Friday, March 31, 2017

ISLAMIC MILITARY ALLIANCE : Pakistan In Hot Seat As General Takes Command Of Saudi-Led Alliance (R)

SOURCE:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/31032017-pakistan-in-hot-seat-as-general-takes-command-of-saudi-led-alliance-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FVsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29




Pakistan In Hot Seat As General Takes Command Of Saudi-Led Alliance – Analysis

                                   By 

                    



With no troops to command and a Riyadh-based skeleton staff, General Raheel Sharif, Pakistan’s recently retired top commander, appeared to slide into a cushy job as commander of a 41-nation, Saudi-led military alliance created to fight terrorism.

In fact, the general’s new job is everything but straightforward. He has taken on a task that is likely to require diplomatic tap dancing if he is to succeed in putting flesh on the alliance’s skeleton and ensure that his native Pakistan is not enmeshed in the bitter dispute between Saudi Arabia, one of Pakistan’s closest allies, and Iran, the South Asian state’s neighbour.

Complicating things for General Sharif is the fact that Pakistan is home to the world’s largest Shiite Muslim minority, who account for up to a quarter of its population. Pakistani critics warned that General Sharif’s appointment risked involving Pakistan not only in the Middle East’s seemingly intractable conflicts, but also in Sunni-Shiite Muslim sectarian strife. 

General Sharif’s appointment of what is officially the Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism, dubbed the Muslim world’s NATO, promises to give the group credibility it needs: a non-Arab commander from one of the world’s most populous Muslim countries who commanded not only one of the Muslim world’s largest militaries, but also one that possesses nuclear weapons.
Yet, General Sharif’s problems start with the alliance’s name. The alliance, announced hastily by Saudi Arabia two years ago without prior consultations with all of its alleged members, has yet to adopt a common definition of what constitutes terrorism.

Members also have yet to reach agreement on what the alliance’s priorities are: Iran, viewed by Saudi Arabia as the foremost threat, or jihadist groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. Many members, including Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, are moreover weary of being roped into Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen that has allowed Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to emerge stronger than ever.

Pakistan’s parliament rejected in 2015 a Saudi request to contribute troops to the war in Yemen. More recently, on the eve of General Sharif’s appointment, Pakistan agreed to send 10,000 combat troops to the Saudi side of the kingdom’s border with Yemen.

Pakistan has sought to deflect criticism that it was ignoring parliament’s rejection by reaching out to Iran. General Raheel has reportedly told his Saudi counterparts that he would seek to involve Iran in the alliance. Similarly, General Sharif’s successor, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, appeared to be hedging his bets by declaring that “enhanced Pakistan-Iran military-to-military cooperation will have a positive impact on regional peace and stability.”

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir seemed to dispel any notion of cooperation, let alone reconciliation with Iran in a speech in February in which he charged that “Iran remains the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Iran has as part of its constitution the principle of exporting the revolution. Iran does not believe in the principle of citizenship. It believes that the Shiite, the ‘dispossessed’, as Iran calls them, all belong to Iran and not to their countries of origin. And this is unacceptable for us in the kingdom, for our allies in the Gulf and for any country in the world.”

Mr. Al-Jubeir stipulated that “until and unless Iran changes its behaviour, and changes its outlook, and changes the principles upon which the Iranian state is based, it will be very difficult to deal with a country like this.”

However, it may, ironically, be the rise of President Donald J. Trump that will provide substance to Pakistani efforts to capitalize on the appointment of General Sharif and Pakistan’s dispatch of troops to bridge the gap between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia has wholeheartedly endorsed Mr. Trump because of his tough stance towards Iran and wants to be seen to be responding to the president’s insistence that US allies shoulder more of the burden of their defence. Iran has long called for talks with Saudi Arabia.
Recent overtures by Kuwait to mediate between the two regional powers have raised hopes that an arrangement may be possible despite the kingdom’s tough stance. Kuwaiti foreign minister Sabah Khalid Al Sabah travelled to Tehran in January to discuss ways of initiating a dialogue between Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

Iranian president Hassan Rohani responded weeks later with a visit to Kuwait and Oman. Oman has long had close relations with Iran, mediated in various disputes involving the Islamic republic, and facilitated US-Iranian negotiations that resulted two years ago in the nuclear agreement with Iran and the lifting of international sanctions. Mr. Rohani also earlier this month sent a letter to Kuwaiti Emir Sabah al-Ahmad Al Sabah regarding efforts to tone down animosity with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia and Iran recently reached agreement on the participation of Iranian pilgrims in the haj, the Muslim pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca. The two countries failed to agree last year, preventing Iranian Muslim from fulfilling what is a key religious obligation.

