Radical Islamic activity in Uzbekistan

Special Information
Bulletin

Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
at the Center for Special Studies (C.S.S)

May 16 , 2005

Radical Islamic activity in Uzbekistan: the latest events in Andijan and their connection with the Islamic Liberation Party¹

The events in Andijan—the state of affairs

The city of Andijan, located in East Uzbekistan’s Ferghana Valley, is home to conservative Islamic Uzbek population. The region, divided between Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, has long been considered fertile ground for radical Islamic mov ements. In the middle of May 2005, riots broke out in the city, probably triggered by the local population’s growing frustration over the continuing dire economic situation and over Uzbek president Islam Karimov’s non-relenting policy towards local Islamic el ements, particularly after their att empts on his life.

The events climaxed early morning on Friday, May 13, 2005, when a group of some 100 gunmen broke into the local prison compound in an att empt to release 23 businessmen arrested for their alleged m embership in Akramiya, a faction that had split from the local branch of the Liberation Party (see Appendix: The activity of the Liberation Party in Uzbekistan). These events followed two days of peaceful d emonstrations held in the vicinity of the local court, where proceedings were being held against the suspects. In the wake of the prison break, about 2,000 criminal and political prisoners escaped. Subsequently, the protestors took over a local administration building and d emanded the release of other Liberation Party activists, including Akramiya faction leader Akram Yuldashev.

These events, in addition to the growing public unrest, raised the Uzbek leadership’s concern over the reenactment of a scenario similar to the “Yellow Revolution” that occurred in Kyrgyzstan in the spring of 2005. According to reports, local Liberation Party activists were involved in the Kyrgyzstan riots as well. Consequently, the local Uzbek authorities dispatched security forces to Andijan and blocked the entire area. Journalists in the area reported that the security forces had opened fire at the protestors, as a result of which several hundreds of protestors were killed and about 500 residents fled to Kyrgyzstan. For the time being, access to the Ferghana Valley has been restored and the situation in the area has calmed down.

The Liberation Party²

General description

The Liberation Party³ is a radical Islamic political mov ement, originally Palestinian. It was founded in 1952 in East Jerusal em and was formally established in 1953 without receiving a Jordanian permit as dictated by law. The party’s founder was Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani, a senior Muslim cleric of Palestinian descent (born in the village of Ijzim, today’s Ker em Maharal, south of Haifa). After Nabahani’s death, the party’s leadership was assumed by Abd al-Qadim Zallum, a Palestinian from Hebron and one of the party’s founders. Following his death some two years ago, his place was taken, to the best of our knowledge, by Ataa’ Abu al-Rishta, a Jordanian national who has served as spokesman for the party during the past 15 years.

The party has made it its goal to reestablish the Islamic caliphate (abolished in 1924 by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk) and impose the dictates of Islamic law (Shari’ah) over its residents. The method chosen by the party to achieve its objective is by indoctrinating the public into its worldview as a preparation for conducting elite revolutions (by military officers, for example) against secular Islamic regimes or by assassinating those regimes’ leaders.

The party espouses the “liberation of Palestine”, i.e., the destruction of Israel by means of jihad (holy war), and vehemently opposes any political settlement with Israel. This approach stems from its completely negative attitude towards the Jews, stemming from the negative portrayal of the Jews in the Quran, as well as its Islamic-political approach, in which the Arab-Israeli conflict is considered to be an existential conflict between Muslims and Jews rather than a national-territorial conflict between Arabs/Palestinians and Israelis. For this reason, the party is also opposed to the existence and activity of the Palestinian Authority.

Throughout the course of the violent confrontation between Israel and the Palestinians, the party has been sympathetic to the terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad; it has been opposed, however, to the involvement of its activists as a group (but not as individuals) in these terrorist attacks. Given that, the members of the party have so far not been involved in terrorist activity during the current violent confrontation. In our assessment, however, the party’s worldview and the nature of its activity make its members, particularly after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, a potential manpower pool for the recruitment of operatives for radical Islamic terrorist organizations both in the Palestinian Authority administered territories as well as elsewhere throughout the world.

