamist violence yet ignores sharia-compliance when targeting America and Americans. Third, reasons are considered for this incoherent application of fiqh al-jihad and attempted Islamic legalization of anti-American mass casualty terrorist attacks. Finally, the discussion concludes with implications for counter-Al-Qaeda strategy.

A specific branch of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh al-jihad) regulates the waging of the jihad of the sword (jihad bis saif). In this article, a detailed exposition is presented of the Egyptian Islamic Group’s (IG; Al-Gama’a Al-Islamiyya) use of fiqh al jihad against Al-Qaeda. The present author’s ‘jihad-realist’ approach is first briefly described; the IG’s critique of AQ systematically outlined; and in conclusion, implications are derived for counter-radicalisation strategies.

Excerpt: On December 26, 2015 a 24-minute audio message was released by the Islamic State Organization’s (ISO) official media arm al-Furqan.

Excerpt: Boaz Ganor’s Global Alert: The Rationality of Modern Islamist Terrorism and the Challenge to the Liberal Democratic Order provides in its eleven brief chapters an analysis of and prescription for liberal democratic vulnerabilities to present-day Islamist-inspired terrorism.

No description available.

Militant Islamist Sayyid Imam's legal critique of Al Qaeda's anti-U.S. mass casualty terrorism holds great potential utility for counterterrorist messaging strategy. In this article, a jihad–realist Islamist theological–jurisprudential methodology is first defended as the means most productive for delegitimizing Al Qaeda among high value, religiously motivated recruits. Second, Sayyid Imam's specific allegations and detailed Sharia proofs against Al Qaeda are presented. Finally, implications are drawn for U.S. counterterrorist messaging focusing especially on the utility of wielding this theological–juridical approach as compared to other “counternarrative” approaches, and the vital need to accurately characterize Islamism and its relation to terrorism.

Adam Gadahn's Abbottabad letter offers a rare opportunity to examine how this Al Qaeda Senior Leadership (AQSL) media operative and spokesman conceptualizes and executes media warfare. In this article, I first introduce, depict, and employ the author's Terrorist Quadrangle Analysis (TQA) as a useful heuristic for conceptualizing and representing the four interrelated components of the AQSL terrorist enterprise: political objectives, media warfare, terrorist attacks, and strategic objectives. This TQA construct is then employed to conceptualize Gadahn's media warfare acumen. Gadahn is shown to be an adept communications warfare operative who conscientiously disaggregates and evaluates key target audiences, messengers, messaging, and media. Gadahn's vehement critique of select “jihadi” groups, in particular Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP), al-Shabaab, and the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), is then described. Key here is how and why Gadahn denounces their indiscriminate, murderous terrorist attacks on Muslim non-combatant civilians and other protected persons as effectively subverting his intended AQSL media warfare strategy and undermining AQSL strategic and religio-political objectives. A concluding section briefly summarizes these chief findings, offers select implications for scholarship and counter-AQSL messaging strategy, and identifies study limitations.

The United Arab Emirates' legal system has developed though the continued negotiation between the Shari’a and the Civil Courts over the spheres of criminal law and commercial law. The framework that has emerged, as a result of regime politics and Supreme Court rulings, provides the regime the flexibility to continue their commercial development and integration into the modern global economy, while retaining the domestic authority structures that legitimate their power.

Why has the United States, given its status as the sole remaining superpower following its Cold War victory, been unable to translate its preponderance of power into the outcomes it desires? The system established by the United States over the course of the Cold War does not effectively translate its power into influence in the post-Cold War world. In fact, the way US-Soviet competition shaped global affairs created systemic problems, weak and failing states, terrorism, autocracy and human rights abuse, that cannot be solved by the mechanisms of influence the US relied upon to win the Cold War. However, precisely these issues now dominate the American foreign policy agenda as its strategic objective shifted from defeating communism to maintaining the stability of the liberal world order that resulted from communism’s defeat. The United States, reliant on Cold War era mechanisms of influence, lacks the tools to accomplish these new objectives because these mechanisms were designed to exploit or accept the problems of statehood that now plague the liberal world order. Therefore, for the United States to make effective use of its abundance of power, it must either change its tools or its objectives.

Since its inception, Israel has wrestled with attempts by adversaries to keep her politically isolated in the international arena. To garner more friends and expand diplomatic reach, Israeli leaders initiated a strategy of sharing specialized knowledge with other nations. The technologies and knowledge shared were based on the experience gained from Israel’s distinctive security and developmental struggles. The transfer of technology developed into a foreign policy instrument in Israel’s overall international relations. Technical cooperation became part of a broader foreign relations drive that sought to deliver greater diplomatic recognition for Israel. This strategy, which continues to present times, was born mostly out of two major necessities for the young struggling state. The first, to boost Israel’s political stature in international forums. The second, to counterbalance efforts by Israel’s rivals to keep the Jewish State isolated in the Middle East and the rest of the world. In the early years of the initiative, the technology transfers were mostly confined in fields related to agriculture and the military. In more recent years, the rise of Israel’s hi-tech industry has attracted worldwide attention creating new opportunities for Israeli foreign policymakers to widen the scope of technologies to be offered as part of international partnerships. The dissertation examines the interplay of technology/knowledge transfers as a source of soft power for Israel in efforts to advance relationships even with seemingly unlikely partner nations. It explores the usefulness of know-how sharing in the making, growing and maintaining Israel’s relationships with two influential Asian countries. The study considers the multiple factors including the convergence of interests as drivers of Israel’s ties to India and China in both secretive and open relationships. Over the span of five decades, the Jewish State’s international cooperation efforts have grown in scope of expertise in areas like agriculture, defense, anti-terrorist training, and disaster relief. The study explores the weight of Israel’s technology transfers as tools of diplomacy in terms of propping up trade ties, gaining more favorable policies towards Israel in the context of the conflict with Palestinians and boosting bilateral exchanges in the form of official visits and treaties.