Showing posts with label TheNolanK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TheNolanK. Show all posts

My MPACS Research Colloquium Presentation on Islamic State's Foreign Recruiting via Social Media [VIDEO]

Location: Waterloo, ON Waterloo, ON, Canada


Below is my presentation of the research I did during my time in the Peace and Conflict Studies program. Basically, I had to address: "What have you done with your time here, why did you study that, and defend your choices against critique."

My research has focused on the Islamic State (IS/ISIS/ISIL/DAESH) and the relevant security implications associated with their theology, their recruiting efforts, and the soft-power attempts to 'destroy or degrade' IS.

I was able to record my initial presentation. I was unable to record the critique response due to privacy concerns by participants - which is out of my control. However, I passed this milestone with full possible points!


Full Paper on Islamic State Recruiting: 

http://www.thenolank.com/2015/05/Islamic-State-ISIS-ISIL-Using-US-Armed-Forces-Recruiting-Methods.html (HTML)

https://www.academia.edu/12336284/What_Are_We_Fighting_For_How_Islamic_State_Uses_United_States_Armed_Forces_Recruiting_Methods_to_Mobilize_Foreign_Fighters_in_a_Struggle_for_the_New_Caliphate (PDF)

Bonus Video:

Comparative Analysis of Occupy Wall Street and Marxist Philosophy


I, along with my group partner, Tyler Cox, gave a presentation on the application of Marxist philosophy in the context of the Occupy Wall Street Movement.


Connect with TheNolanK on Social Media:

"We'll Be Right Back..."
(My Farewell to Jon Stewart)



"We'll be right back..."

Something one of my heroes has said during each and every episode of The Daily Show.

Tonight, as of 12:01pm EST on the 7th of August 2015, that assurance ceases to exist in its current familiar form.

The Daily Show will live on, as will Mr. Jon Stewart. In my list of the Top 5 people (who I have never met and were living at some point during my 24+ years) that have greatly influenced me artistically, creatively, and/or intellectually during my lifetime, Stewart joins the likes of Christopher Hitchens, Barack Obama, Casey Neistat, and Till Lindemann.

Jon Stewart was the narration to my political awakening when I was in the 8th grade during the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election. I had been watching Stewart for years prior, but without realization of the witty nuance of his commentary. The earliest indelible memory of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart that I have - like many other fans - is that of the first post-9/11 episode. For the past month I have been watching The Daily Show's 'Month of Zen' web stream, which featured every episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart from start 11 January 1999 to now, in marathon fashion without geographic restrictions. I have the live webstream on my MacBook Pro as I fall asleep at night and it is likewise there to greet me in the morning. My recent weeks' repertoire is a great departure from the distant nights at my Grandmother's remote Sauble Beach cottage adjusting a bunny-ear antenna on a television set many decades my senior just to have a luxury beyond just electricity.

Like other articles that have been written in the past few months since Stewart announced his retirement plans, now is where I start to create a playlist of assorted episodes... However, I will do no such thing. But only because I have already done so previously: TheNolanK - May 2012 & Mic - June 2012.

I could comment on how Jon Stewart has utilized The Daily Show format to transcend comedy and politics ascending to unparalleled and unprecedented status... However, I will do no such thing. But only because I have already done so previously - in print and online: Mic - April 2012,  TheNolanK - April 2012, OU Daily - May 2012, UWire - May 2012, & The Santa Clara - May 2012.

Instead, I will take relief in how I am parting ways with Jon Stewart. I subscribe to the old maxim that suggests "You should never meet your heroes". While I abide by that maxim, I do reserve the right to amend my position on heroes. In the case of Christopher Hitchens, my vicarious connection via exhaustive texts, Opinion Articles, YouTube Debates, and feature-length documentaries was ripped away from me due to Hitch's untimely defeat at the hands of the spectre of death. Speculation has already gripped the internet in regards to what Stewart's next move might be, with recent reports suggesting a return to stand-up comedy.

Stewart was never more damning than during his relentless (and necessarily crucial) critique of the Bush administration in the lead-up to the Iraq War, the invasion of Iraq, the declaration of 'Mission Accomplished', and the subsequently poor handling of a destabilized Middle East. Even when Stewart let the sitting duck subjects of satire that were, and often still are, President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney have a pass for that week's egregious Iraqi errors, Stewart would focus his efforts on truly important issues such as healthcare efforts for Veterans Affairs and 9/11 First Responders.

The main line of contention that Stewart's critics had was that he would often depart from basic political satire into activist commentary while hiding behind the job title 'Comedian'. Other than the hilarious fact that it was often Fox News personalities that accused Stewart of poor journalistic standards, selling a biased narrative, or (more recently) representing a political entity, Stewart never backed down from a challenge, never used miscontextualization to make his point, and never ceased to be genuine. In fact, that is the justification that Stewart has offered for his retirement, citing that The Daily Show "doesn't deserve an even slightly restless host, and neither do you [the audience]".

"You coulda had all this!"
There is no conceivable way in which The Daily Show with Trevor Noah can even begin to replicate 'The Daily Show with Jon Stewart' and its 18 Emmys, 2 Peabodys, 1 Grammy, and numerous other awards, accolades, and accomplishments - nor should it. Just as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart blazed a trail in the American political dialectic, so too must The Daily Show with Trevor Noah forge its own destiny. Stephen Colbert did it and John Oliver continues to do it. Never has there been such bigger shoes to fill by a vastly smaller footprint.

From the bottom of my heart, truly and sincerely, I thank you for the amazing ride that was The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - and may you enjoy retirement and enjoy the time with your family you so manifestly deserve.