Characteristics and extent of the party’s activity

The Liberation Party acts towards the realization of its goals through spreading radical political Islam among the Islamic public, focusing on Arab states. The method it employs is indoctrination conducted by operatives organized in secret, compartmentalized cells. In this manner, it aims to recruit as many supporters as possible who would assist the party in seizing the rule by force while relying on the assistance of key el ements within government apparatuses. Therefore, the activity of the Liberation Party in the Middle East and the Arab world is illegal.

The primary central base of the Liberation Party was located in Jordan, where the party was persecuted by the authorities that att empted to restrict its moves, infiltrate its ranks, and arrest its leaders. From Jordan, the Liberation Party spread into most Arab and North African countries, Turkey, and Iran. Moreover, it spread to Islamic communities in Europe (mostly in the UK and Germany), North America, Asia ( Indonesia and Uzbekistan, for example), and Australia. The party’s branches operated in secret in most Arab states save Jordan, where it was also active openly on the eve of the first Gulf War (1990-1991)⁴ (see Appendix for information on the activity of the Liberation Party in Uzbekistan).

Notable within this context is the party’s vigorous activity among the Muslim community in the UK (mostly in universities) during the 1990s. It was then headed by Umar Bakri Muhammad, who retired from the party in early 1996, formed a radical Islamic organization called Al-Muhajiroun (whose activity has recently been suspended), and expressed his support for the activity of the Al-Qaeda organization. In recent years, the Liberation Party lowered its profile as far as its activity in the UK is concerned. Lately, however, it has openly stepped up its activity on the British scene in an attempt to persuade Muslims to boycott the UK elections held in early March.

In the past, the party was not successful in recruiting many supporters into its ranks in any country and could therefore neither become a force to be reckoned with nor realize its goals. This failure compelled it to update its political perception, and it now allows its m embers to participate, as individuals, in political oppositionist activity such as d emonstrations and, at the same time, to physically harm any Muslim leader who, in their view, did not follow the righteous path. It should also be noted that various activists who started their way in the party subsequently retired and joined (primarily political) activity of other radical Islamic el ements.

The activity of the party in the Palestinian Authority administered territories and among Israeli Arabs

During the period of time prior to the Six-Day War, the party was active in the West Bank as an underground body opposing the Jordanian regime. In the years 1967-1977, its activity was halted, on an organizational decision, due to its fear of measures that could be taken by Israel against the party and its activists. Its activity was gradually renewed, and since the beginning of the 1990s (in particular, since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, the existence of which is vehemently opposed by the party), it has gained momentum and has become more open than before. In terms of its organization, the party’s activists in “ Palestine” are subjected to a worldwide leadership which, to the best of our knowledge, is located abroad.⁵

It is our assessment that the Liberation Party has several thousand m embers in the West Bank (concentrated primarily in cities, specifically—Jerusal em and Hebron), minor pockets of activists in the Gaza Strip, and an increasing circle of supporters, including those formerly known as Hamas activists (there are at times struggles between the two mov ements over the recruitment of supporters and the control of mosques).

The greater part of the party’s strength is concentrated in Jerusalem, where some of its hardcore supporters regularly pray in the Temple Mount mosques. These activists were involved in violent activities during visits of Muslim or Christian leaders to the Temple Mount compound (the visit of the Turkish president in July 1999, the visit of the Pope in 2000, and the visit of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher on December 22, 2003). Recently, during Laura Bush’s visit to the Temple Mount compound (May 22, 2005), it was reported that her visit was terminated earlier than planned due to protests voiced by Liberation Party activists. Approximately 20 activists and additional worshippers issued calls against the US policy in Afghanistan and Iraq and against the alleged desecration of the Quran in Guantanamo⁶.

As for Israel, the party has many dozens of members and supporters in Israel’s Arab sector, primarily in Jatt, Baqa al-Gharbiya, ‘Ar’ara, Musmus, and Acre.

