Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 1, Day 7.

Unfortunately necessity has dictated that I take a short step back from the war against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in order to concentrate on global efforts to combat climate change. Mind you given ISIL's nihilistic desire to watch the World burn you could almost say that this was an act of resistance.

However it has certainly heightened my sense of pedantry and my awareness of what are termed "translation issues." This has a very specific relevance to the UK's response to the June 26th (26/6/15) ISIL attack in Tunisia which killed 30 British citizens.

In response to that attack the UK Prime Minister David Cameron gave a series of speeches and media interviews. In one in particular given to BBC Radio 4 Cameron said that as a country we could all do more to combat ISIL's poisonous ideology particularly by referring to them as "ISIL" rather then "ISIS" or "Islamic State."

Displaying the sort of barmy left-wing thinking that saw "Top Gear" cancelled but the "BBC Three" channel preserved the BBC - in it's role as the UK's national broadcaster - quickly shot back that they couldn't refer to ISIL as ISIL because that would show bias against the group undermining the BBC's role as an impartial news broadcaster.

If I was being polite I would say that the BBC's position is utter nonsense. If I was being impolite I would just let fly with a long string of expletives highlighting that this is not the battle ground the BBC wants to pick amid it's arguments with the government over the renewal of it's Royal Charter.

In 2013 a group of Islamic terrorists in Iraq headed by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi were expelled from Al Qaeda for being too extreme. This forced them to change their name from "Al Qaeda in Iraq" to "ad-Dawlah al-Islāmiyah fī 'l-ʿIrāq wa-sh-Shām." Although acronyms tend not to be used in Arabic for the purposes of Tweets this was shortened to "Da'ash" or "Daesh."

As the long Arabic "a'a" sound doesn't really exist in English and I don't want to get world famous Armenian Kim KarDASHian" any more involved in this then she needs to be when writing about the group in English I simply use the direct translation which is "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" or the acronym ISIL. 

On June 29th 2014 (29/6/14) ISIL declared the territory they held in Iraq and Syria to be a nation state; "The Islamic State" and their leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to be their head of state. However if you've followed the Palestinians or the Kurd's quests for statehood you would know that it is a lot more complicated then that. 

In order to be considered a "Nation State" under international law you must be both a nation in fact (de facto) and in law (de jure). 

Whether a state is a de facto nation is determined by the 1933 Montevideo Convention. This requires there to be a permanent population, a defined territory, a government and the capacity to enter into relations with other nation states. Even if the BBC feels that ISIL fulfil that criteria article 11 of the convention prevents them from being a de facto nation because their territory was established through force of arms.

Whether a state is a de jour nation is determined by whether it is recognised as a nation by other nations. In the modern age this means recognition by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). As far as I am aware ISIL have not applied for recognition by the UNGA and even if they were to obtain the required majority vote it would be vetoed by the UN Security Council (UNSC) due to the group's clear disregard for the sovereignty of both Iraq and Syria in violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter.

So no, by referring to ISIL as ISIL the BBC - nor any other news agency - would not be displaying bias against them. They would simply be providing an accurate translation of the group's name for non-Arabic speaking viewers. I consider that to be one of the basic functions of an international news outlet.

However the BBC would be showing bias in favour of ISIL by referring to them as "ISIS" because with most people failing to realise that it stands for; "Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (Eng; "the Levant")" they could get confused into thinking that ISIL's activities have something to do with the Syrian government. This is a nasty little trick that US broadcaster CNN has been playing on their viewers for a good few years now.

The BBC and any other news outlet would certainly be showing bias in favour of ISIL if they were to refer to them as "Islamic State" because they are most certainly not a state. They are in fact an violent insurgent group operating primarily within the territory of the sovereign states of Syria and Iraq.

So it's rare that I agree with David Cameron but I think it is long past time for UK broadcasters to drop their clear pro-ISIL bias.

20:25 on 4/7/15 (UK date).