-NK
Connect with TheNolanK on Social Media:

The 26th of June 2015: Today I Am Proud to be an American


My Oklahoma License Plate featuring Human Rights Campaign's Sticker (edited for personal privacy)

In all honesty I did not think that this type of progress was possible in the current political and social landscape present in the U.S. However, what I have witnessed in the US, in the past three days, has solidified my hope that positive change will happen in my lifetime. In the past three days, monumental change has taken place in America:

1) Two Days Ago: Southern States, that have have histories of violence and discrimination towards minorities, finally began recognizing the racist and hateful nature of the 'Confederate Battle Flag' and are working to remove that horrible symbol from state buildings, dismantle ill-conceived war memorials commemorating Southern traitors, and solidifying the social stigma that needs to be associated with that flag.  Without delving too deep into a history lesson, and ignoring the fact that the continuation of slavery was the second most emphasized cause for the South’s secession, I will briefly dispel the whole ‘the South was no more racist than American society of the time’ argument. The Confederate States of America (CSA), in its founding documents, clearly emphasized racist intent. Yes the USA had slavery, but it was defined as “Person(s) held to Service or Labour”. By contrast, in their new Constitution, the CSA used the term 'Negro Slaves' in Article IV. Section 3. The CSA made a clear distinction of highlighting the colour of the slaves’ skin - a definitively racist maneuver. The common refrain I heard growing up was “Heritage not Hate”. Even more absurd is when those who still uphold ‘Southern Heritage’ often claim that racism no longer exists since slavery and segregation are in the past. Yet the very past they are telling Black people to let go of is the exact same past some Southerners are clinging on to when displaying the Confederate Battle Flag or the Stars and Bars. While history is important to learn and should not be forgotten, in the case of the CSA, that Heritage is Hate.

2) Yesterday: The Supreme Court ruled to uphold the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as 'ObamaCare', which added to the long list of victories for that piece of legislation - including over 50 failed challenges to defund and/or repeal by the House of Representatives and a prior Supreme Court case that likewise upheld the law. Adding to these legal victories are the costs of the legislation coming in under budget, numerous success stories in patient coverage and care, and a drop in the number of uninsured Americans. In contrast to the intended policy outcomes from the legislation, a majority of Americans (55%) still disapprove of the law.

3) Today: In an historic day for the United States of America, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, has found that state bans on marriage for homosexual couples are unconstitutional. Their ruling effectively legalizes gay marriage in all 50 states in the union. The 26th of June 2015 will be a date that lives forever in history. Those who have opposed equality for LGBTQ persons are now officially on the wrong side of history. I have been an avid supporter of marriage equality for my entire adult life:
"To deny a fellow human being the right to express their love for a fellow human being, in an adult and consenting fashion, just because they are a homosexual, is nothing short of hateful and vitriolic. Make no mistake, opposition to marriage equality is nothing short of hate, regardless of how you try and justify it. Opposing homosexuality may be part of your religious beliefs, but you have absolutely no right to make someone else submit to your beliefs in such an arbitrary manner." - Excerpt from my 2013 Article on Marriage Equality
What always baffled me was the fact that the Marriage Equality issue has nothing to do with individual churches or their procedures. The argument is just to extend equal protection under the law (See: 14th Amendment) to the LGBTQ community, for rights already enjoyed by straight couples.

TheNolanK, Love, Wins, Marriage, Equality, #LoveWins
(My girlfriend and I during our 2014 road trip to California)
Intolerance that arises from discrimination against someone for something they cannot themselves choose (i.e. Sex, Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation) is not the same as intolerance against those who discriminate by cognitive choice. Thus, based on a choice, bigots who justify discrimination by citing their religious beliefs or political platform are discriminating, by choice, against something for which a person cannot choose. Characteristics of a person that are indivisible from their DNA, and are not arrived at by choice, will always outweigh the characteristics that people elect to either hold or believe. Intolerance or discrimination against someone for an innate characteristic they have no choice or control over is inherently wrong and negative. Just as in the early to mid 20th century, when Government mandates against discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or skin colour were issued, it was similarly the ultra-conservative right wing religious community clinging to "Religious Freedom" and "State's Rights" that served as the last bastion for discrimination and bigotry. It comes as no surprise that those opposing the rulings for love and equality today are largely the same ideological demographic that so opposed the rulings for race and gender equality all those years ago. Furthermore, there are largely no differences between today's arguments against marriage equality verses the arguments against non-whites and interracial marriages from the 1850's up to the late 20th century.

The idea of a Democracy Society is to not allow the majority to disenfranchise and discriminate against the innate characteristics of a minority. Enabling discrimination under the guise of 'Freedom of Religion' is not protection of the First Amendment but rather a thinly veiled attempt to enable homophobic bigots the ability to deny fellow decency and equal protection under the law towards homosexuals - and frankly anybody they deem to not be in accordance with their own interpretation of religious beliefs, including Muslims, atheists, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. However, intolerance towards those who discriminate against someone for characteristics they neither choose nor control is a positive social element. This form of social intolerance is the positive force that enabled women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, and equality based on sex, race, ethnicity, or disability - as well as today's victory for marriage equality.

Yes the U.S. still has its flaws, especially when compared to other developed nations, but this recent series of events has served to lessen that divide. Extreme income inequality and an exorbitant amount of intentional homicides still plagues the U.S. Issues like those still have yet to be adequately addressed. Make no mistake, the long march ahead for true equality remains an ominous challenge, but today, the 26th of June in the year 2015, love wins.

Closing Note: This amazing three day stretch follows President Barack Obama's interview on Marc Maron's WTF Podcast. At just over an hour long, I have already listened to the interview, in its entirety, multiple times. The news cycle picked up on one tiny element of the conversation, but the President gives a candid and very nuanced overview of the political landscape in the US. Click here to listen to Marc Maron's WTF Podcast with President Barack Obama


Connect with TheNolanK on Social Media:

What Are We Fighting For? How Islamic State uses U.S. Armed Forces Recruiting Methods to Mobilize Foreign Fighters




My latest term at Conrad Grebel University College for my Master of Peace and Conflict Studies (MPACS) graduate programme has been long and arduous. The focus of my studies have been on the multifaceted nature of Islamic State. Drawing on course themes, I have analyzed Islamic State through many different perspectives. Previously, I wrote a paper on "The Failure of Soft Power to Destroy or Degrade Islamic State". The following article is an analysis of Islamic State and their unprecedented recruiting campaign, specifically in their use of social media and their target audience of foreign fighters.