Contrary to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, which place emphasis on gradually attracting supporters to the cause of Islam through an institutionalized system of preaching (da’wa), the Liberation Party espouses laying a long-lasting, intensive groundwork for an ideological elite. Therefore, the party finds it unnecessary to maintain an extensive array of charity associations and education and welfare institutions. Its activity is limited to studious examination of Islamic texts in accordance with its ideological interpretation, as well as voluntary activity performed by the individual within the context of mutual relations with the community with the purpose of recruiting supporters from the community. Therefore, it does not depend on money coming in from the outside, and relies on internal financing (membership fees) from the pockets of local activists, as well as donations or profits from its members’ and/or its supporters’ business activities.

The Liberation Party’s stance towards Israel and the party’s involvement in terrorism

The Liberation Party ideologically contests the State of Israel’s right to exist and preaches to uproot it by means of holy war (jihad). In practice, however, this mission, in the party’s view, is not laid upon the individual but rather upon the Islamic caliphate, when such is founded, and its ruler (the caliph). As time went by, however, it appears that this condition has been reduced to any “Islamic state”. Consequently, one of the party’s guiding principles was that its members should not participate in terrorist activity. With the passage of time, however, owing to pressure exerted by its members, they were allowed to take part in “personal jihad”, primarily by joining other Islamic oppositionist elements (as a personal initiative of the activists, not as official partisan activity).

The trend of radicalization prevalent in the party escalated after the signing of the political accords between Israel and the Palestinians, and has grown even more intense since the outbreak of the current violent confrontation (which started in Sept ember 2000) between Israel and the Palestinians. Leaflets published on behalf of the party in recent years as well as stat ements issued by its seniors reflect sympathy to the path of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Al-Qaeda. In this context, it was reported that the party previously issued a religious ruling (1996) supporting suicide bombing attacks, even though there has not been information so far on party activists taking part in suicide bombing attacks or other terrorist attacks throughout the course of the violent confrontation.

The Liberation Party’s stance towards the Palestinian Authority

The Liberation Party denies the very existence of the Palestinian Authority and considers it (alongside other Arab regimes) to be an “infidel Arab regime”. The party refused to take part in the elections held in the Palestinian Authority administered territories and even issued a religious ruling forbidding its activists from taking part in the voters census and in the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council (January 1996).

The activity of the Liberation Party against the Palestinian Authority is primarily expressed in incit ement, sermons, publications and, above all, leaflets (some of which were even posted at the Dome of the Rock Mosque in Jerusal em shortly before the outbreak of the violent confrontation). Those leaflets harshly criticized the Palestinian Authority and Yasser Arafat in particular, and included hints that “traitor and infidel” leaders of his kind (such as the late Anwar Sadat and King Hussein) were to be sentenced to death⁷. For the time being, the position of the Liberation Party towards Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is unclear, even though after the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, the party published a leaflet strongly cond emning the Palestinian Authority.

In the past, the Palestinian Authority’s security apparatuses kept the Liberation Party under routine surveillance, being aware of the danger that its activists could pose to senior Palestinian Authority officials. However, the counter-activity of the Palestinian Authority apparatuses amounted to nothing more than short-term arrests of a number of activists, primarily in the mid-1990s, on charges of incitement. Possible reasons for that are the relatively minor influence of the party among the Palestinian public and the Palestinian Authority’s occupation with monitoring the activity of the key radical Islamic organizations (Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad).

The potential threat posed by the Liberation Party

In the past, the Liberation Party took part (or was accused of involv ement) in several failed coup att empts in the Middle East, most of which were thwarted (for example, an att empt to assassinate King Hussein in the summer of 1993). Its activists were involved in violent incidents in Egypt: in 1974, some 100 activists attacked the Military Acad emy in Heliopolis. Most of th em were captured, as was their leader, Saleh Sariyya (Doctor of Education of Palestinian descent, who formerly served in a key position in the Arab League educational organization), who was put to death.

At this point, the party’s primary areas of activity are preaching and propaganda interwoven with messages of incitement. However, in our assessment, it poses a potential of threat on several levels:

Subversion against Arab regimes, including the willingness of some of its members to attempt to perpetrate terrorist attacks or assassinations of Arab and Muslim leaders.