Mr. Al-Jubeir, moreover, made a surprise visit last month to Iraq, widely seen as a gesture towards Iran. Led by a predominantly Shiite Muslim government, Iraq is closely aligned with Iran. Iran supports the government in its fight against the Islamic State (IS) and sponsors powerful Shiite militias that fight alongside Iraqi troops. As a result, relations between Saudi Arabia and Iraq have long been strained.

Writing in Al-Monitor, former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian suggested that a 1988 United Nations Security Council resolution could serve as a basis for a Saudi-Iranian arrangement. The resolution which in ended the Iran-Iraq war in which Saudi Arabia co-funded the Iraqi effort to roll back the Islamic revolution called for regional collective security arrangements. That may be a tall order with Iran unlikely to back off its support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah militia, or the Houthis in Yemen.

“For a new era to dawn in Iranian-GCC relations, the two sides have to be able to express their concerns to each other in a constructive way and translate dialogue into tangible diplomatic gains. They can look to Europe for examples on how to resolve historic rivalries and how the Peace of Westphalia or systems such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the European Union came to be,” Mr. Mousavian said.

Meta-Analytic Investigating of the Notion of "Terrorism" (r)

SOURCE:




             Meta-Analytic Investigating 
                                  of
             the Notion of "Terrorism" 
                    Zahed Ghaffari Hashjin PhD, 
      Associate professor in Shahed University, Tehran, Iran                  Corresponding author: Z_ghafari@yahoo.com 

Mohammad Aghaei PhD. Student in the Political studies of The Islamic Revolution of Iran at Shahed University, Tehran, Iran Aghaei_1387@yahoo.com 


Abstract 

During the second half of the twentieth century up until today, the issue of terrorism and how to fight this phenomenon are among the most important priorities of all members of the international community, particularly the countries which have been victims of terrorism and especially the Islamic Republic of Iran which has been one of the biggest victims of terror, in a way that thinkers consider this phenomena among international threats, not in the field of internal affairs.
Due to the importance of this phenomenon, unfortunately, a holistic definition that includes all aspects of this notion has not been provided in the books of scholars and not in international documents, so based on this fact, providing a comprehensive definition that would have included all the notions of terrorism is necessary. The main question of this study is that what are the main components of the notion of terrorism? The presented paper examines these facts by using the "meta-analysis" method and by using the descriptive-analytical approach. This paper concluded that in order to have a comprehensive definition of "terrorism", three basic components of lack of legitimate-defense, security-debugging, and strategy based on violence are required in explaining this idea. 

Keywords: Terrorism, meta-analysis, a comprehensive definition. 



1. Introduction: When we deal with the previous study of notions, we find the history full of terrorist acts, in all these centuries, serious ideological struggles have been going on to clarify the concept of this phenomenon but they did not provide a comprehensive definition of this problem. However, from 1970s onwards, the global efforts were made for this issue but has always been failed due to the ideological and political reasons (Dona, 1987: 1-9). It should be noted that one of the main causes of global firm in dealing with these problems is the lack of a consensus definition which this same problem has created the lack of modular orientation in dealing with terrorism in international level and among the international community members (Muller, 2003: 211-219). In the second half of the twentieth century, scientists have proposed the science of methodology in order to have a better and broader definition and accordingly, it is better to use the particular way that described it as "meta-analysis ". The present paper by using this method, seeks to identify the main components of this phenomenon. 