(Here is an Academia.edu link for a .PDF version)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note of Process and Terminology

          Media outlets, politicians, academics, and denizens of Islamic State controlled territory have referred to this organization as ‘Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’ or ‘Islamic State of Iraq and Syria’ – ISIS, ‘Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’ – ISIL, and/or ‘ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyah fil-Iraq wash-Sham’ – DAESH. In the context of this report, ‘Islamic State’ will be uniformly used throughout for the name of the group in question. The geographic region known as the ‘Levant’ will be understood to include the modern nations of Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, and Lebanon. Any comments on or portrayal of Islam or its theology will be representative of Islamic State ideology and is in no way representative of true or mainstream Islamic thought.[1] In addition, when Arabic or Islamic elements are described, they will be transliterated from Arabic to English using a simplified phonetic spelling. References to the United States Armed Forces in comparison to Islamic State are in no way meant to be defamatory or critical. Any comparisons are made for that singular specific juxtaposition and do not extend in scope beyond what is described therein.

Introduction

          The Levant continues to be rife with conflict and destabilizing violence. The most recent conflict to strike the region started in spring 2011 as the Syrian Uprising – and has since metastasized into the Syrian Civil War. The death toll from the ongoing conflict ranges from a United Nations (UN) estimated 220,000 to a Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) estimated 310,000.[2] [3] Amidst the chaos of a conflicted region were the waning hours of an American combat operation, Operation Iraqi Freedom, in Iraq. The United States Armed Forces decision to withdraw combat troops in Iraq by December of 2011 left an immense power vacuum in the still destabilized Levant region. Emboldened by Western and American inaction, the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad continued its brutal military crackdown on opposition movements within Syria’s borders. In response to the Assad regime’s offensives against civilian neighbourhoods, resistance forces began fighting back against regime security forces and likewise aligned paramilitary militias. The subsequent eruption of open conflict flooded the region with what has been described as “the largest foreign fighter mobilization since the Afghan conflict in the 1980’s”, by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (ICSR).[4]

          The largest draw to the region is the enticement of Islamic State via their recruiting efforts through social media and video productions. Islamic State started with the migration of regional al-Qaeda affiliated foreign fighters arriving to fight in the Syrian Civil War. According to a February 2015 assessment by the United States Intelligence Community, the number of foreign nationals fighting for Islamic State are estimated at 20,00 to 31,500, with 3,400 coming from nations in the Global North.[5] United States Secretary of State John Kerry suggests that the target demographic for Islamic State recruiting are “[those] among the disaffected and disenfranchised, but also among those of all backgrounds on a misguided quest for meaning and empowerment”.[6] Islamic State is able to successfully connect with their target audience via “the power of modern communications”, as described by CIA Director John Brennan:
“New technologies can help groups like [Islamic State] coordinate operations, attract new recruits, disseminate propaganda, and inspire sympathizers across the globe to act in their name.”[7]
Islamic State has a candidate pool and the means to contact them, but potential and ability alone do not automatically convert into actually recruiting foreigners. The underlying issues described by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry are not new phenomenon in the Global North, especially regarding those who are first or second generation immigrants from outsider countries.
The most prominent societal issues are often predicated on institutionalized racism and discrimination. The resurgence of extreme right-wing political movements in Europe has lately exacerbated those factors. The recent economic slumps that hit the Global North have further marginalized already isolated non-Caucasian demographics. Lastly, the desire for adventure, belonging, and empowerment is a strong urge that transcends ethnic or religious divisions. Alienation from western society experienced in their own countries of residence is a key force for potential radicalization. Much like how America constantly reaffirms its national identity through hypernationalism and uniting against an enemy of the other, so too has Islamic State fashioned its ideological foundation. Understanding their target audience for supporters, Islamic State crafted their recruiting message to reflect the unique nature of their group, leading to an unprecedented mobilization campaign of foreign fighters devoted to fight and die for their newly created state.

The Rise of Islamic State Ranks[8]

          Islamic State began with an estimated 5,291 foreign fighters, of which 1,626 were from nations in the Global North, as of late 2013.[9] Since Islamic State’s rise to prominence, their number of foreign fighters, as of February 2015, increased to an NCTC estimated 20,000 fighters with roughly 3,400 of those fighters coming from nations in the Global North.[10] Although Islamic State began as a semi-autonomous al-Qaeda affiliate group, in February 2014 “al-Qaeda’s central leadership announced that it had severed ties with” Islamic State due to their excessively brutal and unforgiving tactics to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.[11] In June of 2014, in the midst of their aggressive military campaign, the American supported Iraqi military largely crumbled under the advance of Islamic State fighters, resulting in the capture of Mosul, an Iraqi city with the population of over 1 million residents.[12] Islamic State quickly took control of major cities in Eastern Syria and Northern Iraq, while in the process accruing fiscal assets, estimated to be around the “$2 billion (USD)” mark.[13]

          The current leader of Islamic State is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, whose duties include military command, spiritual leadership, and acting as the group’s public face. Al-Baghdadi is an Iraqi-born Salafist Sunni Muslim with a claimed PhD. in Islamic Studies and alleged ties of descendancy to the Prophet Mohamed’s Quraysh tribe.[14] Al-Baghdadi was detained by U.S. Armed Forces as a civilian during Operation Iraqi Freedom, was jailed by the Iraqi government from 2005 to 2010, and placed on a UN Security Council (UNSC) “Al-Qaida and associated individuals” sanctions list on 15 August 2014.[15] Al-Baghdadi is an enigmatic figure that is rarely seen in the public eye. During one of al-Baghdadi’s rare public appearances he gave a speech to mark the creation of Islamic State, humbly saying to Islamic State fighters and denizens of the Iraqi city of Mosul that "I am not better than you or more virtuous than you".[16]

          Al-Baghdadi’s public appearance followed an online document release that outlined the aims of Islamic State:
“[the] legality of all emirates, groups, states, and organizations, becomes null by the expansion of [Islamic State’s] authority and arrival of its troops to their areas…We [Islamic State fighters] spilled rivers of our blood to water the seeds of [Islamic State], laid its foundation with our skulls, and built its tower over our corpses… It is the state for the Muslims – the oppressed of them, the orphans, the widows, and the impoverished.”[17]
The document was a well formatted ten-page .PDF transcript released in Arabic, as well as translated into four languages - English, Russian, French, and German. The manifesto laid out a bold design for what Islamic State aimed to achieve and represent. While the aggressive verbosity of the document was defended with lines from the Koran and Hadith, the tone of the message echoed the Machiavellian maxim that, for the leader of a kingdom, “it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one has to lack one of the two.”[18] Unlike Hezbollah’s foundation in 1985 and Osama Bin Laden’s Fatwas in 1996 and 1998, in which both appeal to the Ummah, Arabic for “Islamic Community”, and still operate within the dialectic of international relations, Islamic State appeals to the Ummah, while conversely rejecting the current existence of state borders, national identities, and religious denominations.