Involvement in terrorist attacks against Israel and Jewish targets: with the growing power of Al-Qaeda-inspired radical Islam and the radicalization of Liberation Party activists we have witnessed in recent years, we ought to consider the possibility that the party’s activists might, in the future, become involved in the perpetration of terrorist attacks against Israel and Jewish targets both on the Palestinian scene as well as elsewhere in the world.

Involvement in Al-Qaeda’s terrorist activity: the global spread of the Liberation Party, its extremist Islamic ideology, and its covert activity make it a convenient manpower pool for the recruitment of operatives for terrorist activities for Al-Qaeda and elements associated with the global jihad movement.

1. Hizb ut-Tahrir, as they transliterate their name from Arabic. The party will hereinafter be referred to as the “Liberation Party”.
2. This is an updated and revised information bulletin of a Hebrew publication (January 2004) on the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center website (www.intelligence.org.il).
3. Known as Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Liberation Party.
4. During that period, the party took an active and leading role, with the government's authorization, in pro- Saddam Hussein and anti-American rallies.
5. At least until the death of Abd al-Qadim Zallum (2003).
6. Haaretz daily, May 23, 2005, article by Amiram Barkat and Arnon Regular.
7. After Arafat's death, the Liberation Party published a harsh article on its Internet website ( November 25, 2004), lashing out against Arafat's “concessions” to the Jews.

Appendix

The activity of the Liberation Party in Uzbekistan and its involvement in the Andijan events—the state of affairs⁸

Background information

The activity of the Liberation Party in Uzbekistan most probably began in the early 1990s, in the wake of the fall of the USSR, as a manifestation of the religious Islamic renaissance mov ement that spread throughout the Central Asia region. As known, the focal point of this renaissance was the Ferghana Valley, divided between Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

The primary activity of the Liberation Party in the 1990s was expressed in the distribution of Islamic propaganda and incit ement publications (mostly in the form of leaflets in Uzbek and in Russian, with some circulated in the Palestinian Authority administered territories in Arabic), in order to rally supporters for its ideology. Later on, however, the name of the Liberation Party became associated with violent incidents as well.

It should be noted that shortly prior to the assassination att empt on President Karimov in 1999 (see below), a businessman was murdered in Tashkent. Local police searches for the murder suspect led to the home of Bakhtyar Mahmoudov, a m ember of the local Liberation Party branch. Documents found in his house gave rise to the possibility of a planned terrorist attack against the local Charvak Dam. After an extensive search in the region, the police forces captured a group of armed terrorists that might have been planning to perpetrate such an attack (damage to the dam as a result of the attack could have resulted in flooding the Uzbek capital of Tashkent).

The Liberation Party made the headlines primarily after many of its activists (including such senior figures as Hafizullah Nassirov, a relative of Bahram Abdullayev, head of the Liberation Party branch in Uzbekistan) were charged with two att empts to assassinate Uzbek president Islam Karimov, which took place in the Uzbek capital of Tashkent on February 16, 1999⁹. It should be noted that a short time before the attacks, leaflets on behalf of the Liberation Party were distributed in Tashkent, saying, among other things (in contrast to the non-violent approach taken by the party up until then), that if the local leadership could not be changed d emocratically, the party would be forced to achieve that goal through what is termed “radical measures”.

Even though the president was not injured in these assassination att empts, 6 security guards and local residents were killed in the terrorist attack. In the wake of the event, about 300 Liberation Party activists were arrested. They were brought to trial and some of th em were sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Consequently, the party issued a leaflet (June 1999) claiming, among other things, that President Karimov was “poisoning the government apparatuses against Islam and against the Liberation Party, and he is a Jew (sic) who hates Islam with every fiber of his being… who, in his struggle against Islam, has engaged in every conceivable villainy”. The name of the Liberation Party has come up in connection with the riots that recently broke out in the city of Andijan (see below).

The Akramiya faction of the Liberation Party

Despite the centralized structure of the Liberation Party, it has experienced disputes and undergone splits, primarily over tactical issues. One of the groups to branch out from the Liberation Party is called Akramiya. It was formed by Akram Yuldashev in 1996 in Andijan. He left the foundations of the Liberation Party intact; however, he tried to adapt his organization’s tactics to the specific conditions prevalent in the Ferghana Valley.

