The Islamic State’s Relationship With Al-Qaeda

By Kyle Orton (@KyleWOrton) on August 30, 2016


Since al-Qaeda broke ties with the Islamic State (IS), then the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), in 2014 there has been an ongoing war of narratives about what happened. Below is an attempt to work through this murky situation.

Early Days

Ahmad al-Khalayleh (Abu Musab al-Zarqawi) had set up the organization now IS in Taliban Afghanistan in 2000, using al-Qaeda seed money. The organization was then-called Jund al-Sham. Al-Khalayleh departed to Iran once the Taliban was ousted, and moved into an enclave of northern Iraq held by Ansar al-Islam—really a precursor jihadi statelet to IS’s on five-hundred-square-kilometres of territory, ruling over 200,000 people. Arriving in April 2002, al-Khalayleh orchestrated the assassination attempt against Barham Salih, the Prime Minister of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Ahmad al-Khalayleh, long before he was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

Ahmad al-Khalayleh, long before he was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

By May 2002, al-Khalayleh was in Baghdad, with “a dozen” senior al-Qaeda linked operatives, including his Egyptian successor Yusuf al-Dardiri (Abu Hamza al-Muhajir); another Egyptian Thirwat Shehata who spent time with al-Qaeda in post-Qaddafi Libya until he was reportedly arrested in 2014; and his brother-in-law and fellow Jordanian, Iyad al-Tubaysi (Abu Julaybib). They were joined at some later point in 2002 by Samir Hijazi (Abu Hammam al-Suri, Farouq al-Suri). Interestingly, al-Tubaysi was also among the seven-man team that IS dispatched into Syria to create Jabhat al-Nusra in 2011, and al-Tubaysi and Hijazi are among those who have objected to al-Nusra’s rebranding as Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (JFS) and ostensibly split from the organization.

Saddam Hussein’s government gave various kinds of support to Ansar al-Islam—they kept his chief foe, the Kurds, off-balance after all—and Saddam was certainly (p. 338) “at a minimum” aware of al-Khalayleh’s presence in his capital because Amman gave “detailed information about al-Zarqawi’s possible location” as early as June 2002. Instead of rounding him up, al-Khalayleh was allowed “relatively free” movement within central Iraq. Contrary to some recent comments from those contending to lead the free world, Saddam’s opposition to terrorism was not one of his notable characteristics.

Al-Khalayleh departed Iraq on a recruitment drive in the Levant around July 2002, to Ayn al-Hilweh in southern Lebanon (where he made associations with Asbat al-Ansar, which was connected to Assad’s mukhabarat, as well as to al-Qaeda) and then Syria, where he organized the “ratlines” that—overseen by Assad’s intelligence—brought the foreign mujahideen into Iraq during the invasion and long after. While in Syria, in collaboration (p. 17) with Assadist cut-outs, al-Khalayleh organized the assassination of USAID’s Laurence Foley on 28 October 2002.

Al-Khalayleh moved back to Baghdad and departed for the final time while Saddam was in power in November 2002 (p. 91), perhaps because a second request had now been forwarded to Saddam’s regime to apprehend al-Khalayleh, again from the Jordanians, this time at the behest of the Americans in relation to the Foley murder. Al-Khalayleh returned to Ansar-held territory in northern Iraq and fled with several hundred men into Iran on 29 March 2003 during the invasion.

After the Iraq Invasion

Ansar and associated forces were smuggled back into Iraq with the complicity of the Iranian government and the fallen Saddam regime around early June 2003. Once back in Iraq, Ansar would reassert its autonomy—until joining IS in August 2014. Al-Khalayleh’s network coalesced into Jamaat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (JTJ). Able to call on a large underground Salafist network, with deep links to the Saddam regime’s security apparatus, which had been both allowed to develop as Saddam’s regime Islamized and which the regime lost the capacity to restrain, JTJ’s media apparatus lagged its military capacity. It is therefore unclear when exactly JTJ became a declared entity.

The trio of “spectacular” bombings that started it all in August 2003—against the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad, the United Nations at the Canal Hotel, specifically intended to murder  Sergio de Mello, who had “extracted a part of the Islamic land” (East Timor), and against a Shi’a mosque in Najaf, killing Ayatollah Mohammad Baqir al-Hakim—were only claimed by al-Khalayleh on 6 April 2004. The rebranded Ansar al-Islam (Ansar al-Sunna) was announced on 20 September 2003; JTJ was probably formed within a month of that date.