Islamic State Social Media

          Islamic State social media efforts are bold and continuous in their outreach efforts. The ability to interact instantaneously on an international scale has been heavily employed by Islamic State. Different social media platforms serve different purposes in their design: Facebook is meant for more personal interactions with a fairly limited social circle and is heavily regulated in regards to what sort of content can be posted, YouTube is the world’s most popular streaming video website and features moderate content restriction, and Twitter is meant for instantaneous and immediate communication with minimal content restrictions. Additionally, while all three of those social media websites have reporting processes for questionable or objectionable content, Twitter is the least reactive in prosecuting content removal. Hence, the most popular social media platform, for Islamic State supporters and fighters alike, is Twitter.

          Islamic State has quite a sophisticated media production division and their social media efforts are just as relentless. The media produced by Islamic State is of no usable value unless it can be broadcast to the world. Islamic State supporters have learned how to exploit the mechanics behind Twitter to positive effect. Using the ‘trends’ mechanism in Twitter’s coding, Islamic State supporter use what are known as hashtags to promote a singular identifier even in the absence of an official Islamic State Twitter account. Additionally, Islamic State supporters will often coopt regional or worldwide trends and tag Islamic State messaging with arbitrary tags in order to increase that tweet’s exposure – such as #AaronHernandezTrial, #LillyforTarget, and #StanleyCupPlayoffs. Those topics have nothing to do with Islamic State, but people who click on those tags are taken to a central page that aggregates all tweets with that tagged phrase. In a similar fashion, the tag of #baqiyah, baqiyah is Arabic for “it will remain”, is used by Islamic State supporters.[19] Going to the Twitter webpage that aggregates content with the #baqiyah tag reveals the variety of Islamic State supporters as well as the range of to what extent users declare their support. The accounts that are the most fervent and verbose in their support for Islamic State are suspended without the ability to appeal. The more subtle Islamic State supporters will often post tweets with double entendres, innuendos, vague messaging, and religious proclamations.

          Reliable data on the subject of Islamic State is hard to come by. In the realm where a person can pretend to be anybody or even an automated bot can emulate a person, the Internet can be a deceptive arena for data collection. The best estimates of pro-Islamic State Twitter users comes from a March 2015 Brookings Institute research report. The study estimated with, with over 90% confidence, that the “total number of overt [Islamic State] supporter account on Twitter [is] 46,000”.[20] They speculated that upwards of 90,000 accounts could be Islamic State supporters, while each account surveyed averaged 2,219 tweets over 1,004 followers.[21] The majority of Islamic State supporter accounts on Twitter “were created in response to the suspensions, either to replace accounts that had been taken down, or as backup accounts to hedge against future suspensions”.[22] The majority of Islamic State supporter account were created in 2014 (59.51%), while just 1.3% were created prior to 2011.[23] The report also noted that the top five countries for the Islamic State were Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, U.S.A., and Egypt.[24] The preferred smartphone platform for Islamic State supporters is Android based (69%), with Apple (30%) and Blackberry (1%) following.[25]

          The democratized platform of social media has also presented a few challenges to Islamic State’s public image of battle hardened and disciplined warriors. With the ability to post instantaneously and independently, Islamic State fighters on the actual battlefields in Iraq and Syria can post whatever content or imagery they please. Often times Islamic State fighters post selfies on the frontlines or graphic images after a victory in battle. However, there are instances where Islamic State fighters have posted cell-phone video showing amateur mistakes with weapons handling, explosives manufacturing, or other assorted moments of failure. In response to one of Islamic State’s graphic videos, Internet users compiled all of the video clips of Islamic State fighters making mistakes and failing spectacularly into one video. The edited video shows events like “one fighter blow[ing] himself up when his rocket launcher backfires, another accidentally shoot[ing] a comrade with a machine gun… and [another] mistakenly detonates a bomb during a group photograph”.[26] In some instances social media users have even openly mocked Islamic State movements by humorously parodying their violent threats. In February 2015, Islamic State created the hashtag “#We_Are_Coming_O_Rome” to declare their aim for the center of the Western Christian world. Italian Twitter users responded by warning Islamic State fighters of the perils of rush hour traffic, unreliable public transport, and dysfunctional Italian government.[27]

          Islamic State has publicly acknowledge the importance of a proper social media policy, as stated by Abu Bakr al Janabi, an Islamic State official, in a VICE News interview:
“Social media is good for building a network of connections and recruitment… Fighters talk about experiences in battle and encourage people to rise, and supporters defend and translate ISIS statements.”[28]
Even corporations recognize that the key to increasing public exposure and earned profits is through social media, as spending on social media as a part of marketing is expected to grow upwards of 128% in the next five years.[29] Through a comprehensive and mostly coordinates social media policy, Islamic State “is able to project strength and promote engagement online”.[30] Islamic State has made a name for itself in regards to their ruthless military tactics and continuing violence, but their use of social media as an outreach and recruiting tool has been similarly successful to their overall growth.

