The upcoming international war on ISIS

In 1990, America put together an international alliance to end Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait; in 2003 Washington and London made their war on Baghdad international. Today, the “gains” made by the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq have become critical enough to form another coalition led by the United States that calls for a war on the group; once again, the fighting will be on Iraqi soil.

A number of countries have signed-up, influenced by the media hype, especially Washington’s allies in the Middle East. They include Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt and Turkey, as well as the armed forces in the “host” country, Iraq.

After the recent NATO summit in Wales earlier this month attended by nearly 60 world leaders, and after agreeing on the danger and seriousness of ISIS and the need for a war, the US president and diplomacy swung into action to mobilise the countries of the world and make the “ISIS danger” mainstream. The world was warned of the imminent danger of ISIS and its dominance over European and Asian security.

Analysis of the US and European positions regarding the danger posed by ISIS suggests that they are not linked to the land the group controls in Syria and Iraq; neither country did anything in response to its expansion across large parts of Syria or its almost complete control over three central provinces in Iraq. Instead, Western intelligence believes that the emergence of an ISIS “khalifa” in the areas it controls, running from the borders of Iraqi Kurdistan to the borders of Lebanon, passing through Syria; its possession of the necessary financial capacity and equipment to manage the battle; its ability to use the media; and its knowledge of modern military techniques, all make this organisation a potential role model for people who are oppressed or marginalised.

EU and US intelligence agencies have noticed that Muslim youth in their countries are attracted to ISIS and are getting involved with its fighters. The danger posed by this is the potential for trained fighters returning to their home countries highly-motivated and radicalised.

Leaks to Western newspapers confirm the presence of over 4,000 fighters in the ISIS ranks in Iraq and Syria at the moment. Western countries believe that the risk of their citizens being involved in terrorist operations is “existent and very high”, claims CNN’s security affairs and terrorism analyst, Paul Cruickshank.

According to British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, “The Islamic State organisation and all the other Islamic terrorist groups that are unorganised, unstable and very dangerous, all threaten the structure of sovereign states and push large numbers of people to flee in order to escape their brutality, which brings about dire consequences for our allies and friends in the region.”

He added that raising the security alert level in the UK is not only due to the threat posed by groups such as ISIS to the security of British interests abroad. It is also due to the threat posed to the national security of the UK, the West and the Arab world, and because “it will most likely seek to strike us at home, sooner or later”.

Thus, the United States and Britain have found justifications for leading an international campaign to wage a war on ISIS in Iraq. Now, the US president, who has been conservative when it comes to involving his country in any war that may lead to human and economic losses throughout his presidency, finds himself forced to make the decision to wage another war. He expects to spare his country the use of ground forces by using Iraqi troops and the Kurdish Pashmerga militia.

However, despite this, he has stressed repeatedly that “victory over the ISIS organisation cannot be achieved without the participation of the Sunnis in Iraq and Syria in the war.” He considers that the Sunnis, who have been suffering under difficult circumstances since the US-led occupation of Iraq, are a natural nursery for ISIS, which they believe is on their side against the oppression of the Iraqi government militias linked to Iran, as well as the official security forces, which are often described as sectarian.

In a meeting in Cairo on September 7th, the Arab foreign ministers agreed to take all necessary measures to address ISIS and cooperate with all the international, regional and local efforts to combat extremist groups; this meant that they agreed to join the US-led international alliance against ISIS. They also supported the UN Security Council resolution issued last month which calls for the Member States to take action to stop all logistic, military and financial support provided to extremists in Iraq.

Following this, Obama sent his Secretary of State, John Kerry, Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel and Special Adviser for combating terrorism Lisa Monaco to the Middle East to make arrangements for the formation of the international alliance. “Rooting out a cancer like ISIS won’t be easy,” said the president, “and it won’t be quick.”

Adding that the operation will not be done in a week, month or even six months because of the vacuum in authority in Syria, he pointed out that certain elements have become masters of battle and left the Al-Qaeda umbrella during the Iraqi war.

“This will take some time before we can force them to retreat,” said Vice President Joe Biden in reference to the ISIS fighters. “They should know that we will follow them to the gates of hell until they’re brought to justice, because hell is where they will reside.”

According to the New York Times on September 8, Washington’s plans for the war in Iraq will have three phases. The first will be extensive use of air power, in which all allied countries will participate. The next phase will focus on training the Iraqi army and Kurdish Pashmerga, as well as Iraqi Sunni factions, which are “the most important and dangerous element”. They will be armed with advanced weapons that match the style of the ISIS fighters.

As for the third phase, it will consist of pursuing and destroying all sites and locations in which the ISIS leaders are present and completely eliminating their presence in the region. The US army chiefs of staff have set a three-year time frame for this scenario.

Despite Obama’s confirmation that this campaign against the Islamic State “is not the equivalent of the Iraq War”, and that it is “similar to the kinds of counter-terrorism campaigns that we’ve been engaging in consistently over the last five, six, seven years”, the reality of the situation indicates clear confusion in the American president’s vision and positions on this issue, not least because he is fighting an ill-defined organisation.

According to Ben Hubbard, the journalist responsible for covering the Islamic State for the New York Times, the leader of the group, “Caliph” Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, has 24 deputies, most of whom are middle-aged Iraqis. A third of these deputies are men who were officers in the former Iraqi army. Hubbard points out that the advantage of these officers is that they mobilise ISIS fighters just as they would an army, with military precision; they are not irregular and disorganised rebel forces.

The Arab countries which have declared their enthusiasm for the new international war on Iraq should be cautious and not follow blindly the policies based on media and psychological hype adopted by Washington, London and Paris. Such caution is needed specifically regarding the portrayal of the threat posed by ISIS, as if it is ready to overthrow all the regional governments and extend itself to Europe and America.

They must also remember and study the experiences of the last two wars in Iraq, as well as the experience of the Arab Spring. In all of these examples, Washington warned many Arab states that they were in imminent danger, either from Saddam Hussein or from their own citizens in the revolutionary atmosphere of the Arab protests. As for Iraq, no one can say anything about it because, to be honest, it lacks the ability to make any decisions of its own due to the great imbalance in its political structure since 2003. I must also note that this war will cost it a lot of money, many Iraqi lives, and many possibilities for its future development.

Translated from Al Jazeera net, 14 September, 2014

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.