Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Islamic State

The OED gives no definition for “Islamic State”.

“Islamic State” is the name given to the group that refers to itself as al-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah, and has been the subject of much debate since it came to prominence during the Anbar Offensive. To date, neither governments nor media organisations have been able to arrive at a consensus. Terms currently in circulation include “Daesh” – which is particularly popular in the Middle East, “ISIS” and “ISIL”, which translate the group’s initial pre-expansionist name of al-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham, and most problematic of all, “Islamic State”.

Term Variants: Daesh, ISIS

How this term should be used

We suggest the replacement of “Islamic State” and “Isil/Isis” with Daesh or “al-Dawla”. 

 

The group, which has been active since at least 1999, has undergone a number of name changes in the past decade. When it came to prominence with its expansion into Syria during the Syrian Civil War, it adopted the name al-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham. The fact that the Arabic noun “al-Sham” variously translates to Syria, Greater Syria or the Levant explains much of the initial inconsistency over the way the group was named in Western media outlets.  

In the Summer of 2014, the group renamed itself al-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah, as part of a desire to establish a worldwide caliphate and so, the name “Islamic State” was born. 

But the term is not without its detractors. In December 2015, then British Prime Minister, David Cameron said that he would begin calling the group “Daesh” instead of “Islamic State” because: “This evil death cult is neither a true representation of Islam nor a state.” [1] The decision came on the heels of a similar directive issued by the French government, who rejected the term “Islamic State” because they did not wish to legitimise terrorism. 

 

BBC News  

“The name should be qualified e.g. “Islamic State group” or “the group calling itself Islamic State” (rather than “so-called Islamic State”) or refer to “Islamic State fighter, militants, extremists” etc. Use IS in the rest of the piece. IS can also be used in headlines.” [2]

Guardian and Observer Style Guide  

“Islamic State at first mention, thereafter Isis. The abbreviation stands for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (“al-Sham”), which is why some people call it Isil. The group was originally al-Qaida in Iraq.” [3]

The New York Times 

The New York Times has settled on “Islamic State” as the preferred designation, with Assistant Managing Editor Michael Slackman explaining the policy thus: “Certainly there are many Muslims and non-Muslims alike who find it offensive, but that’s their name. We have a pretty straightforward policy here. We use the name that individuals and organizations select for themselves and try to explain it”. [4]

The Associated Press 

The AP has decided to go with “Islamic State Group” with the word “group” appended because, according to AP standards editor, Thomas Kent, “we think it’s important to indicate it’s not a state by normal criteria.” [5]

Arguments for using Islamic State
“That is their name”.
This argument, as expressed by the assistant editor of the New York Times, ostensibly hinges on accuracy. The basic premise is that because the name “ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah” translates to “Islamic State” in English, it would be inaccurate to refer to them as anything else. But the most obvious problem with this kind of thinking is that “ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah” is not the same thing as “Islamic State” – they are two different names in two different languages. The decision to translate the group’s name in English is therefore editorial and goes against the established precedent of reporting on terrorist organisations. Al Qaeda is seldom called “The Base”, most people in the Western World probably don’t know that the word “Taliban” means “students” and Hizbollah has never been referred to in Western Media outlets as “The Party of God”. Why then, in the case of “ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah” are we happy to subvert these long-established precedents and use the term “Islamic State”? The only possible argument for doing so is that it is easier for a native English speaker to say “Islamic State” than it would be to say “ad Dawlah al-Islamiyyah”. But then, if we accept that, we also have to accept that it is easier for a native English speaker to say, “The Base” instead of “Al Qaeda” or “The Students” instead of “Taliban.”
The Impartiality argument
This argument, which was used as a defence by the BBC, states that because the word “Daesh” has negative connotations in Arabic, it interferes with the stated aim of “Journalistic Impartiality”. But even setting aside the question of whether these murderous terrorists deserve to be treated with impartiality, this argument can be rejected simply by using the example of “Boko Haram”. This name, which came to prominence because it was the choice of the local population in the northern provinces of Nigeria, is similarly pejorative (it translates to “Books are Banned”) and bears not even the slightest resemblance to “Jamaat Ahl-al Sunnah li al-dawa wal Jihad” (Group of the People of Sunnah for Preaching and Jihad) which is what the group known as Boko Haram calls itself. Yet the BBC still chooses to refer to the Nigerian terror group as “Boko Haram”, which pours cold water on the idea that they cannot choose to refer to ad-Dawa as “Daesh”.
The Habituation Argument
This argument suggests that because the term “Islamic State” has been in currency for such a long time, it is now too late to refer to “ad-Dawa” as anything else. We certainly agree that the term “Islamic State” has become embedded in public discourse, and we do not doubt that it will be difficult to replace it. But the question is whether or not it would be prudent to attempt it. A Comres poll released last year showed that one in three Britons surveyed believe that Islam promotes violence in the UK, with over half of the respondents disagreeing with the statement “Islam is compatible with British values” . It is our submission that words such as “Islamic State”, have enough impact on the way that Muslims are perceived in this and other countries to make it worthwhile for us to attempt to replace it.

Statistical Trends 

 According to our search on the News on the Web Corpus, looking at collocates of the word “Islamic”, the word “State” ranked 20th worldwide, but 11th in the Great British Corpus.  Thus, we can conclude that the term “Islamic State” is much more popular in the British Media than in the World Media taken as a whole.