Ansar al-Sunnah calls for patience

A statement by the jihadi organization Ansar al-Sunnah, posted on various forums on April 12, takes up he question of differences and disputes between different groups of mujahideen. Abu Aardvark called attention to it the other day.

The text is divided into three parts, the first dealing with the question of the meaning of "groups" in the moral and religious order of things. The writer's point is that for an individual, his obligation is first and foremost not to a group or to a group-leader, but rather to what is right and legitimate according to scripture and the authentic traditions. He says:

We don't judge a preacher by his wealth or the magnificence of his building or the number of his followers, but by his closeness to the authentic truth... Likewise a mujahid should strive to follow the authentic truth, and not to fixate on a clique, or on a sheikh, and not on a sect or on a group. His only concern should be the truth that Allah disclosed to his messenger, peace be upon him, because the one who will be asked what he has to say for himself will be [the individual], and not a group or a sheikh or a sect...

So the writer's first point is that those who ally themselves in an absolute way with "a sheikh or a group" are wrong, because what counts is for each person himself to do the right thing. Belonging to a group doesn't let out of that obligation. No doubt the implicit target here is ISI people who kill other Muslims just for failing to swear allegiance to the leader of the ISI.

Next: Under the heading "Schemes to weaken the mujahideen: America and its allies", the writer the writer criticizes the non-ISI resistance groups, but since he doesn't name names, it is a little difficult to tell what specific errors he finds in which groups. Just by way of giving the overall gist of this part, the first couple of sentences go like this:

The heretic occupiers will not leave the country with their forces and their people until they are convinced there is a sect among the people of the country that is able to serve as the anchor supporting them, and that is the primary aim of all of the secular sects in all of their variations. And their second filthy scheme aims at separating muslims from the mujahideen, cutting off their support [in that way], after they have failed to do so militarily.

The writer's point is that in various ways, the nationalist groups are playing into the hands of the Americans and weakening the overall effort. The details here become quite hard to follow, for me anyway, so I'm leaving out a big chunk here, but his overall point is clear: While there are errors among the ISI people because of blind faith in their group and their leader, there are also errors on the nationalist side.

The writer talks at length about the virtue of patience. And in conclusion he says the most important specific obligations for mujahideen right now are:

Efforts to resist their corrupt schemes, and exposing them, and you should also relate this to the leadership... And taking care not to enter into fights with them, but to urge muslims not to give in to their corrupt methods.

To which he adds the obligation to make preparations for self-defence, and to take measures to ensure that organizations are not penetrated by them, but his main point has to do with persuasion and perseverence: Not getting sucked into their corrupt schemes, but not getting into fights with them either; and explaining their errors to people.

Very broadly speaking, this writer sees a problem with groups of hotheads on the one side, and groups that are too close to the Americans on the other. But interestingly, he seems to understand this as a political problem: The corrupt scheme, he said, involves an attempt to "separate (or alienate) muslims from the mujahideen". In the case of a political problem, he seems to be saying, the solution isn't for one side to take up arms against the other, rather it is going to have to involve a lot of "patience".