The Islamic State Was Thrilled By Trump’s Oval Office Ambush of Zelensky
Issue 485 of Al-Naba, the weekly newsletter of the Islamic State (IS), released on 6 March 2025, had as its main editorial a gloating article about the gruesome spectacle at the White House on 28 February, where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky found himself ambushed by U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance on live television.
The hectoring of Zelensky was a most public manifestation of Trump’s reorientation of U.S. policy towards a severing of relations with Ukraine and an alignment with Russia, which invaded Ukraine three years ago with the intention of eliminating the State and remains in occupation of a fifth of the country to this day. The security threat to Europe from this U.S. about-face is obvious and it has created a crisis in transatlantic relations.
As can be seen in the translated article below, IS is delighted by this division within the West, seeing immense opportunity, and relishing the prospect of a NATO collapse that would give them even more space to operate. IS also takes the chance to mock other jihadists, notably those currently ruling Syria, who have sought the benefits of an accommodation with the U.S.-led “international community”. In doing so, IS judges that these jihadists have not only betrayed the true faith, but changed ships on a falling tide.
The Oval Office Battle
All the diplomatic channels failed to contain the dispute between America and its Ukrainian allies, which exploded live on air in the Oval Office, the very place where they have long conspired and gathered to wage war against us. It is a major rift within the Crusader camp, the most outstanding in our time, though it is neither new nor strange when viewed against the backdrop of the Crusader structure throughout its dark history.
The Crusader crisis quickly extended beyond the Oval Office to encompass all of Europe, which hastened to convene an extraordinary European summit in what they themselves described as “a once-in-a-generation moment.” This summit was not held to discuss the threat of the Islamic State and its global attacks! But rather to discuss ways of supporting Ukraine after the position of “Uncle Sam” took its current turn toward peace with Russia, at the expense of its historical relationship with old Europe, seeking instead to focus on its own crises and retreat inward under the banner of “America First”.
The Oval Office battle reflects the extent of the pressure the American administration is experiencing due to its internal crises and its escalating rivalry with Communist China. Trump and his aides wanted to teach Europe, the hard way, that it is now facing a new reality in which it will no longer receive free American services! Nor any services that do not put America’s interests first. The uproar [in the Oval Office] also reflects the depth of the American-European dilemma resulting from the ongoing war in Ukraine, which has become a source of major military and economic drain for both sides, contrary to the hopes they had. They wanted Ukraine to be the sacrificial lamb [kabsh al-fida] that would spare them a Crusader bloodbath on their own soil, but it seems their hopes have been dashed.
Before the Oval Office battle, Europe had already begun increasing spending on its defensive capabilities, to scratch its own skin with its own nails, after the American claws became too busy scratching their own skin, inflamed by the Chinese allergy! Before that, it was “terrorist threats” that occupied them. And now, Europe, or at least some of its key powers, see that there is no alternative but to arm themselves in pursuit of the “security” that America is no longer able or willing to provide for them.
The increase in defence spending and the costly European militarisation means that the old Continent must prepare for waves of austerity and abandoning much of its luxury. They are heading into a new era where they must choose between “security” and “comfort” in light of the great Crusader divide. Will the Crusader society be able to bear that? What matters more to us is that European defence independence from America puts the future of NATO in jeopardy.
Many global Crusader newspapers have started to question the future of NATO in light of this division within the American-European camp, and, consequently, [to wonder about] the extent of its impact on the international Crusader coalition fighting the Islamic State, whose lions’ attacks continue to reach Europe and America. Add to this that the European position is not unified on military support for Ukraine, contrary to American desires, and it raises the spectre of division within the European Union, which now staggers as it walks a tightrope between the “European House” and the “White House”, with the likelihood that it will eventually have to choose between them.
Meanwhile, European militarisation, seen in Europe as a security necessity, is interpreted by Russia as an attempt to ignite the flames of war, as many Russian officials have stated. In other words, the drums of war are beating in Europe for the first time after years of trying to contain the war to Ukraine alone. This is what led the French Foreign Minister to say: “The front line is closer to us than ever before”.1
All of the above paves the way for the disintegration of the American-European international order and the loss of central control, leading to the emergence of new alliances and entities based on the principle that everyone has their own plans and ambitions. This signals a return to the age of wars that the Crusaders have long striven to keep away from their lands since the end of the Second World War. It is a glimpse into the future of the escalating Crusader division, a realisation of God’s words about them: “We have stirred among them enmity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection”2 [Qur’an 5:64].