Islamic State Media Production

          Islamic State media production is a multi-faceted propaganda and recruiting factory. The main arm of Islamic State media production is Al Hayat Media Center.[31] Al-Hayat is Arabic for ‘The Life’ and Islamic State coopted the name from a well known newspaper in the Arab world. As mentioned before, Islamic State affiliated social media accounts are frequently suspended or deleted, resulting in a lack of a single stable official social media account. The social media accounts operated by Al Hayat were promptly suspended by Twitter in the weeks after the Islamic State began to regularly publish videos. Outside of the realm of social media platforms is where Al Hayat Media Center is able to maintain a stable publication base via ‘isdarat.org’. Isdarat is Arabic for ‘Publish’ or ‘Spread’ and currently serves as the single fixed point for Islamic State’s internet presence. Islamic State also demonstrates technical knowledge in how they operate their website’s domain rights. The domain address for isdarat.org is registered to a protected and obscured registrar who holds the domain rights until January 2016.[32] The features of the website include a media archive for Islamic State videos and articles, a ‘frequently asked questions’ (FAQ) page, a feedback comments page, and separate page filters for the different geographic territories in which Islamic State is present. While the HTML design of isdarat.org is fairly basic, the overall web product is polished and comprehensive. In addition to isdarat.org, Islamic State uses Dabiq, an online English language magazine. Dabiq is a reference to the name of a Syrian city mentioned in the Hadith in reference to the end-times or the ‘Last Hour’.[33] Keeping the same style of Islamic symbolism, Islamic State purposefully chose Dabiq to fit the themes and motifs of their justification for an Islamic Caliphate.

          Islamic State uses isdarat.org as its main broadcast hub to publish Al Hayat Media Center’s video productions. Through navigating the website a visitor can easily find links to the third-party hosting mirrors for Islamic State videos. The pursuit of video files often leads to the discovery of broken URL links and the removal of hosted files. Access to these files are notoriously dubious, often coming from disreputable sources or questionable content hosts. Attempts by Islamic State to have their video content hosted on YouTube is met with minimal success, often staying active for only a few hours before the video is taken down and the associated account is terminated. Nevertheless, Islamic State has still been able to devise a method for hosting accessible media content by encrypting their uploaded files via password, obscuring the filenames, and utilizing third-party file hosts that even offer quick connection speeds with up to 8.3Mbps download rates.[34] Islamic State publishes video content on a fairly regular basis, with eight major video productions that standout above the rest.

          The first two Islamic State video releases were in relatively quick succession to each other: their first, “There is No Life without Jihad”, was released on 19 June 2014 and is 13 minutes and 16 seconds long, while their second, “The End of Sykes-Picot” was released on 29 June 2014 and is 15 minutes and 4 seconds long.[35] These two videos serve as an important foundation for the way Islamic State is represented in the digital world. While these first two videos had yet to feature the high value production and sleek editing synonymous with the latest Islamic State video releases, they still outlined two major components of Islamic State ideology. The “There is No Life without Jihad” video features exclusively English-speaking foreign fighters from countries such as Australia, U.K., Cambodia, and Bangladesh. In a clearly unscripted fashion, the men extoll the virtue of sacrificing one’s family and material possessions in the Western World to wage Jihad in order to implement the law of Allah. The “The End of Sykes-Picot” video features a Chilean Islamic State fighter giving a historical geography lesson and declaring the Sykes-Picot mandated borders in Asia Minor to be dissolved. The point is reiterated as the narrator mocks the dispossessed Iraqi Army before parading prisoners of war in front of the camera and avowing that Islamic State will strive to break more borders. While these videos are basic in their editing technique and production value, there still exists a clear narrative behind the purpose of these two videos.

          On 19 September 2014, Islamic State released the video “Flames of War”, their longest video at 55 minutes and 11 seconds. The message of “Flames of War” frames the mission aims of Islamic State by providing theological justifications for their ideology. The video flashes between passages from the Koran and Hadith overlaid on scenes of Islamic State fighting battles in Iraq and Syria. The video’s narrator states that the purpose of fighting on behalf of Islamic State is for “Allah, not land, but the [Islamic] Caliphate.”[36] The end of the video shows purported Assad regime soldiers digging their own graves while, under duress, one man makes the claim that “it’s as if Allah has blessed the Islamic State” because “ten or twenty or thirty [Islamic State fighters] captured the base when it had 800 soldiers.”[37] The videos narrator then declares the fighting has only just begun.

          Islamic State also released a series of videos showing the executions of Western journalists, aid workers, and a Jordanian fighter pilot. While Islamic State videos often feature mass executions by firing squad or beheadings, these videos strike a different tone as they are singular executions of high profile persons. The Jordanian fighter pilot execution video marked a distinct change in Islamic State video productions. The 22 minute and 34 second video released on 3 February 2015 opens with an intricate use of detailed computer-generated graphics and geographical schematics highlighted with news clips of U.S. President Barack Obama and the King of Jordan Abdullah II. The intricate digital renderings depict the Jordanian pilot’s strike sortie over Islamic State targets, while the Pilot is made to confess his guilt and wrongdoing. The video is primarily in Arabic and is directed at the immediate regional opponents of Islamic State. The video garnered widespread media attention for featuring the execution of the Jordanian pilot by being set on fire with gasoline while trapped in a metal cage. In previous videos, the Islamic State fighters wore military attire, but they were mismatched and assorted patterns – forest and desert camouflage fatigues are not meant for desert combat. This time the Islamic State fighters are shown in uniformed military attire – desert sand camouflage – while in a straight formation, postured in the same rigid manner, and even equipped with the same model of firearm. The depiction of Islamic State fighters in this video is a stark contrast to the fighters in previous videos, as the fighters now look like a professional military force. Islamic State continued with the depiction of military imagery in their next video release, showing their version of Boot Camp with various training exercises and a column of fleet vehicles dawning the Islamic State Black Standard. While the video is the shortest release at 2 minutes and 9 seconds, the imagery of the fighter training video builds upon the themes of the Jordanian fighter pilot video. However, the video features fairly low production value and was mocked by military veterans who analyzed the video.

          Islamic State shifted direction in their, as of yet, penultimate and antepenultimate video releases. Executions have been a significant component of Islamic State videos, but in these two videos the executions are the central focus. The third to last video purports to show the execution of an ‘Israeli spy’ and is 3 minutes and 17 seconds long. The execution is carried out by a young boy, probably not even sixteen years-old, shooting the prisoner in the face with a Glock pistol. The execution is captured with multiple, simultaneous camera angles and in slow motion as well. Post production effects add dramatic thematic elements to the video and colour correction effects are used to emphasize the blood and gore on the dying prisoner. The second to last video titled “Strike Their Necks” is also centered around an execution featuring youth fighters and is 4 minutes and 15 seconds long. The similar editing elements from the previous video are present here, but the method of execution was instead beheading. The executioners are dressed in the now standard desert camouflage uniforms from the Jordanian fighter pilot video. Multiple camera angles likewise capture the blood and gore in an intensely graphic fashion, ultimately showing a collective flow of blood flowing into a collective pool.

