Is the Islamic State attack in Istanbul a Warning to Europe?

On the afternoon of Sunday, January 28, two masked individuals armed with automatic pistols stormed the “Santa Maria” Catholic church in the Sarıyer neighborhood of Istanbul, as worshippers celebrated mass. The gunmen opened fire, killing one person and injuring another - both Turkish citizens - then fled.

The Turkish Ministry of the Interior later said it had arrested the two shooters as they left the scene, confirming that one of them was Tajik and the other was Russian. It added that it had detained a further 47 people linked to the Islamic State group. However, when IS claimed responsibility for the operation, it boasted that the “perpetrators of the attack safely withdrew from the site of the operation”.

It is possible to draw several conclusions from this incident. First and foremost, it demonstrates the organization’s keenness to make a global comeback, five years after its territorial defeat and the dismantling of its “Caliphate” in Syria an Iraq. IS hopes to achieve this by striking religious and civilian targets in various countries, particularly in Europe, and justifying these attacks in religious terms, claiming they are in support of Muslims in Gaza. This is reflected in the group’s statement after the Istanbul attack.

This analysis chimes with the most recent audio recording by IS spokesman Abu Hudhayfa Al-Ansari in early January, “And Kill Them Where You Find Them”. In it, he outlined the organization’s strategy for choosing targets, and offered religious justifications: “Aim for easy targets rather than difficult ones, civilian ones before military ones, and religious targets such as synagogues and churches before anything else, for that is more healing for the heart and makes the features of the battle clearer. Our war with them is a religious war. We fight them wherever they are found, in response to the command of God Almighty.”

Two further points are of note in the Istanbul attack. The first is that the Turkish citizen who was killed was the only Muslim inside the church, indicating that his targeting at that location was intentional. His family later confirmed that he was mentally disabled and unable to fully comprehend his surroundings.

The second point of note is that the Polish consul was at the mass along with his children and wife. This suggests that the gunmen intended to target him for assassination, but that due to the crowded place, a reportedly faulty weapon and the fact the security services were able to respond quickly, the gunmen were forced to withdraw before achieving their goal.

The Turkish authorities have tightened security in the country in recent months, leading to the arrest of hundreds of suspected IS members or sympathizers. Yet despite this, the organization’ was able to carry out the attack in Istanbul, due to its strategy of promoting “lone wolf” operations.

It is highly likely that similar attacks will occur in other countries, particularly in Europe, despite these countries’ crackdowns against IS cells and potential members during the last quarter of 2023. Indeed, these campaigns clearly indicate that authorities are aware that the threat of IS attacks across Europe is growing.

It is also worth noting that IS has mostly relied on Tajik and Caucasian members in its solo attacks in Europe since 2021. This reflects the importance of these members to IS, both in terms of their doctrinal affiliation to the organization’s ideas and their presence in large numbers, enabling them to carry out such attacks in various countries. Moreover, many of these members are well-trained to carry out such operations. This suggests it is likely that authorities across Europe are likely to security campaigns against such figures suspected of holding extremist religious views.

In conclusion, the Istanbul attack and the subsequent claims by IS, contradicting the official narrative over the operation itself, its context and the gunmen’s ability to evade the security services both before and after the operation, serve as an early warning to other countries. Despite the efforts of the security services worldwide, IS has flexible and rapidly evolving capabilities. This means that preventing future attacks will require a more comprehensive approach and measures that are closely tailored to respond to its strategy and actions.