Abd al-Rahman al-Qaduli (Abu Ali al-Anbari)

Abd al-Rahman al-Qaduli (Abu Ali al-Anbari)

Al-Khalayleh gave his bayat (pledge of allegiance) to al-Qaeda in October 2004, and it was accepted by Usama bin Ladin in December 2004. JTJ became al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia (AQM).

AQM was foreign-led initially but a process of “Iraqization” was well underway by the time al-Khalayleh was killed in June 2006, with al-Majlis Shura al-Mujahideen (MSM) formed in January 2006 from AQM and five other groups, ostensibly led by one Abdullah bin Rashid al-Baghdadi, who according to IS was Abd al-Rahman al-Qaduli (Abu Ali al-Anbari). With al-Khalayleh dead and al-Qaduli in prison, al-Dardiri became emir of both AQM and the ostensible-coalition of MSM.

Hamid al-Zawi (Abu Umar al-Baghdadi)

Hamid al-Zawi (Abu Umar al-Baghdadi)

On 12 October 2006, three additional Islamist groups and six Anbari tribes (of thirty-one) took hilf al-mutayyabin (oath of the scented ones), merging with MSM. Three days later the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) was declared under the leadership of Hamid al-Zawi (Abu Umar al-Baghdadi), a stolid bureaucrat and consensus figure within AQM, a stark contrast to the charismatic al-Khalayleh. On 10 November 2006, in a speech entitled “Judgment is for None but Allah,” al-Dardiri switched his bayat to al-Zawi and said the 12,000 soldiers of MSM were now at the service of ISI, technically dissolving al-Qaeda on Iraqi territory. And here things get murky.

The Dispute

In the telling of IS(IS), the declaration of ISI meant they were now a state, unaffiliated to al-Qaeda, and they point to statements by Ayman al-Zawahiri, including one in December 2007 where al-Zawahiri said: “There is nothing in Iraq by the name of al-Qaeda”. Al-Qaeda, however, says that ISI was merely a group with the name “Islamic State” and both al-Zawi and his successor, Ibrahim al-Badri (Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi), remained al-Qalim (location leader) in Iraq for al-Qaeda, until al-Qaeda broke connections with IS on 3 February 2014. There seems to have been a degree of willed ambiguity on all sides.

While it is true that IS regularly defied al-Qaeda by, for example, attacking Shi’a civilians—the letters from al-Zawahiri and Jamal al-Misrati (Atiya) in 2005 criticizing al-Khalayleh are famous—which is held by IS to show they were independent, it is also true, as Taha Falaha (Abu Muhammad al-Adnani) once put it, that ISI kept “abiding by the advices and directives of” al-Qaeda, specifically on not attacking Iran, where al-Qaeda maintains its key resource pipeline to this day. “Let history record that Iran owes al-Qaeda invaluably,” Falaha had tauntingly added.

Falaha’s statement came in response to a May 2014 speech by al-Zawahiri, where he claimed that al-Dardiri had sent a letter to al-Qaeda “central” (AQC) after ISI was established giving his bayat, and that of al-Zawi, to Bin Ladin. This was kept secret due to “political considerations”. After al-Badri became leader an ISI Shura Council member wrote to AQC and al-Zawahiri quotes the letter saying that ISI had tried to wait for AQC’s instructions on appointing the next leader but “for several reasons” had been unable to. Al-Badri’s appointment, however, should only be considered “temporary” and “if anyone is sent from you” ISI will “ensure” that he takes over the leadership, al-Zawahiri quotes the ISI letter saying.

After Bin Ladin was killed, al-Badri made a public statement that al-Zawahiri had “faithful men in the Islamic State of Iraq”. In August 2011, Falaha’s inaugural speech as ISI spokesman publicly welcomed al-Zawahiri’s appointment as al-Qaeda leader, following the pattern of a series of statements from al-Qaeda’s other branches in Yemen, North Africa, and Somalia. Al-Zawahiri quotes a letter from ISI to Atiya in May 2011, which asked, “Do we renew the baya in public or in secret as it was done before?”

Al-Zawahiri’s speech contained references to internal al-Qaeda memos, some of them made public after the Abbottabad raid. Perhaps this was skilful disinformation, or perhaps not.