Akram Yuldashev promoted the idea of developing small Islamic communities whose m embers work together to set up small industrial and agricultural projects. It se ems that this facet of socio-economic activity was effective and well-suited to the dire economic conditions prevalent in the Ferghana Valley. There is a possibility (unconfirmed as of yet) that this social economic activity was used as a cover for clandestine subversive activity.

The name of this faction has come up in connection with the latest events (the breaking of armed gunmen into the Andijan prison in order to release businessmen suspected in Akramiya m embership). However, the extent of the involv ement of Akramiya activists in those events and in the violent activities in general is not fully clear to us.

The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)

As noted earlier, it is not certain whether the Liberation Party did, indeed, play a central role in these events. There is another version, according to which the events were orchestrated by activists of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). This movement was formed in the 1990s and consists of several thousand people. The IMU was affected by Wahhabi radical Islamic worldview originating in Saudi Arabia.

To the best of our information, this worldview was spread in Uzbekistan primarily by Saudi preachers sent to the region by the Saudi authorities (apparently, with the authorities’ approval) and through Islamic propaganda literature. An additional means for the spread of this worldview were the strengthening links between the IMU leadership,¹⁰ key Al-Qaeda operatives (such as Osama bin Laden), and radical Islamic operatives on the leadership level in Tajikistan¹¹ and, primarily, in Chechnya¹².

The IMU is working towards the perpetration of terrorist attacks in Uzbekistanin close cooperation with Al-Qaeda. It was responsible for the two assassination attempts on the Uzbek president in February 1999 and for terrorist attacks against the embassies of Israel and the US in Tashkent in July 2004.

The relations between the Liberation Party and the IMU

Due to the lack of qualified information, we cannot readily assess the relations between the Liberation Party and the IMU:

On one hand, the ideology of the Liberation Party is unique and different than that of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, even though they share a common goal: turning Uzbekistan into an Islamic country led by Islamic law (Shari’ah). Moreover, due to its clandestine activity, the Liberation Party does not tend to easily associate itself with other bodies, including Islamic, and even if such links do exist, they are completely covert.

On the other hand, the ideology of the Liberation Party allows requesting the assistance (nusra) of a reliable Islamic source if circumstances warrant, even if those circumstances are only t emporary. Therefore, there is a possibility that the Liberation Party (or some of its activists) asked the IMU for such assistance. The IMU advocates the perpetration of acts of violence against those it considers to be “infidels”, while the Liberation Party allows such actions only after establishing a certain cadre of supporters and under specific circumstances (that is, when it is convinced that the acts of violence would necessarily lead to seizing the reigns of power).

According to (unverified) information, the leaders of Uzbekistan’s Liberation Party held meetings with the heads of the IMU as well as with the Taliban, meetings whose contents is unclear. It is likely that such meetings, if they were held at all, occurred in the wake of the mass arrests of Liberation Party activists in 1999 as well as prior to the toppling of the Taliban regime in late 2001. Moreover, according to other reliable information, a group splintered off the Liberation Party in 1999 to become a faction calling itself Hizb al-Nusra (the party of aid, or victory), some of whose activists were willing to engage in violent activity. It is possible that those activists cooperated with the IMU.

The place of the Liberation Party in the Andijan events

The Uzbek authorities repeatedly accused the Liberation Party of involvement in the Andijan events and claimed that similar events had also happened in Kyrgyzstan. In a press conference, Uzbek president Islam Karimov stated that the Liberation Party and the Akramiya faction had been planning the Andijan events for several months. The events, said Karimov, had not been spontaneous but rather planned in advance in order to bring about the foundation of a radical Islamic state according to the worldview of the Liberation Party.

In response, Hassan al-Hassan, vice representative of the Liberation Party in the UK¹³, said in an interview granted to RadioMonte Carlo¹⁴ that the Liberation Party had had nothing to do with the events in Uzbekistan. He added that thousands of Liberation Party members were being held in custody in Uzbekistan. He noted that President Karimov had accused, on several occasions, the Liberation Party of terrorist activity as a means to enlist the support of the Western world and the entire international community for his activity against the Liberation Party in his country.

