The Failed Ideological Hybridization of the Islamic State

The Islamic State (IS) was founded on the premise of a “new ideological” offer based on extreme takfir as an alternative to Al-Qaeda ideology i.e. Salafism-Jihadism. More specifically and ideologically speaking, IS ideology rested on the alliance between three schools of thought: the Neo-Takfiri, the Bin Ali, and the Hazimiyah. However, instead of coalescing into a single coherent thought, those three schools confronted each other in a violent internal strife that caused the death of hundreds of its members including key leaders, endangering the very existence of this organization. This paper shows that instead of opting for a clear ideological line, the IS leadership of neo-takfiri orientation, alternated its support for each of these, between the Bin Ali and the Hazimiyah, resorting each time to severe internal purges. Using interviews with former foreign fighters jihadists in addition to other relevant material1, this paper analyses the origins and ideological foundations of these three schools and seeks to explain the patterns of conflict as well as the perspectives for a possible reconciliation between them in the wake of the death of Al Baghdadi.