          The most recent Islamic State video, released on 19 April 2015, titled “Until There Came to Them Clear Evidence” is a 29 minute and 20 second video production in Arabic, but was published with the options of English, Russian, French, and German subtitles. The video opens with scripture from the Koran and Hadith describing the theological justification and subsequent requirements of Jizyah – the compulsion of taxation on those ‘People of the Book’, Jews and Christians, who choose to not convert to Islam. After a long introduction from one of Islamic State’s religious advisors, video testimony of non-Sunni Muslim denizens in Islamic State controlled testimony is shown. Those in the video begin to proclaim the fair and just practices of Islamic State and how their rule is more equitable than either the Syrian or Iraqi governments. The video extolls the virtue of the Islamic society built by the Islamic State. The consequences for failing to submit to the enforcement of Jizyah are shown by Islamic State fighters destroying Christian churches in the region with sledge hammers and vandalism. The conclusion of this video is purported to be in Libya and shows Christian prisoners lined up in front of a firing squad. The narrator frames the issue as “battle between faith and blasphemy, between truth and falsehood”.[38] The final scenes show two mass executions of 21 African Christians, half by firing squad and the other half by decapitation.

          Each video released by the Islamic State has its own unique message and substance while still adhering to a coherent message. The subject of each major video production is unique, but certain aspects are repeated throughout each video. The beginning of each video reads “Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-raheem”, Arabic for “In the name of God, the most gracious, the most merciful. Each video is also watermarked in a top corner with an animated Black Standard of the Islamic State flapping in the wind. The vernacular of foreign Islamic State fighters in the videos is a unique blend of their primary language, usually English or French, and Arabic phrases. The speakers in the video, whether foreign or from the Levant, most frequently punctuate their dialogue with “Inshallah”, Arabic for ‘God Willing’, “Wallahi”, Arabic for ‘Swear by God’, and “Alhamdulillah”, Arabic for ‘Praise be to God’.
The production efforts of Islamic State are intricate and detailed, which certainly translates in their video releases. Their cinematographic body of work shows clear improvement in multiple aspects, including scripted dialogue, choreography, quality of audio and video capture, costume design, body language, computer generated graphics, and overall production value. Islamic State and Al Hayat Media Center have successfully allocated qualified talent to relevant media production positions. The videos released by Islamic State are graphic in nature, but do not contain boring or disinteresting elements. Since their rise to prominence in the Summer months of 2014, Islamic State has been a permanent fixture in the Western media news cycle. Whether on television or imbedded on news websites, the video news reports feature heavy use of the videos published by Islamic State. Attention to detail and investment in media creation have bolstered the official image of Islamic State in the eyes of the general public, as well as those in the potential Islamic State fighter candidate pool.

American Military Recruiting and Social Media

          After the end of the first Iraq War, Operation Desert Storm, in 1991 the U.S. Armed Forces faced a recruiting slump and a declining enlistment in the nation’s all volunteer military. To combat the recruiting slump the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) commissioned a research assessment from the RAND Corporation. The 2001 RAND report on military recruiting assessed the current factors in declining recruitment and recommended that the DoD should “consider additional marketing strategies and enlistment options” to correct the issue.[39] In response, the DoD launched an aggressive television advertising campaign across the branches of the U.S., even enlisting the help of the major advertising firm Campbell-Ewald to help with recruiting messaging.[40] The new content created for recruiting demonstrated an increase and production value, the use of digital graphics, and directed messaging to the target recruiting pool. The classic motifs of “service or duty or patriotism or some potential long-term benefit” were minimized in favour of being “all about the experience” instead.[41] The shift in messaging and design, initiated by the 2001 aim to increase recruiting, has had a lasting effect through current military recruiting efforts.

          The U.S. Navy was the most conspicuous in regards to the call for increased recruitment advertising. Their “Accelerate You Life” campaign featured video clips that incorporated heavy metal music riffs, fast-cut editing, and a narrator asking the watcher “If someone wrote a book about your life, would anyone want to read it?”[42] The U.S. Army, the largest branch of the U.S. Armed Forces, also launched renewed efforts with their “Army of One” and, later, “Army Strong” advertising campaigns. After the outset of the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) military recruiting campaign advertisements were a mainstay of American television. The latest iteration of a U.S. Armed Forces recruiting campaign is the U.S. Air Force’s “Aim High” messaging. The primary campaign video is a mix of thematic music, military footage of aircraft and soldiers, and narrated by compiled quotes of previous U.S. Presidents.[43] Through the maintained exposure of television broadcast, recruiting methods continued to evolve from the simple days of Uncle Sam posters and movie theater introductions. However, the U.S. Military still employs a multitude of conventional advertising channels including radio, print media – newspapers and magazines, and television commercials.

          The four largest branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines, have quite an extensive social media presence. Coinciding with U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, from 2001 to 2014, was the rise of the internet and social media. During the height of these conflicts was when the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines began their social media campaigns. After examining each branch’s official page on YouTube and Twitter, the key data points for their accounts analytics were compiled on 19 April 2015. The U.S. Army joined YouTube in March 2006, amassing 2,587,245 views over 780 videos with 19,460 subscribers; and later joining Twitter in September 2007, accumulating over 627,000 followers with 21,900 tweets.[44] [45] The U.S. Air Force joined YouTube in January 2008, amassing 9,554,804 views over 1,622 videos with 35,370 subscribers; and later joining Twitter in January 2009, accumulating over 407,000 followers with 25,900 tweets.[46] [47] The U.S. Navy joined YouTube in March 2006, amassing 29,478,673 views over 5,497 videos with 40,532 subscribers; and later joining Twitter in July 2009, accumulating over 463,000 followers with 18,200 tweets.[48] [49] The U.S. Marines joined YouTube in November 2005, amassing 21,015,729 views over 1,555 videos with 76,901 subscribers; and later joining Twitter in November 2007, accumulating over 537,000 followers with 10,800 tweets.[50] [51] In total, these four branches have garnered over 62,626,451 views over 9,454 videos with 172,263 subscribers on YouTube and over 2,034,000 followers with 76,800 tweets on Twitter. The reach of U.S. Armed Forces recruiting has grown exponentially with the advent of social media.