2. The Theoretical Framework of "Meta-Analysis": 

In the 1970s, the modern European science of methodology  had been dealt with serious challenge and lived in a deep crisis which was as a result of the weakness and inefficiency of traditional methods of that time, because these methods, had put massive problems for researchers (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004: 18). Efforts of methodologists for solving this challenge brought the birth of the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis refers to the research methods that can be gained from viewing the previous research on a particular topic, and investigating the results of their research and finally, the discovery of common ground among the results of conducted studies, in other words, creating consistency and arranging the results of researches on a particular topic, and estimation of the fresh hidden relationships between them (Glass, 1976: 3-8). In the meta-analysis the researchers try to study the previous results of scientific research and then they should evaluate and assess each one of them and after this stage, they try to obtain the comprehensive answer through these studies and evaluations so that to bring together the previous research results and to create consistency among the results of previous research (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004 445).  The main advantage of meta-analysis is its ability to increase the power of the study to achieve new and significant findings and to offer conclusions arising from the collective mind of researchers (Siahpoosh, 2008: 102, quoting from Rezaeian: 2006). It should be noted that in terms of the political science perspective, three types of phenomena can be recognized and separated from each other, the first group is the group of phenomena which have merely material existence, the other group are the phenomena that lack any material aspect, but the third category of phenomena are also reckoning that they not only have material aspect but also have immaterial indicators, (Reiters, 1995: 243), from this perspective, we can put terrorism in the third category, because this unfortunate phenomenon has harsh and intimidating material aspects and non-complex immaterial elements that are needed to be recognized. A variety of studies and research carried out so far in relation to terrorism, each of which has been examined a particular aspect of the issue, this paper is trying to analyze the previous results of studies and by changing and assembling them with each other, could achieve the basic elements of terrorism and create the overall and functional result. 


3. The Concept of Terrorism 3-1: Components and Features of Terrorism: The concept of terrorism is a multilateral issue. In fact, when we examine the concept of terrorism, we find that this phenomenon is composed of several components, that the most important among them are violence, victim, target, motivation, legality, accepting responsibility, the factors of a terrorist act, and audience (Abdullah Khani, 2007: 23-24) But among these factors and components that we reckon for the concept of terrorism, the three factors have got the greatest importance rather than other ones that these three are the victim, the terrorists and the audience (Mohseni, 2011: 205) 

3-2. Different Kinds of Terrorism: Monitoring the various kinds of terrorism has a decisive role in the general understanding of its meaning. One of the most important divisions of terrorism that has been done till now is the division of this concept in terms of geopolitical mode. In terms of geopolitics, we can study terrorism in four different levels: local terrorism, national terrorism, regional terrorism, and global terrorism (Afzal and others, 2011: 112-114). The government's strategy against nowadays’ terrorism must be dealt with places attacked by terrorism which means that the terrorist insurgency can occur at any point, all states should be united with the insurgency and confronted with terrorist destruction, because such a thing is more easily for the governments than the struggling with terrorists and also it is more safer from confronting with the terrorists inside the country's borders (Tuker, 1997: 14-31). 

3-3. Researchers’ Definition of Terrorism: 

Researchers have offered various definitions associated with the concept of terrorism. "Reich" in its definition of the concept of terrorism, stated that terrorism is more likely to occur in democratic societies, and terrorism is fundamentally the spread and promote of a philosophy that opposed to democracy, he said, terrorism is a form of fighting based on ideology that its final goal is to seize political power and business and to get governmental rule (Reich, 2001: 123), in the other definition, they defined terrorism as the use of violence and bloodshed and conducting various threats or planned attacks that have many similarities with guerilla warfare which have no special order ( Whittaker, 2006: 50). When we look at history of terrorism we find that in past, states considered terrorism, as an internal threat, but in the modern age, the issue of terrorism is in the form of international concern (Luck, 2003: 1-2). Through these statements, we understand that nowadays’ terrorism is drastically changing in terms of various ways of conducting terrorist acts and also based on the goals of conducting terrorism acts (Tayeb, 2003: 118). As long as there is not a clear definition of terrorism, is possible that a militant terrorist act of people in some countries can be considered as justice and nationalist movement (Braden and Shelley, 2004: 223). There are definitions of terrorism that focused their gaze at the regional level of terrorism that these people had brought the previously planned use of violence by a state against another country with the aim of creating the fear and panic and violence atmosphere to achieve the political objectives of terror in the definition of terrorism (Rosie, 1987: 7). 



