Turmoil in the Levant: Inconclusive Conclusions
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Standard
Turmoil in the Levant : Inconclusive Conclusions. / Jung, Dietrich.
The Levant in Turmoil: Changing political Landscapes in the Middle East. ed. / Martin Beck; Dietrich Jung; Peter Seeberg. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. p. 191-210 (The Modern Muslim World).Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Turmoil in the Levant
T2 - Inconclusive Conclusions
AU - Jung, Dietrich
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - What is IS [the Islamic State] a case of?” This question Jillian Schwedler posed in an essay published in February 2015 in the Washington Post. In this article, she discussed the terms that academics and the broader public use in analyzing Islamist organizations in general and the IS in particular.1 Of course, Schwedler had no difficulties in categorizing the IS as a radical and extremist jihadist group. Yet, how is this group different from other jihadist organizations? This question has occupied scholars and media pundits in their assessment of the rise of the IS and its warfare in Syria and Iraq. In an essay for the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, for instance, Volker Perthes, the director of the German think tank Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (German Institute for International and Security Affairs) in Berlin, warned the public not to underestimate the significance of the role of the IS in the Syrian civil war. Instead of talking about a mere terrorist organization, Perthes suggested considering the IS as the central actor in a jihadist state-building process, which is “totalitarian, expansive, and hegemonic” in its nature.2 Perthes’s essay raised immediate responses. In the journal Zenith Naseef Naeem and Daniel Gerlach, to take only one example, criticized Perthes in that talking with reference to the IS about a state-building process enhanced its status and disparaged the concept of the state.
AB - What is IS [the Islamic State] a case of?” This question Jillian Schwedler posed in an essay published in February 2015 in the Washington Post. In this article, she discussed the terms that academics and the broader public use in analyzing Islamist organizations in general and the IS in particular.1 Of course, Schwedler had no difficulties in categorizing the IS as a radical and extremist jihadist group. Yet, how is this group different from other jihadist organizations? This question has occupied scholars and media pundits in their assessment of the rise of the IS and its warfare in Syria and Iraq. In an essay for the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, for instance, Volker Perthes, the director of the German think tank Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (German Institute for International and Security Affairs) in Berlin, warned the public not to underestimate the significance of the role of the IS in the Syrian civil war. Instead of talking about a mere terrorist organization, Perthes suggested considering the IS as the central actor in a jihadist state-building process, which is “totalitarian, expansive, and hegemonic” in its nature.2 Perthes’s essay raised immediate responses. In the journal Zenith Naseef Naeem and Daniel Gerlach, to take only one example, criticized Perthes in that talking with reference to the IS about a state-building process enhanced its status and disparaged the concept of the state.
U2 - 10.1057/9781137526021_10
DO - 10.1057/9781137526021_10
M3 - Book chapter
SN - 9781349576289
T3 - The Modern Muslim World
SP - 191
EP - 210
BT - The Levant in Turmoil
A2 - Beck, Martin
A2 - Jung, Dietrich
A2 - Seeberg, Peter
PB - Palgrave Macmillan
ER -
ID: 169968872