          The increased emphasis for the use of social media in communications and advertising has acted as a major catalyst in outreach and recruiting efforts. The common motifs of country, duty, patriotism, purpose, and experience are transmitted through electronic methods. The successful recruitment advertising campaigns of the U.S. Armed Forces have employed common thematic production styles and audio-visual elements since the redoubled efforts began after 2001. Scenes of battle, military imagery, regimental consociation, and impassioned background music are central components to the efficacy of U.S. Armed Forces recruiting media. Combined with the effects of the Internet and globalization, the recruiting media used by the U.S. Armed Forces has been viewed the world over.

Same Tactics, Different Intent

          The commonalities in recruiting efforts between the U.S. Armed Forces and the Islamic State are numerous. Coincidentally, the intent of recruiting in both organizations are also similar in nature on a main point: Islamic State’s campaign to recruit fighters to volunteer to leave their homes to fight on foreign soil mirrors the U.S. Armed Forces recruiting campaign to likewise find volunteers to leave their homes to fight on foreign soil. The presence of either group in the Levant has proven to be a causal mechanism for regional instability. Whether the scenario is the U.S. Armed Forces fighting against Islamic State or vice-versa, both bring about the arrival of foreign fighters to the region. Even the driving motivation for the individual fighting for their respective cause stems from the same alluring playbook of recruiting media production. The strategies employed by Islamic State communications outreach closely resembles, and even outright plagiarizes, the approaches and recruiting themes employed by the all-volunteer U.S. Armed Forces. Video media from either group contains four major components: 1) Military imagery, 2) Coherent narrative of duty, 3) Enlivening orchestral music, and 4) Quality production editing.

          Military imagery is the easiest component to capture. All videos released, from either party, neglect to show the absence of camouflage fatigues, even in the most minor of productions. Similarly, great measures are taken to show the might of each group’s respective hardware – for the U.S. Armed Forces that means a column of M-1 Abrams tanks and fly-bys of F-22 Raptors, while Islamic State features fleet vehicles of SUV’s and trucks with anti-aircraft guns mounted on the beds. Coherent narrative of duty can be a more nuanced task. For the U.S. Armed Forces, patriotism is an often easily aroused passion in the average American. Islamic State, a relatively new creation, has simultaneously bolstered its declared form as an autonomous and sovereign governing body, while literally destroying the history and ancient artifacts of the regions under their control.[52] Enlivening orchestral music is a subtler component, but can give the video a completely different mood. Humans involuntarily respond to music in wondrous ways. The ability to harness that pathway into the mind draws the observer closer in to the transmission. Lastly, major attention to the editing and overall quality is what differentiates between amateur footage and the appearance of a major media production. Quality of the finished product is integral to how viewers perceive the video’s message. The U.S. Armed Forces are able to go to some of the advertising industry’s best firms and invest in their own sophisticated media creation departments. Islamic State is a group constantly on the move, unable to operate in the realm of normal commerce. Nevertheless, both groups are able to record, edit, and produce major video works with proven track records in the effective recruiting. The ability of Islamic State to properly implement strict finishing standards is a vital catalyst for broadcasting their novel approach to state building.

          Social media efforts are of paramount importance to both groups, again, for related purposes. For disseminating information among current members as well as helping to raise morale within their ranks. The high quality video productions from both organizations are meaningless unless they reach their target audiences. Social media has been shown to cause gaffes in the public image of Islamic State, but also in the case of the U.S. Armed Forces. However, one of the features of social media called geotagging has presented a challenge for Islamic State, as users have accidentally revealed fighter locations and announced battle plans prematurely. As a result, the U.S. Armed Forces and their coalition allies have translated that data to use in kinetic sortie strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq.[53] Despite the lack in low-level operational security, according to UN estimates, “the number of foreign fighters worldwide had soared by 71% between the middle of 2014 and March 2015” – the same period of time in which Islamic State aggressively used social media to release their video productions.[54]

          Islamic State influence in the Levant and the rest of the world will continue to grow until their recruiting efforts are brought to a halt. Reducing the ease of which a person can take-up arms for Islamic State alone will not cease the influx of foreign fighters. Domestic situations in a potential foreign fighter’s home country must also be improved reducing the chance that they would even want to leave home in the first place. Just as there is a large emphasis on counterterrorism in America and the Global North, so too should there be a more active counter-propaganda agency to combat the spread of Islamic State ideology via soft power methods. Granted, while soft power failed to destroy or degrade Islamic State in any measurable way during their rise to power, the key to reducing their charm and attraction to disenfranchised foreign nationals is by specifically combatting Islamic State recruiting messaging.[55] Social media has now become the latest weapon in the arsenal of asymmetrical warfare. Regardless of how Islamic State will eventually be brought down and held accountable for their atrocities, their unique recruiting campaign that was able to mobilize a wide array of willing fighters for a newly created cause will become a standard model for future extremist organizations.

Working as a Rapporteur: Group of 78 Annual Policy Conference



Back in September of 2014 I participated in an annual conference hosted by the Group of 78 and Project Ploughshares in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. I, along with three of my colleagues from Conrad Grebel University College and the Executive Director of Project Ploughshares, John Siebert, went to Ottawa for the WWI and Contemporary Policy On War and Peace conference. I served as a rapporteur of the conference proceedings, charged with writing about two of the main conference discussions.

From Left to Right: Holger Afflerbach, Tamara Scheer, Daryl Copeland, Ernie Regehr, Mustafa Aksakal, and CBC's Michael Enright.
Attending this conference as a rapporteur was my first major extra-curricular outing as a graduate student. Over a decade had passed since I last visited Canada's national capital - which brings the current score of the Canada vs. U.S.A. capital visits competition to 2-0 in favour of Canada.

The annual conference report has finally been published and I can now share my work. Here is the conference's concluding summary that I wrote, in its entirety:

Concluding Roundtable Summary: What can we learn from WW1 to make the 21st century a century of peace?

What did we learn from WW1 to make world a safer place?

The traditional 19th century opinion of ‘The Fatherland’ faced a watershed moment. The notion of “Dying for Fatherland” that was prevalent in 19th century Europe was abandoned except in its cynical or ironic uses. This was quite a political departure.

WW1 served as an exercise in the failure of our ability to accommodate shifting power. The only thing we ever learn is that we never learn. It is now more necessary than ever to learn from previous conflicts to prevent emerging and escalating conflicts. The key is to understand and evolve past these issues to address the big ones that humanity faces collectively.

WW1 was transformative in the Middle East and shaped how it is today. WW1 touched off civil war and mass traumas that lasted well into the 20th century. Understanding this period as the origin of contemporary problems is invaluable. Often times the region is described as having populations predisposed to violence, which is categorically untrue. What the denizens of the 34 Middle East have been subjected to for the past century is shortsighted Western policies of imperialism, colonialism, and interventionism. Organic growth in the region continues to be scarred from the consequences of WW1.

Conflicts are multifaceted and are by nature hard to understand fully for factors and igniters, especially when the WW1 alliances were so veiled and secretive. Rather than apportioning specific blame, humanity should extract useful lessons. For instance in WW1 the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand caused events that spun out of control. When politicians default on their responsibilities as decision-makers, the result is handing their control over war to the military.

Regardless of the justifications used for war, all belligerents bear responsibility. Nations should unite not in military alliances, but rather in understanding that they should not be sending their sons and daughters off to war. This ideal is what has fostered peace in the European Union. The role of the media must be considered, for instance, in the case of the Hapsburg Empire from the turn of the century up until 1914. Newspapers treated war like it was expected, yet people were surprised when armed conflict actually broke out. Bertrand Russell remarked that England was also happy for war.

WW1 gave us new technologies to build better weapons. Humanity has perfected the means to kill each other. What mankind has yet to do is wholly unite against non-traditional threats, whether that be climate change, diminishing biodiversity, resource shortages, or the challenge of managing the global commons. There are no military solutions to many of the threats which now imperil us all. Airstrikes are no remedy for a warming planet. Expeditionary forces cannot occupy the alternatives to a carbon economy. Garrisons and border guards are useless against the advance of pandemic disease. These sorts of issues are best addressed using the tools of diplomacy and development: dialogue, negotiation, knowledge-based problem solving and cooperative action in concert.

Framing a conflict as war will always leave a winner and a loser. However, it is what those parties choose to do, either in victory or defeat, which will shape the future. While the Americans won WW II, they have been a global leader in armed interventions during the second half of the 20th century. Conversely, Germany and Japan have adopted foreign policies centered on pacifism. The frame of conflict analysis is always focused on why war happened or who was responsible. Perhaps our thinking should be the other way around: Why did the peace work before? Credit has to be given for the prevention of large-scale wars since the end of the two World Wars of the 20th century. Diplomacy has identified conditions that would lead to war. Attention must be given to de-escalation and prevention. Nations must never stop talking; transnational cooperation needs to exist in good times and bad.

There exists a grotesque imbalance of resource allocations in major nations, as the lion’s share of resources fall to defence agencies and defence corporations. In the USA there are more soldiers in uniformed marching bands than there are diplomats. In any given year the budget increase alone that is afforded to U.S. defence exceeds the total budgets of the State Department and USAID combined. A major disparity between defence spending and spending on diplomacy and development of nearly 24:1 exists in the U.S., while Canada is 4:1, and the Nordics are 1:1. Contemporary wars are primarily intra-state or civil wars and they emerge out of internal conflicts based a variety of social, political, and economic grievances and the failures of 35 national institutions in weak states to mediate effectively and respond to chronic grievances. Military force is incapable of mitigating these grievances or of forcing dissident movements, once they have gained the support of major communities and sections of the populations, to conform. Political accommodation is the only sustainable response, yet most states, even or especially weak states, are better prepared for mounting military responses than political responses. The result is long drawn out civil wars, even though they cannot be, and are not settled on the battlefield. Most wars today, in fact, have little in common with the circumstances and conditions of World Wars I or II.

Special attention must be afforded to the distinction between commemoration and glorification of war. Countries recently engaged in conflict or those nations that were plagued by conflict for decades regard war in a manner that contrasts with countries that have not had conflict waged on home soil in quite some time.

Did they all die in vain? Soldiers that perish on the battlefield and civilians that bear the brunt of a conflict will die in vain if the lessons learned from that conflict are not applied towards the future. If the conflict does not just lead to peace, but an understanding of how to sustain peace, then the victims of war will indeed die in vain. In the case of WW1, little was learned – and that led to WW II.

History does not create workable models for the future. What is clear is that war must be avoided at all costs. In the tradition of Bertha von Suttner, the first female to win the Nobel Peace Prize, she insisted that you never stop talking. Never give up. Meeting a person’s basic needs of food, water, shelter, and economic prospects contribute more to human security than any military force could. Security is not a martial art. Human security is the key. Freedom from fear and freedom from want.

Canada’s capacity to contribute and innovate when it comes to assisting humanity towards peace must be resurrected. Unfortunately in Canada today much of that capacity has been lost. Canada has moved away from internationalism and diplomacy, and renowned institutions and civil society organizations are among the casualties. As a result Canada is losing its established influence on the international stage.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to thank the Group of 78 and Project Ploughshares for this marvellous opportunity. Additionally, I would like to thank my colleagues Allie Bly, Darren Kroph, and Sandrine Uwimana for contributing to an awesome weekend.

Here is a link to the entire conference report - in which my name is only misspelled once...

From Left to Right: Darren Kroph, Allie Bly, Sandrine Uwimana, John Siebert, and Nolan Kraszkiewicz (me).


Copyright © Nolan Kraszkiewicz 2018 || Please Properly Attribute Republished Work. Powered by Blogger.