"Habermas", believes that terrorism is necessary consequences and unfortunate implications of modernism, he says in all terrorist acts that have been occurred, three factors are visible: the use of violence, political objectives and intention to create fear among the people (Habermas 2001: 79). 


3-4. UN Definition of Terrorism: 

The issue of terrorism in ancestors of international organizations, was used firstly in 1937 in first article of the convention on the prevention and punishment of terrorism adopted by the "UN", in this convention, terrorism considered as criminal act that takes place against a government and was defined to establish panic and fear among the public, particular individuals or obvious groups of people. After the founding of the United Nations, terrorism issue took into consideration independently for the first time in September 1972 after the hostage-taking of Israeli athletes during the Munich Summer Olympics (Peterson, 2004: 179). In this statement noted that the United Nations is obliged to take action to prevent from terrorism acts and other forms of violence endangering human life and the rights that have been taken away from them for having life or endangering fundamental freedoms of people with risks and also have the duty to study the main factors of this phenomenon and other acts of violence which are rooted from the phenomena such as poverty, frustration, injustice and despair and leads a group of people or even some of their fellows to sacrifice themselves to witness major changes in the world (Bozorgmehri, 2008: 22). The common thread in all of these reports was that the national liberation movements of the issue of terrorism was isolated and was not brought under the heading of terrorism (Peterson, 2004: 197). All United Nations conventions considered terrorism as a serious worldwide threat towards international peace and security (Bozorgmehri, 2008: 21). The problem of terrorism is not defined in the European Convention on fighting terrorism and instead that matter, they refer to instances outside the phenomenon of terrorism: hijackings and taking any action that would jeopardize the security of air travelers, threaten or otherwise violate the life or liberty of individuals which is internationally supported, such as diplomats, hostage situation, the assassination attempt, manifest application and parcel bombs, and finally trying to do one of the above matters and participation in the commission of such acts (Piruzan, 2009) . 


3-5. Analysis of the Proposed Definitions and the Search for Basic Terrorism Components: 

By studying the votes of political science thinkers and searching the definition of the notion of terrorism which is provided in international conventions, and finally by gathering these definitions and discourses we can offer new and appropriate answers to the research question which is questioning that what are the basic elements of terrorism. In fact, by reading these definitions we can define three basic components in relation to terrorism (Afzal and others, 2011: 109) which are as a result of definitions provided by political scientists and international relations or international conventions. These three components must be included in the definition of terrorism and without them understanding the notion of terrorism would not be possible which includes the lack of legitimate defense, security debugging, and strategy based on violence. In fact if we want to offer a conceptual model of the notion of terrorism, we have to offer a  combination of these three components in recognition of the concept of terrorism. This following model clearly explains the matters:    

SECURITY DEBUGGING  plus STRATEGY BASED ON VIOLENCE plus LACK OF LEGITIMATE DEFENCE   gives impetus  to  TERRORISM



The word "violence  " is derived from the Latin root "Vis  ", in fact having strength and force in the commission of acts of violence is very important and in other words having violence and force would play a vital role in conducting violence, to the point that sometimes some social scientists defined violence in terms of an ultimate force and put an emphasis on it (styrene, 2003: 16). In all definitions of terrorism, the acts of violence are known as one of the most original and the most obvious components of terrorist activity as much as if there is not an act of violence, accordingly it is impossible to refer to that single incident as a terrorism act. In the field of "lack of legitimate defense" it is necessary to note that there is fundamental difference between legitimate and non-legitimate defense. In the Charter of the United Nations, the legitimate defense is recognized as one of the inherent right for each country, in fact, if a foreigner wanted to enter a country's borders with aggression and occupation, for the all members of that country, dealing with this person, arresting and deporting him considered as an undeniable right and conclusive matter, and no one  won’t held them for the legitimate defense of their land, because defensing them has legal and legitimate aspects and it is applied in a legitimate way and the issue of legitimate-defense is rooted in natural right of "self-defense" (Bowett, 1958: 48). Based on this provision of the charter of the United Nations was noted above that, it is not right to call terrorist group the "Hezbollah" in Lebanon and the resistance groups in occupied Palestinian in accordance with international standards, because they defense their land against the aliens who fight in aggression and occupation against them to get their land. But terrorists have no such rights because basically they are not rejected form somewhere that intend to recapture it and secondly, that the use of violence by these groups completely lacks legitimacy, because without having any frame, they keep killing accidental victims in the intended community, so the absence of legitimate-defense is one of the terrorism criteria that must be considered. But security-debugging is a very important in terrorism, because terrorists’ secondary purpose of committing terrorist acts aimed at destroying social security, security-debugging is fundamental factor that in all forms of terrorism can be seen and it is necessary to put it in the broader definition of terrorism. Many definitions have been released for security in some definitions, for example, they called it through the opposite concept of security which means insecurity and sometimes security have been defined as the concept of relative freedom from the absence of physical and mental modes that may cause serious damage (Both, 1991 319). But if we pay attention to this issue, we learn more in the sense that this idea with the combination of three factors of land, power and politics is understandable, due to this fact, some experts believe that it is better to consider security as a geopolitical concept (Hafeznia, 2005: 327) .

