Paris Attacks: An Analysis

Terror attacks in Paris, represent a major departure for the Islamic State militant
group that until now concentrated on creating a state in Syria and Iraq rather than
directly targeting the West.

Such a turn also heralds a dramatic escalation in the perils faced by civilians in
Europe and the U.S., the “crusader nations” in Islamic State’s cross hairs. Islamic
State, after all, is far more indiscriminate in its targeting than al Qaeda: It considers
pretty much anyone in the West as legitimate prey.

The Paris massacre occurred as Islamic State was suffering military setbacks in
Syria and Iraq, losing territory to the Kurds in both nations and being subjected to
an intensified air campaign by both the U.S.-led coalition and, since recently,
Russia.

“Islamic State is on the defensive and so it is shifting toward terrorist activity,

particularly in Europe, because that is an accessible area for them. This is the way
to make sure people keep speaking about them, and to appear as an attractive group
that remains capable of spectacular action,” said Camille Grand,director of the
Foundation pour la Recherché Strategique, a Paris-based defense and security think
tank.

While the Paris massacre wasn’t the first terrorist act in the West claimed by
Islamic State, it is by far the deadliest and most sophisticated. It came two weeks
after Islamic State claimed to have brought down a Russian passenger jet in Egypt.
Until now, most of its attacks in the West, such as the January assault on a Paris
kosher supermarket and the December hostage-taking in a Sydney coffee shop,
were believed to be the work of Islamic State sympathizers rather than people
acting on direct orders from the militant group, also known as ISIS and ISIL.

“If this was indeed directed by ISIS Central, it represents a major change from an
earlier focus on state-building: They have made a decision that they will punish
anyone who stands in the way of the expansion of their state,” said William
McCants, an expert on radical Islam at the Brookings Institution and author of a
recent book, “The ISIS Apocalypse.”

The initial claim of responsibility from Islamic State didn’t name the Paris
attackers or provide video evidence of the kind usually released following
bombings in the Middle East. Terrorism experts, however, increasingly believe
Friday’s killings were unlikely to have been the work of lone wolves.

“The complexity of the operations we have seen in Paris shows that we are facing
an organization, something that was not just incited but also organized,” said Mr.
Grand.

As long as Islamic State retains control over a huge territory in Syria and Iraq, and
enjoys the legitimacy this control confers on it in the eyes of many radical
Muslims, more such attacks are likely soon.

“Let France and all the nations following in its path know that they will continue to
be at the top of the target list for Islamic State, and that the scent of death will not
leave their nostrils.…Indeed, it is just the beginning,” Islamic State said in its
claim of responsibility for Friday’s attack.
Given just how simple it is to kill random civilians in a Western city, that isn’t an
idle warning. It’s also one that calls into question the U.S.-led policy of using
limited means to contain, rather than decisively defeat, Islamic State.

“Without a doubt, this is a whole new threat to humanity, and it is really hard to
imagine how it could be contained,” said Hassan Hassan, a fellow at the Royal
Institute of International Affairs in London and author of a recent book, “ISIS:
Inside the Army of Terror.” “I don’t think it could be restrained without effectively
defeating it in Syria and Iraq.”

In fact, Islamic State is far more dangerous than al Qaeda in the immediate future,
many experts say. Unlike Islamic State, al Qaeda exercises relative restraint and
pursues a political agenda that, for example, doesn’t call for an outright genocide
of Shiites. During the January attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris, claimed
by al Qaeda, the perpetrators didn’t shoot random bystanders—the victims of
Friday’s rampage.

“Al Qaeda chose symbolic targets,” said Stephane Lacroix, a specialist in radical
Islam at Sciences Po University in Paris. “But Islamic State views this as an almost
existential conflict, which translates into far more indiscriminate methods of
action. And that makes its attacks much more difficult to stop.”