As ISIS, a group thought to consist of only a few thousand people led by a shadowy

figurehead, defeats forces many times its size to capture a large part of Iraq, RT looks into
what is ISIS, and how has it achieved its terrifying triumphs.

So, what is ISIS? And is it even ISIS, or is it ISIL?

The worlds most committed and fanatical radical organization has only
recently gone by its current name, after the unrecognized Islamic State in
Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) was proclaimed in April last year. Al-Sham has been
most commonly translated from Arabic as the Levant, hence ISIL. It was
previously known as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic
State of Iraq.
The frequent name changes are not cosmetic but the direct result of the transforming
circumstances which have allowed ISIS to rapidly flourish. Initially focused on achieving
dominance in Iraq, it was kept under control in the relatively calm period between the
initial sectarian strife that broke out following the US-led invasion in 2003, and the
outbreak of hostilities following the American military withdrawal in 2011.
Since then, it has become a major player, receiving another critical boost when the civil
war in Syria turned into a sectarian conflict, bringing in millions of dollars in FUNDING
and thousands of fresh recruits from around the world.
Currently, ISIS strongholds extend from Raqqa in northern Syria all the way down to the
outskirts of Baghdad a stretch of more than 500 km, though the group doesnt have
comprehensive oversight of the roads and settlements between them.
The speed with which the Islamist group is closing in on Baghdad can be compared if not
exceeds the pace of the 2003 invasion. Unlike the US and allies, though, ISIS does not have
a capability of launching destructive air strikes, however in its latest offensives the group has
reportedly managed to significantly boost its military power capturing dozens of US-made
armored vehicles and other heavy weaponry from the retreating Iraqi military.

ISIS is part of and similar to Al-Qaeda, right?

No, it is significantly worse. Al-Qaeda has been the touchstone for the Western
understanding of terrorism ever since 9/11, but ISIS differs from it philosophically,
organizationally, and even officially, as it has declared itself an entirely separate body. If
anything the two organizations though both espousing Sunni Islam are currently
more rivals than allies.

While Al-Qaeda, in its most well-known forms, is a terrorist organization, with sleeper
cells, training camps and terrorist attacks, ISIS as of now is more a militia and a rogue
territory with its own infrastructure, more similar to Boko Haram and other localized
fiefdoms that have spawned in lawless or failed African states.
Al-Qaeda has become more conscious of avoiding acts of indiscriminate or counterproductive brutality since the demise of Osama Bin Laden, but ISIS revels in it, espousing
a religious philosophy so uncompromising it appears almost nihilistic.
The areas it has secured have been kept under control by an endless stream of
floggings, mutilations, beheadings and crucifixions. The targets can be well-chosen or
arbitrary, but no one is spared Shia opponents, Sunni rivals, captured soldiers or
immoral women.
ISIS 'execute' 1,700 Iraqi soldiers, post gruesome pictures (GRAPHIC)
Unsurprisingly, although the first leader of ISIS, the late Abu Musab, did swear fealty to
Al-Qaeda back in the early 2000s, the two organizations have fallen out.
The breaking point was the internecine fighting between ISIS and Al-Qaeda-backed
Nusra in Syria. Pleas by Al-Qaeda to divide spheres of influence were flatly rejected by
Abu Bakr, the ISIS leader, who spent four years in US captivity, before being released in
2009. After increasingly testy communication between the sides, Al-Qaeda disowned
ISIS earlier this year, in return provoking ISIS to call the organization traitors and a
joke.
With the rise of ISIS, many say that it is now Al-Qaedas Ayman al-Zawahiri who should
be pledging allegiance to the 43-year old Abu Bakr.
How is ISIS funded?
ISIS operates as a half-mafia-style commercial enterprise, half pious international
charity, looking for wealthy donors in the Gulf States and throughout the globe.
It is certainly not lacking in opportunism in commercializing its military activities. In 2012
ISIS or ISI as it was then took over oil fields in Syria, reaping profits from selling the
oil at discounted prices to anyone willing to pay. It has TRADED in the raw materials in
areas it has captured, and even dabbled in selling antiques from monuments under its
control.
Sometimes, it doesnt have to be so elaborate. Its biggest single success was plundering
a governmentvault in Mosul captured last week that reportedly contained more than

$425 million. With the loot taken during its recent advances, ISILs estimated war
chest now stands at over $2 billion.
But just as important is ISIS income from its unknown yet easily guessed backers
from the Arabian Peninsula. As the worlds foremost proponents of Saudi-style
Wahhabism, Iraqi officials claim ISIS gets a steady stream of FUNDS and support from
politically engaged operators, working from the safety of Saudi Arabias and Qatars USprotected borders.
How did ISIS manage to capture so much territory?
On June 10, less than a thousand of ISIS militants on soft-shelled pickup
trucks occupied the northern Iraqi city of Mosul with a population of 1.8 million people.
The city was supposed to be under the protection of the US-trained Iraqi military force
of about 30,000 stationed in the region. It was equipped with sophisticated US-made
military equipment part of the weaponry and hardware supplied by Washington to
Baghdad, which has been estimated to cost billions of US dollars.
However, Mosul fell with no apparent resistance as scores of Iraqi troops fled dropping
their uniforms and leaving the precious hardware behind. The militants celebrated
getting US-made Humvees and tanks some of which have since headed to Syria to be
used against the government forces and even allegedly captured at least one Black
Hawk helicopter.
General lack of morale and cohesion in the Iraqi army has been named the cause for the
humiliating loss of this and other cities including the strategic city of Tal Afar close to
the Syrian border and Saddam Husseins birthplace Tikrit.
Aiding this parade of ISIS victories has been the allegedly sweeping support of the local
Sunni population, who previously supported the Sunni regime of Saddam Hussein
overthrown by the US-led forces.
Sectarian factors, but also the way the post-invasion Iraqi PM Nouri al-Malikis
government has handled religious and social conflicts in the country, certainly
contributed to Iraqi army being unpopular in ISIS-occupied regions. Apparently,
replacing some Sunni commanders with Shiites locally did not help, and the way ISIS
won the support of local tribes via negotiations has shown how little the new central
government is valued in northern rural Iraq.
However, one also has to realize that ISIS is no bunch of poorly-trained extremist thugs.
With years of experience on the Syrian battlefield, the group boasts training camps
producing well-prepared fighters, and it has been joined by scores of professionally
trained overseas mercenaries.

ISIS spokesman Shaykh Muhammad Adnani has explained the groups current success
by the will of God, saying that the [Islamic] State has not prevailed by numbers, nor
equipment, nor weapons, nor wealth, rather it prevails by Allahs bounty alone, through its
creed in a recent statement posted on YouTube.
It remains unclear for how long the brutal and repressive policies of ISIS will guarantee
their support on the ground in Iraq, while they are trying to win the locals hearts with
religious propaganda and dreams of a huge cross-border caliphate.
It is ironic that the hardcore Islamist group will be using the equipment provided by
Washington to Baghdad in the Western-backed insurgency in Syria, but at the same time
may be confronted by the West in Iraq, where the militants are now contesting the countrys
largest oilfield.
Having spent billions on Iraq and war on terror for securing its own interests in the region,
the US and its allies have been unwilling to admit the devastating 2003 invasion was a
mistake with disastrous consequences for the whole Middle Eastern region. While 2013 was
marked by the bloodiest sectarian violence in Iraq in five years, it mostly went unnoticed
with the international community. Recently, the former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair chose
to blamebad systems of politics mixed with abuse of religion as the root of all the problems
in Middle East.