 4. Conclusion: In today's world, terrorism and how to fight against it are among the most important concerns of all members of the international community, the terrorism which is not placed in the same national level anymore and it is considered as an international phenomenon. Although many efforts had been done to counter terrorism at the national, regional and international level, but none of these efforts had not been successful. One of the main causes of this failure, is the absence of comprehensive and inclusive definition of terrorism, it should be noted that great efforts have been made in line with the definition of the phenomenon, but these studies have been conducted separately and independently and that is why not it could not put all those factors under this concept to accommodate components. This article by utilizing the theoretical framework of analysis, after reviewing and studying the definitions by scholars and international conventions in relation to the notion of terrorism has come to the conclusion that it is necessary for broader definition of the notion of terrorism to pay attention toward three essential elements in the definition of this concept, first factor is conducted to recognize that the most outstanding characteristic of terrorism is the violent strategy of this phenomenon, secondly that generally terrorism is different from what is called legitimate-defense, in other words, the lack of the legitimate defense is second feature of terrorism since the terrorist events lack of any framework of legitimate actions, and thirdly to know that in the definition of terrorism, we should pay attention to the category of security-debugging since in all terrorist events, destroying the security is considered as the terrorist group aims.



References 

Styrene, Fran├žois (2003), violence and power, translator: Behnam Jafari, Tehran: Foreign Ministry publications.

 Afzali, Rasul, Ansarinejad, Salman, Pouyan, Davood (2011), "Geo-terrorism: geographical approach to terrorism", Journal of Spatial Planning, Volume 15, Number One.

 Braden, Kathleen; Shelley, Fred (2005), inclusive geopolitical, translated by Alireza Farshchi and Hamid Reza manuals, Tehran: high-war period. 

Bozorgmehri, Majid (2008), "UN definition of terrorism: a review of the approval document and the views of experts", Journal of Political Studies, Volume One, Number Two.

 Piruzan, Alireza (2010), "The European Union and the phenomenon of terrorism", a monthly political-economic studies, Year 24, No. 265-266.

 Hafeznia, Mohammad Reza (2006), the principles and concepts of geopolitics, Tehran: Papli Institute of Technology and Amirkabir publications. 


Reich, Walter (2003), the roots of terrorism, translated by Seyyed Hossein Mohammadi Najm, first edition, Tehran: high-war period. 


Rezaeian, Mohsen (2006), "descriptive glossary of meta-analysis", Journal of Medicine, Volume Six, number two. 


Reiters, George (1995), contemporary sociological theory, translation by Mohsen Salaeie, second edition, Tehran: Academic Press.

 Siahpoush, Amir (1998), "Meta-analysis of studies of capital in Iran" culture strategy, the first year, the third number. 


Seyed-Emami, Kavus (2008), Research in Political Science, Tehran: Institute for Social Cultural Studies, Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, and the University of Imam Sadeq (AS). 


Tayyab Alireza (2003), terrorism, history, sociology, rhetoric, law, Tehran: Ney Publishing.

 Abdullah Khani, Ali (2008), Terrorism Studies, Tehran: Abrar Moaser.

 Golshani, Ali Reza; Babanasab, Heydar; Mahmoodabadi Bagheri, Ali (2011), "Nuclear Terrorism: the concept within the framework of the United Nations", Journal of Political and international Studies, Number Nine.


