Choose Your Own Adventure: Confronting the Islamic State

Since the escalation of the Syrian civil war, the world has witnessed the brutal rise of ISIS. Not only has the insurgent army seized territory in the Levant, instituted a harsh theocracy, and violated the human rights of ethnic minorities in the region, it has drawn in the Western civilization by recruiting European Muslims and decrying the United States. As recent events in Libya and Nigeria indicate the spread of ISIS’s ideology, which has been almost unanimously defined as barbaric, observers search for the ultimate solution to end the group’s activities, once and for all. But here’s the bad news: There is no such solution. There is no magic pill to cure the Middle East of ISIS, nor is there a clear set of policies that one can adopt to defeat the organization. The fact is, ISIS is a complex organization that arose from a complex conflict in an extremely complex region in which a variety of different actors work towards conflicting goals. In order to curb its advance, the international community needs to stop searching for an ultimate solution against the organization and start to realize the different paths available towards confronting ISIS.

Looking at the characters involved in the conflict with ISIS on a wider scale, we see the major geopolitical players. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, known as the Quds Force, has taken an active role in fighting ISIS militants in Syria. Some Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria, as well as Hezbollah, have served as proxies for Iran, defending Shia communities in Iraq from ISIS control. Saudi Arabia, Iran’s longtime foe, has seen the activities of such Shiite militias as part of Iran’s expanding influence in the region after the Houthi rebellion in Yemen and successful retention of power by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. Turkey is another regional power who is confronted by the Islamic State. Bordering Syria and Iraq, Turkey has faced a refugee crisis from the war. The rise of Kurdish militias fighting ISIS has also been a major concern for Turkey given the state’s history of conflict with Kurdish separatists, most notably the PKK. Also a staunch opponent of Syria’s violent Assad regime, the Turkish government has benefited slightly from the Islamic State’s attacks against the Syrian government and the Kurds.

Zooming in further, smaller non-state actors are ingrained in the conflict. In Syria, the dwindling Free Syrian Army has continued the battle against the Assad regime,albeit with little success, and has also been brutalized by ISIS. The Iraqi Peshmerga and Kurdish YPG have been fighting valiantly to defend Kurdish land from ISIS insurgents. Militias from other minority groups including Assyrians, Christians, and Shias have also fought to protect their communities. However, a large focus of the Islamic State’s activities has been to purge apostates from the “caliphate,” and mass atrocities have been committed against such minorities. Most notably, the Yazidis of Mt. Sinjar have been subjected to threats of ethnic cleansing and sexual slavery.

Then we come to the ones who are furthest away from the Islamic State--the Europeans and Americans. Both of whom are terrified of the prospect of thousands of jihadis returning from Syria to commit terrorist acts in the Western World. For European states like France, Great Britain, and Germany, this is a valid concern, as many of the ISIS foreign fighters hold passports from those countries. It is less so for the United States, and many analysts claim that there is little risk of domestic terror as a result of the Islamic State. This has not stopped the United States from taking an active role in the fight against ISIS, by conducting air strikes and supporting its Arab allies militarily.

When one asks, “What should we do about ISIS,” we often evoke images of their brutality and barbarity, leading the expected response to be attempts to “destroy and degrade” the organization, as President Obama put it. However, judging by the motives of the actors that we have just established, destroying ISIS completely is not the prevailing option for many of the groups involved. So, if that is the case, what are our options?

For Iran, it must decide how dedicated it is to preserving the Assad regime and sustaining its proxies in the region. Amid nuclear talks with Western nations, part of the negotiations may include Iran’s role in sponsoring militias in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Moving forward with these talks may force Iran to reduce its influence and also its role in fighting the ISIS. For close American allies, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, it may be more strategic to just contain, rather than destroy, ISIS, since ISIS has conveniently been fighting their own enemies, namely Assad, Iran-backed militias, and the Kurds. For the ethnic and religious minorities on the ground, all it seems like they can do is fight for their lives.

This situation puts the United States and its allies in a unique dilemma between actively trying to destroy the group in the name of humanitarian protection and following its strategic goal of degrading ISIS to a point that it is no longer a threat to American allies in the region. The first route would involve mobilizing local Sunni leaders against the group, integrating former Ba’athists into the Iraqi government, and accepting young Arab immigrants into European society to avoid isolation and recruitment by ISIS, all the while cooperating militarily with powers in the region such as Jordan and even Iran and Syria. Otherwise, we could decide to keep the geopolitical battle going by refusing to coordinate with Iran and its supporters and use military airstrikes to prevent ISIS from taking major cities but allowing them to keep Shiite militias at bay and fight the Syrian Army.

After recent battles in Tikrit, beheadings in Libya, and Boko Haram’s pledging of allegiance to ISIS, the insurgency’s prominence in the world continues to be an issue. Although a complex situation, there are available paths for every character in the ISIS saga. All that is yet to be seen is which ones each actor will choose to take.