In terms of methodology [manhaj], the clash in the Oval Office is the true image of jahili [pre-Islamic, ignorant (of God)] politics that the treacherous jihadists became infatuated with,3 after their long tenure wore them down and they grew comfortable descending to the lowest depths, while continuing to describe themselves—falsely—as “Islamically legitimate” [al-shar’iyya]. Satan beautified it for them, making them think there was a path to salvation without the price of pure monotheism [tawhid], a price the devout [or godly: al-rubbaniyeen] have willing paid since the era of prophethood until the present day.
It is also a sign for those who sought refuge in the international community during the twilight of its dominance and the fracturing of its structure. We refer to the apostate movements and organisations that think they have enough political cunning and experience to win American aid and support, by offering assistance or requesting the lifting a sanction, even as America is cutting off support to its own Crusader allies and threatening them with sanctions. Is there room in the “international community” for the Arab apostates, when it is squeezing its own pure-blooded Frankish [al-Ifrenj] sons? And what might be the fate of the monstrosity [or deformation: al-masakh] “Jolansky”,4 as he watches “Zelensky” being scolded and humiliated in the very heart of the international community, the same one that the treacherous jihadists from Mali to Damascus have been courting and begging, after their feet slipped into the mud?
Among the just ironies is that this division within the international Crusader camp will reflect negatively, will bringing ruin and destruction, upon those who built their governments and projects by relying on it, clinging to its drapes, and tying themselves to its fate. Meanwhile, those who were and remain a thorn in its throat, those against whom it gathers a “global coalition”, will reap the fruits of its collapse. The future of that coalition now hinges on this “creative Crusader division”. It is, therefore, imperative for soldiers and supporters of the Caliphate to seize on this division and make preparations, starting now, to exploit it.
Historically, we recall, that division and fragmentation are the default state among the Crusaders. They differ on everything, even their fabricated god! The division and disintegration of the modern Crusader campaigns resembles what befell their ancient ancestors. The disputes, hatred, and selfish ambitions of every alliance and state have begun to dominate the Crusader landscape, each one crying out: “Myself! Myself!” In contrast stands the steadfastness of the devout upon their monotheism and their jihad, which has not ceased, and that is what has worsened the suffering of the Crusader states, despite their focus on it and preoccupation with it. So how much more [room will IS have] if they were to become distracted from it entirely?
In conclusion, let the mujahid who is certain of the promise of his Lord reflect on how their [the West’s] alliances and conferences, once convened to wage war against the Islamic State, have now shifted to focus on each other. The tables have turned, and they now convene to discuss their own divisions and internal wars, which are only just beginning. O Allah, set discord in their hearts and turn the circle of evil back upon them.
NOTES
This is IS’s rendering of the quote. The exact words from French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot, spoken on 3 March 2025, were: “the front line keeps getting closer to us”.
Sometimes given as the “Day of Reckoning” or “Day of Judgment” (Yawm al-Qiyamah).
The word translated as “treacherous” is “al-nukkath”, which more literally means something like “oath-breaker”. A looser translation might be “renegade”. The connotation is of deceit and betrayal. It is clearly directed primarily at Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), whose leader was once an IS operative, before he—as IS sees it—betrayed them and broke his bay’a (oath of allegiance), switching his loyalty to Al-Qaeda, before apparently discarding them, too. HTS became the government of Syria in December and has since made a lot of effort to normalise relations with Western countries, its most immediate interest being the lifting of Western sanctions that were placed on Syria when it was ruled by Bashar al-Asad.
The reference is to the current interim president of Syria, Ahmad al-Shara, known by the kunya Abu Muhammad al-Jolani when he was an Islamic State emir (until 2013) and for some time after his defection as the leader of Al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra, a powerful and ultimately dominant part of the insurgency against the Asad regime, which fell in December. Al-Nusra publicly severed its links with Al-Qaeda in a two-stage process in 2016-17, resulting in a rebrand as HTS.