 Mosaffa, Nasrin; Taherkhani, Setare (2012), "the General Assembly of the United Nations and counter-terrorism", Journal of Politics, Volume 41, Number Three.

 Habermas, Jurgen (2001), "Terrorism is a modern phenomenon" reflection journal, Issue 22.

 Both, K (1991), "Security and Emancipation", Review of International Security, Vol.17.

 Bowett, WD (1958), In International Law, Manchester: University of Manchester. 

Dona, MS (1988), International Terrorism: An Introduction to The Concepts and Actors, Maryland: Lexington books. 

Glass, GV (1976), Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research, United States: Educational Researcher. 

Higgins, R (1997), The International Law of Terrorism, London: Rutledge. 

Hunter, J & Schmidt, F (2004), Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Finding, California: Sage Publishing.

 Muller, E. (2003), Trends in Terrorism, Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer.


Peterson, MJ (2004), "Using the Global Assembly" in Boulden, Jane & G.Weiss, Thomas, Terrorism and the UN, United States: Indiana University press. 

Rosie, G. (1987), The Dictionary of International Terrorism, New York: Paragon House. 

Tucker, D. (1997), Skirmished at The Edge of Empire: The United State and International Terrorism, California: Praeger.

 Verma, SK (2000), "Terrorism and International Law", in BPSingh, s., Global Terrorism, Socio-Politico and Legal Dimensions, New Dehli: Deep and Deep Publication.

 Whittaker, JD (2006), Terrorism: Understanding The Global Threat, London: Longman







Wednesday, March 29, 2017

TERRORISM J & K Hizb-ul-Mujahideen : MAPPING MILITANT ORGANIZATIONS

SOURCE:
http://web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/223?highlight=Tehrik-i-Taliban



                   

      Hizb-ul-Mujahideen




MAP HIZB-UL-MUJAHIDEEN

Click on the maps below to visualize this group's interactions with other militant organizations

On Pakistan -- All map


CakePHP

On Pakistan map


CakePHP

CONTENTS

SEARCH










































These terms from your search are highlighted: Tehrik-i-TalibanClear highlighting.

Hizb-ul-Mujahideen

Formed1989
DisbandedGroup is active.
First AttackJanuary 16, 1990: HM militants attacked Jammu and Kashmir Police Constable and hanged him from a tree in Srinagar, Kashmir, India. (1 killed, 0 wounded) [1].
Last AttackNovember 10, 2010: HM along with Jameeat-ul-Mujahideen militants attacked and killed two Indian Central Reserve Police Force in Pattan, Kashmir, India. (2 killed, 0 wounded) [2].
UpdatedAugust 8, 2012

NARRATIVE SUMMARY

Hizb-ul-Mujahideen(HM) was formed in Pakistan controlled Kashmir in 1989. Pakistan's famous religious political party Jamaat-e-Islami reportedely formed HM under the influence of Pakistan's intelligence agency ISI to counter the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Fron(JKLF), an organization which had advocated complete independence of the State.
HM's organization was formalized in June 1990, when its 'Constitution' was approved and Syed Salahuddin was made the patron of the organization. But soon after, there were differences between the Jamaat-e-Islami and non Jamaat-e-Islami elements of HM which led to a split; one of the factions was led Syed Salahuddin, while the other one was led by Hilal Ahmed Mir, who was killed in 1993. 

LEADERSHIP

  1. Muhammad “Master” Ahsan Dar (1989 to 1990): Master Ahsan Dar was the founder of Hizbul Mujahideen.[3]
  2. Mohammed "Syed Salahhudin" Yusef Shah (1990 to Unknown): When the HM "Constitution" was agreed upon in 1990 it named Syed Salahhudin as Patron of HM.[4]

IDEOLOGY & GOALS

  • Jihadist
HM’s primary goal is to unite both Azad Kashmir (Pakistan controlled) and Jammu and Kashmir (Indian controlled) into one entity that would then join with the Pakistani state[5].  Many claim that HM was started by the ISI for the sole purpose to act as a counter to the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, a militant organization that also fights against the Indian government, but strives to create an independent Kashmiri state[6].

