Author: Ahmad Abid
Today, I encountered some content on social media in which Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) was being compared to ISIS, with assertions that both groups are detrimental to Islam. As an impartial writer, I chose to examine the distinctions between these two groups.
While the names of ISIS and HTS are widely discussed in global media and research in relation to Islamic militant groups, significant ideological, political, and operational variances exist between them which serve to differentiate one from the other.
Ideology and Approach
ISIS is infamous for its extremist takfiri ideology, misleading people worldwide under the banner of establishing an Islamic caliphate. Conversely, Tahrir al-Sham has engaged in active jihad against the Syrian regime with practical efforts that have produced tangible outcomes.
ISIS embraces an aggressive takfir (excommunication) policy, labelling individuals who refuse to pledge allegiance to them as non-believers. HTS, on the other hand, takes a much milder stance on takfir, confining it to those who openly commit acts of clear and explicit disbelief (kufr buwah).
ISIS does not limit takfir to verbal declarations; it enforces it through severe punishments such as killings, imprisonment, and torture. Additionally, in ISIS, individuals without proper qualifications assume the authority to issue fatwas and make arbitrary proclamations. Conversely, HTS delegates the authority to declare takfir solely to qualified scholars and judicial bodies, ensuring that ordinary members cannot make such determinations.
Relationship with Scholars
ISIS targets Islamic scholars who oppose its extremist practices, branding them as non-believers and resorting to violence against them, proclaiming itself as the legitimate representative of Shariah. In contrast, HTS seeks to maintain connections with Islamic scholars, seeking their support to enhance its legitimacy.
Governance and Strategy
ISIS upholds the concept of an “immediate caliphate” and proclaimed the global Islamic caliphate in 2014 without taking into account essential conditions or stages, resulting in numerous complications. On the other hand, HTS adheres to the concept of a gradual caliphate, emphasizing the establishment of prerequisites and a systematic progression towards an Islamic framework.
Conclusion
In conclusion, ISIS and HTS differ significantly in ideology, objectives, and strategies. HTS aims to gain local support, establish an Islamic system, and function as a moderate Islamic resistance. In contrast, ISIS’s extremist policies have resulted in division, internal conflict, and global isolation.