In private letters in 2007 and 2008, al-Zawi and al-Dardiri addressed Bin Ladin as if he was their leader. Al-Badri was unknown to Bin Ladin when he became emir in 2010 and communication between ISI and al-Qaeda had been virtually absent for many years by 2011. It is unclear if al-Badri communicated at all with al-Qaeda until al-Qaduli came out of prison in 2012, despite al-Zawahiri’s claim to the contrary. Al-Zawahiri (purportedly) quotes letters from Falaha (April/May 2013) and al-Badri (July/August 2013) during the ISI-al-Nusra schism, which referred to al-Zawahiri as “our leader”. True or not, al-Badri did accept—until the decision went against him—that al-Qaeda was the legitimate authority to rule on the dispute between ISI and al-Nusra.

Additionally suggestive of ISI being a branch of al-Qaeda: the Iran-based al-Qaeda network, led by Muhsin al-Fadhli of later “Khorasan Group” fame, was also providing ISI with resources at least as late as 2009.

It’s open to doubt what practical impact ISI’s bayat to al-Qaeda had. It was evidently politically toxic within Iraq to such an extent that they denied it; Falaha was not lying when he said that ISI had conducted itself without reference to, and often in defiance of, AQC; and in terms of resources ISI was self-sufficient. Al-Zawahiri’s July 2005 letter included a request that ISI send AQC a “payment” of $100,000.

ISI’s subordination to AQC might have been largely an abstraction, but it does seem that this was the way all sides understood the relationship.


Ahmad al-Khalayleh in his first public appearance as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, April 2006

Al-Qaeda’s attempt to avoid blame for ISI’s mistakes lead it to rather shade the truth on ISI’s behaviour. Al-Qaeda claims that ISI was its Iraqi branch until 2014 but its state-building pretentions violated the group’s methods. Al-Zawahiri has said publicly that ISI’s announcement was done without al-Qaeda’s knowledge. Al-Qaeda was “not informed about [the state’s] creation,” al-Zawahiri said in his note expelling then-ISIS, and he repeated this in May 2014. Adam Gadahn, in a letter advising Bin Ladin to publicly break with ISI in January 2011 and lambasting their “fictitious state,” wrote that ISI was formed “without an order from al-Qaeda and without consultation”. But this isn’t quite true. What al-Qaeda was uninformed of was the timing of the state declaration.

In Iran, in late 2001, al-Khalayleh was with Sayf al-Adel, one of al-Qaeda’s chief military and strategic leaders to this day (he’s now in Syria) and they formulated (p. 15-16) a plan to create an embryo caliphate in Iraq. Al-Adel reiterated this plan to al-Khalayleh in a letter in 2005, and the above-mentioned letters form al-Zawahiri and Atiya that year, while partially rebuking al-Khalayleh, were on-board with a state-building project. In the April 2006 video where al-Khalayleh showed his face, he said MSM was “the starting point for establishing an Islamic state,” and in unbroadcast footage said he wanted to do this within three months. (He was killed within two.)


Thus, ISI really had attempted to build a proto-caliphate in Iraq—it just had al-Qaeda’s blessing for the idea, even if not for all of the methods used to try to get there, and the coordination of its announcement had been a big ragged.

The argument, therefore, of Hassan Hassan and Bassam Barabandi, that al-Qaeda’s move with JFS—effectively an information operation, albeit with real-world effects—is a replay of what happened with MSM is convincing. Al-Zawahiri wrote to al-Khalayleh after MSM was declared:

My belief has always been that Islam’s victory at this day and age will be reached through the establishment of a Muslim country on the methodology of the Prophet in the heartlands of the Islamic world. … [W]e expect your state to be formed … and … with God’s help, [it] shall be a broad step in the direct path toward [a globe-spanning caliphate].

Later, as al-Qaeda changed its own view, it would deny that “state-now” was ever any part of its methodology, and IS(IS) would claim that the public relations was for real.

6 thoughts on “The Islamic State’s Relationship With Al-Qaeda

  1. Pingback: Obituary: Taha Falaha (Abu Muhammad al-Adnani) | The Syrian Intifada

  2. Pingback: Fifteen Years After 9/11 | The Syrian Intifada

  3. Pingback: The Obama Admin Has Officially Forgiven Iran - The DENISE SIMON EXPERIENCE Blog

  4. Pingback: The Obama Admin Has Officially Forgiven Iran - #RedNationRising

  5. Pingback: The Riddle of Haji Bakr | The Syrian Intifada

  6. Pingback: The Islamic State and Chemical Weapons | The Syrian Intifada

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s