SIZE ESTIMATES

According to the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP), HM cadres are in the range of 1500 in total. 
  • 1990: 10,000 (Jamestown Foundation)[7]
  • 2011: 1500 (SATP)[8]

RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER GROUPS

HM’s relationship with Jamaat-i-Islami is unclear, with some sources claiming HM to be the armed wing of the group, while others maintain that they are only closely linked.[9]  Whatever the case may be, the two groups are connected and it appears that they do act independently on occasion, which is of great embarrassment to JI.[10]  Adding to the difficulty of discerning the full extent of the relationship is the fact that both groups are intent on denying that any such relationship exists, though for observers some sort of link is obvious.

It has also been reported that HM trained alongside the Afghan Hizb-i-Islami, run by Gulbaddin Hekmatyar throughout the mid-1990’s until the Taliban gained power.[11]

HM is further part of an umbrella organization known as the United Jehad Council (UJC), which is headed by HM chief Syed Salahuddin.
·      Al-Badr split from HuM in 1998 after helping to form HuM in 1989.[12] 
·      As of ’05 HM was part of the United Jihad Council, a collection of groups fighting in Kashmir.[13]
·      Some claim that HM has been infiltrated by AQ.
·      HM has reportedly carried out attacks in coordination with LeT.




REFERENCES

  1. ^ Global Terrorism Database Incident Summary, Incident # 199001160014. Accessed on May 3, 2012 at http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=199001160014
  2. ^ Shabir Ibn Yusuf, “Militants kill two CRPF troopers at Pattant; high alert sounded in north Kashmir,” The Kashmir Times, November 11, 2010. Accessed from LexisNexis Academic on May 3, 2012.
  3. ^ “Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM)” GlobalSecurity.org. Accessed on May 2, 2012 at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hum.htm .
  4. ^ “Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM)” GlobalSecurity.org. Accessed on May 2, 2012 at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hum.htm .
  5. ^ http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2002/html/19992.htm
  6. ^ “Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM)” GlobalSecurity.org. Accessed on May 2, 2012 at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hum.htm
  7. ^ Arif Jamal, “A Guide to Militant Groups in Kashmir,” Terrorism Monitor 8 (2010). Accessed online on May 3, 2012 at http://www.jamestown.org/programs/gta/single/?tx_ttnews[tt_news]=36005&cHash=1c4ef28fa3 .
  8. ^ http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/terrorist_outfits/hizbul_mujahideen.htm
  9. ^ Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Pakistan: The relationship between the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM); recent human rights violations committed by HM; whether HM practices forced recruitment in Azad Kashmir, 24 July 2003, PAK41668.E, available at:http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3f7d4df20.html . Accessed July 9, 2012.
  10. ^ Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Pakistan: The relationship between the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM); recent human rights violations committed by HM; whether HM practices forced recruitment in Azad Kashmir, 24 July 2003, PAK41668.E, available at:http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3f7d4df20.html . Accessed July 9, 2012.
  11. ^ http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2002/html/19992.htm
  12. ^ “Al-Badr,” GlobalSecurity.org. Accessed on May 2, 2012 athttp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/Al-Badr.htm .
  13. ^ Bill Roggio, “Hizbul Mujahideen chief: Pakistan allows terror group to run ‘hundreds of training camps,” The Long War Journal, May 27, 2011. Accessed on may 2, 2012 athttp://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/05/hizbul_mujahideen_ch.php

***********************************************
 CLICK / GOOGLE  BELOW TO OPEN THE MAPPING OF MILITANT ORGANIZATIONS

Mapping Militant Organizations

mappingmilitants.stanford.edu/

Jun 6, 2012 - Mapping Militant Organizations · Stanford ... The Mapping Militants Project identifies patterns in the evolution of ... For more information or to contact us, see our About page. ... relationships between the Islamic State and global militant groups. ... The map of Pakistani militants includes those organizations ...

Pakistan -- All | Mapping Militant Organizations

web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/maps/view/pak

View Mode. Choose a category to bring to the front of the map. Groups ... Tehreek-e-Jafaria Pakistan. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan.
























MAP HIZB-UL-MUJAHIDEEN

Click on the maps below to visualize this group's interactions with other militant organizations

On Pakistan -- All map

CakePHP

On Pakistan map

CakePHP

CONTENTS

SEARCH