Faced with these two contradictory versions, it is our assessment that Liberation Party activists and, possibly, Akramiya activists were indeed involved in the Andijan events. We consider it doubtful, however, that they played a key role in these events; it is more likely that they acted alongside other radical Islamic opposition elements, primarily the IMU.

Conclusion

The Liberation Party, a radical Islamic party that grew in Uzbekistan as a branch of the mother party formed in the Middle East, continues to work towards the spread of its ideology. Its goal is to obtain a large number of supporters in order to eventually topple the regime in Uzbekistan. The party’s primary activities, at this point, include preaching and propaganda interwoven with messages of incit ement.

The radical Islamic ideology of the party and the characteristics of its activity pose, in our assessment, a potential threat in the form of perpetration of acts of violence and terrorism by its activists, for example: assassinations of country leaders considered to be “infidels” or the integration of its activists in local terrorist and violent activity in various countries. This kind of threat potential exists, in our assessment, in Uzbekistan as well.

Sources:

Yakubov, Oleg, The Pack of Wolves – The Blood Trail of Terror. Moscow: Veche Publishers, 2000. Translation into English: K. Tamriko, B. Vladi, 2000.

International Crisis Group [ICG], Radical Islam in Central Asia: Responding to Hizb al-Tahrir. ICG Asia Report no. 58. ASH/Brussels, 30 June 2003.

Baran, Zeyno, Hizb ut-Tahrir: Islam’s Political Insurgency, Washington D.C.: The Nixon Center 2004.

“Should we treat Muslims as criminals?” A leaflet published on behalf of the Liberation Party, composed on June 14, 1999 and distributed (in Russian and in Uzbek) in Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, following the announc ement of the verdicts against Liberation Party activists accused of involv ement in the assassination att empt on Uzbekistan’s president, Islam Karimov. The title of the leaflet is taken from the Quran, Chapter 68 (Al-Qalam), verse 35.

“The Sharm el-Sheikh summit is a burning link in the chain of humiliating concessions”. An Arabic announcement published on February 8, 2005 on the Liberation Party website, in which the Liberation Party lashed out at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, held on that day, and the self-belittlement, according to its claim, of its Arab participants in the face of Israel, and called for its destruction.

A venomous article against Yasser Arafat signed by “Hassan al-Hassan, the UK”, published on the Liberation Party website after Arafat’s death (November 25, 2004).

An interview granted by Hassan al-Hassan, presented as a Liberation Party senior (in the UK?), to RadioMonte Carlo (May 15, 2005).

8. The present description of the state of affairs was written by Dr. Yoram Kahati of the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, a specialist on the Islamic Liberation Party. His sources are detailed at the end of the appendix. For the time being, this description is only partial due to the lack of additional (primarily local Uzbek) reliable and detailed sources.
9. These arrests were made even though these terrorist attacks were perpetrated by the Islamic Mov ement of Uzbekistan, the IMU, an organization also responsible for terrorist attacks against the Israel and US embassies in Tashkent.
10. Such as Tahir Yuldashev, who in late 1991 declared himself the leader of the Islamic Renaissance Party of Uzbekistan, and Juma Namangani, who was considered his second-in-command.
11. In which dozens of activists were apprehended for spreading religious propaganda literature on behalf of the local Liberation Party branch in the early 2000s.
12. Such as Shamil Basayev and “Khattab”—the nickname of the Arab leader of the Chechen fighters who was killed by the Russians approximately 3 years ago.
13.According to the website of the Liberation Party (September 2004), Hassan al-Hassan is the vice representative of the party in the UK. Al-Hassan wrote an article, published after Arafat's death, vehemently attacking the defeatist policy, as he put it, of Arafat towards Israel. In the article, he called upon the people of Palestine to distance themselves from “the regime of disgrace built by the Arab leaders for the benefit of the West” (i.e., the Palestinian Authority) and called for the destruction of the State of Israel and for the expulsion of all the Jews who came to the country from abroad.
14. Radio Monte Carlo, May 15, 2005.