The man in the black mask

So now we know the identity of  the smug executioner with the black balaclava and the knife, and the British media and politicians are struggling to understand how a boy who once liked S-Club 7 and wanted to be a footballer became a ‘monster.’

I don’t pretend to have an explanation for this myself, but I don’t believe in monsters, only in human beings who either lost their moral compass and their humanity, or perhaps never had either in the first place.   According to the advocacy group Cage, Mohammed Emwazi once belonged to the former category, and his transformation into ‘Jihadi John’ was due to an overbearing security establishment that destroyed his prospects of a normal life because he refused to become an M15 informant.

The Cage case file on Emwazi describes a four-year process of harrassment, in which the Kuwaiti-born former computer operator was arrested, intimidated and harassed and lose his fiancée, and his right to travel, because he refused to become an informer.

Emwazi tried to protest against this treatment, using Cage as an advocate, and gave detailed description of his treatment at the hands of the security services.  If true, and there’s no reason to think that it isn’t, it isn’t a pretty picture.  The narrative that Cage is presenting is that of an ordinary young Muslim unjustly suspected of jihadist activities and stripped of the possibility of a normal life. The British media was predictably outraged by this, particularly when  Cage spokesman Asim Qureshi described Emwazi as ‘ a beautiful young man’ and ‘ extremely kind, extremely gentle and the most humble young person I ever knew.’

Faced with statements like this, the tabloids and David Cameron have reacted with their usual fury, and rejected any suggestion that the security services might have had any responsibility for Emwazi’s transformation, because as we all know the state can only ever do good.  The emails published by Channel 4 certainly suggest a man with his back against the wall back in 2010, such as this declaration after he was not allowed to fly to Kuwait:

‘I never got onto the flight, what was the point, I said to myself; I’ll just get rejected. I had a job waiting for me and marriage to get started. But now I feel like a prisoner, only not in a cage, in London. A person imprisoned and controlled by security service men, stopping me from living my new life in my birthplace and my country, Kuwait.’

Qureshi has cited this history to ask ‘When are we going to finally learn that when we treat people as if they’re outsiders, they are going to feel like outsiders and they will look for belonging elsewhere.’Some of the papers have condemned Qureshi for attempting to ‘justify’ Emwazi’s actions, even though Qureshi has not said that they were justifiable.   Today the Daily Mail has engaged in predictable smear tactics by suggesting that Qureshi himself is a jihadist and a closet supporter of Islamic State.

Neither the British government or its tabloid servants are likely to consider the possibility that the security services may have contributed to Emwazi’s ‘radicalization’ by leaning on him too hard.  The priorities of national security and  the good versus evil/moderation versus extremism rhetoric of the war on terror precludes acknowledging any responsibility whatsoever for any form of blowback or unwanted consequences.

Nevertheless Cage’s victim narrative isn’t necessarily the explanation for his grim trajectory, or at least not the whole explanation. After all, there are many things that ‘outsiders’ can do in order to find ‘belonging’ that don’t involve cutting the heads of innocent hostages in a propaganda video.  Emwazi may not have realized that he would be doing this when he went to Syria to fight in 2012, since  Islamic State didn’t exist then.

But there were plenty of other groups with a similar ideology and methodology, some of whom were de facto allies in the Western/Gulf State/Nato regime change program in Syria – something that is almost never recognized in the hysteria about what British jihadists might do if they come back. Was Emwazi in touch with some of these groups? If so, does that mean that the security services had reasons for suspicion?

The Cage case file says that he was barred from flying to Kuwait three times and stopped at the airport.   Yet one week after his third flight ban, he ‘left his parents home to travel abroad’ and his parents reported him as a missing person three days later. How did he manage to get out of the country if he was on a no-fly register?   Why did the police not visit his home till four months later, if the security forces had him on the radar?   How did the police know that he had entered Syria?

We may never know the answer to these questions.   All we know is that Emwazi arrived in Syria in 2012, and two years later the man who once praised Cage for standing up for justice and against oppression stood in the desert next to his helpless prisoners and told the West that ‘this knife will be your nightmare.’

Perhaps two years of the nightmare of the Syrian Civil War were enough to obliterate what humanity Emwazi took with him to Syria.   But whatever the reasons that led him to play a starring role in Islamic State’s snuff videos, the man in the black balaclava is no longer a victim, but a murderer and a tyrant,  whose actions have nothing to do with fighting tyranny or injustice.

And the ultimate responsibility for that transformation is down to him, and the organization that gave him his orders.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *