As the Islamic
State of Iraq and Syria continues to hold their territory they have captured in
Iraq and Syria a comprehensive plan must be formed to eliminate the threat they
pose to the international community. By viewing this conflict through the lens of
Realist Constructivism we are able to see the hostilities raised by ISIS
through the creation of the other, the power politics necessary to maintain
their state and ultimately the need for regional allies and enemies alike to
band together. By creating an Islamic
Caliphate all infidels become the other.
ISIS
fighters are vicious and have an extreme dedication to the creation and
preservation of an Islamic state. Through their ferocity they were able to take
the city of Mosul that was defended by 30,000 Iraqi soldiers with a mere force
of 800 fighters. The Iraqi army was so terrified of ISIS they abandoned the
city. While it may seem surprising that such a small force was capable of this
feat the factors were always in ISIS’s favor. ISIS was able to get many of
their fighters from the discontent created by the Iraqi government. The Shiites
in the government excluded most Sunnis from holding public offices creating
resentment of the Sunnis who felt discriminated against. ISIS took advantage by
first painting the Iraqi government as the enemy that must be toppled at all
cost to preserve the Sunni strain of Islam. After their gains in Iraq they
painted the rest of the world that did not believe in their specific
fundamentalist strain of Islam as the enemy that must be crushed for Allah. When
the U.S entered the fight and began to create a coalition for defeating ISIS it
only further inflamed more arabs to join the fighters. No one wants the
Great Devil, the U.S, to reengage in Iraq. ISIS fighters are will stop at
nothing to secure and preserve their state against the infidels.
ISIS
realizes that the preservation of their caliphate is dependent on the relative gains
that they continue to achieve. As powerful as ISIS’s fighters are they are no
match for the full force of a highly trained military. By taking territory city
by city they are able to entrench and repel enemy forces. By only taking small
portions of the surrounding countries they are able to prevent a massive
retaliation from any of the other nations. By playing smart power politics they
are able to make relative gains in all the surrounding countries while
preserving their main force.
The
U.S’s current plan will never be to root out ISIS. For every fighter we kill
two more will take the persons place. A western led coalition is too easy a
target for ISIS to demonize. The proper solution would be to get the local
countries around the caliphate to invade the Islamic state. Only regional power
will be able to effectively rout ISIS and turn local opinion against them. The
Western powers would still be able to fund their armies but U.S troops cannot
be involved. Only once countries such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iran
actually contribute a significant amount troops, which Iran has started to do,
can ISIS be truly stopped.
By understanding the tactics ISIS
is using to recruit and stay in power we can start to use their own tactics
against them. Constructivists understand that ISIS is uniting their forces by
making the West and those who do not share their extreme views the other and continuing
to gain territory by making relative gains in Iraq and Syria. By making a local
coalition to fight ISIS the U.S can prevent more recruitment and roll back
their gains with one large invasion force of Arab countries.
I think it is really interesting how you approached the problem posed by ISIS from a constructivist lens. I want to elaborate on how you claimed that ISIS strives to define the US and other Western nations as "the other." I think this is the most important connection you made between ISIS and the constructivist theory, because of the importance of identity in constructivism. ISIS is creating its own identity for its followers, one that is rooted in extremist values. However an important part of this identity is separating "we" from "them." I think that this is why ISIS has been very successful in gaining so much support, and why ISIS poses an extremely hard challenge to the western world; it is much easier to change peoples' actions than it is to change their identity.
ReplyDeleteYou obviously have been keeping in touch with this issue, I did not know a lot about what you talked about, especially Mosul. So forgive my ignorance for the following; what do Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iran think about ISIS? Do they have something gain from the dissolution of ISIS? Do they have something from listening to Western powers? How can the US persuade regional powers to get involved without looking like we are only pursuing our national interests? Moreover, if the ISIS forces were able to take down Iraqi soldiers 37:1, how is the regional power expected to compete without completely obliterating the international rules of warfare? Sidenote: if ISIS is not an internationally credible power, do we have to observe the Geneva accords? I assume yes....
ReplyDeleteBe that as it may, you post was very thought provoking, good work!