June 9, 2014 | Now Lebanon
Jihadist Blowback?
On May 24, a deadly shooting occurred at the Brussels Jewish Museum that left four dead: an Israeli couple, a French volunteer worker, and a Belgian museum employee. A few days later, as the suspect, French national Mehdi Nemmouche, was apprehended, details emerged that he had in his possession a white sheet scrawled with the name of the jihadist group the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and that he had spent time in Syria in 2013.
Analysis in the media immediately connected the dots, and characterized the attack as evidence of jihadist blowback from Syria. Several European officials likewise endorsed this reading. “The new elements in this investigation draw attention once more to the problem of the 'returnees' [from Syria],” Belgian federal prosecutor Frederic Van Leeuw said. However, this analysis, which draws a direct line from Syria to the Brussels attack, requires reevaluation: upon closer examination, the shooting at the Jewish Museum is less about Syria than it is about Europe.
Yet, as evident from his speech at West Point last week, President Obama's Middle East policy sees the world through a counter-terrorism lens. The White House situates Syria squarely within this framework, and its overriding focus is on the capacity of jihadists coming out from the Syrian battlefield to target the US.
The general concern about foreign jihadists in Syria is that they acquire lethal skills and military experience there that they can use upon their return home. And so, as journalist David Ignatius wrote last month, “US officials believe that ISIS is providing tactical expertise and training facilities to these foreign fighters – building the infrastructure for foreign terrorist operations.” Furthermore, the argument is that the sojourn in Syria might move these individuals further along in the process of “radicalization,” priming them for an attack in their home countries (mainly in Europe).
But when applied to the case of Mehdi Nemmouche, who is now presented as a textbook case of a jihadist “returnee,” this argument appears tenuous.
The sad fact is that violence perpetrated by European Muslims against European Jews and Jewish targets has been an established phenomenon for years, well predating the Syrian conflict. Indeed, at first, Belgian authorities officially categorized the attack as “most likely a racially-motivated hate crime,” before starting to probe possible terror connections.
Although little to nothing is yet known about Nemmouche’s activity in Syria, according to the argument described above, it would have been during his stay there that he acquired the necessary ideological and military training to perpetrate the attack. But here too, the argument is thin. In looking at parts of Nemmouche’s bio as reported in the media, he evidently has a criminal background (armed robbery), which landed him in prison, where he supposedly was “radicalized” in Islamic circles. It’s unclear how and to what degree Nemmouche’s stay in Syria altered his already existing proclivities.
Still, Nemmouche, according to the paradigm, would have acquired “tactical expertise” and “lethal skills” in Syria for terrorist operations on European soil. However, it’s not immediately obvious how Nemmouche’s modus operandi – walking into a museum and opening fire from an assault rifle stashed in his bag – represents this kind of specialized expertise. And perhaps the same could be said about his reentry to France on a bus, carrying weapons in his luggage, which was not particularly sophisticated – especially as the German authorities had previously flagged him to the French as a potential security threat.
It's unclear what in Nemmouche’s attack was the result of specific training that could be obtained only on the fields of jihad in Syria. In fact, acquiring skills to carry out mass casualty attacks is possible from the comforts of home, without the need for training or combat experience in the Middle East. Take for example the case of the Tsarnaev brothers, perpetrators of the Boston Marathon attack last year, who obtained instructions to make pressure-cooker bombs off the Internet.
Of course, there is little doubt that a group like ISIS spells trouble for Syria, and it may also come to pose a threat to US national security. After all, leaving Syria to fester, as the Obama White House has done, was never going to lead to good things. At the same time, in viewing Syria through a counter-terrorism lens, the White House is merely prioritizing the accidentals of the Syrian conflict, and not addressing its essentials: the continued existence of the Assad regime.
All that said, it's important not to conflate Europe and the US. Europe suffers from chronic social issues – notably in terms of immigration, social integration, and anti-Semitism – that have manifested themselves through violence. In looking for a link to Syria, it’s essential not to gloss over this Europe-related violence. In that regard, it was telling that, following the attack in Brussels, many in the local Jewish community placed it in this European context, viewing it as an outcome of growing anti-Semitism in Europe and the rise, reflected in the recent parliamentary elections across the continent, of far-right political parties.
The case of Mehdi Nemmouche is better understood against this particularly European backdrop. His is a story about the ills of Europe, much more so than about blowback from Syria.
Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay