ISIS Is Not a Terrorist Group by Audrey Kurth Cronin, Foreign Affairs
After 9/11, many within the U.S. national security establishment worried that, following decades of preparation for confronting conventional enemies, Washington was unready for the challenge posed by an unconventional adversary such as al Qaeda. So over the next decade, the United States built an elaborate bureaucratic structure to fight the jihadist organization, adapting its military and its intelligence and law enforcement agencies to the tasks of counterterrorism and counterinsurgency.
Now, however, a different group, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), which also calls itself the Islamic State, has supplanted al Qaeda as the jihadist threat of greatest concern. ISIS’ ideology, rhetoric, and long-term goals are similar to al Qaeda’s, and the two groups were once formally allied. So many observers assume that the current challenge is simply to refocus Washington’s now-formidable counterterrorism apparatus on a new target.
But ISIS is not al Qaeda. It is not an outgrowth or a part of the older radical Islamist organization, nor does it represent the next phase in its evolution. Although al Qaeda remains dangerous—especially its affiliates in North Africa and Yemen—ISIS is its successor. ISIS represents the post–al Qaeda jihadist threat…
Comments
While not recognized by any legal entities, ISIL is probably most accurately a de facto rogue state.
"Terrorist" is a legal status we confer upon a wide range of organizations who engage in behavior we deem as "terrorist." These organizations are mostly nationalist or regional revolutionary or resistance insurgency groups. Some are UW groups, like AQ
The reality is that it is a term with no strategic meaning, so calling an organization a "terrorist organization" is really little more than name calling. It does not suggest a category of actor or problem that can be solved by some associated family solutions. We love meaningless categories defined by superficial characteristics. The problem is that we then apply solutions designed to make those characteristics go away, and declare victory when they do. There are simple approaches to naming that work, but we seem happy with a simplistic approach that does not.
When you think about it she is right, this is more the actions of a (non-)nationstate. Which given its current rate may soon be a true Nation State. Remember that in most of the Middle-East we are dealing with political boundaries that didn't exist prior to the end of WWI, that were drawn up as political necessity not as traditional or historical boundaries.
So just like at the end of the WWI, WWII and the Cold War where new or previous countries were born, could we be looking at the realigning Western political boundaries with the ethnic reality on the ground and the beginning of new nations? What would be the ramification for other contested regions, Duran Line between Afghanistan and Pakistan? Maybe a nation called Baluchistan in the Southwestern corner of Afghanistan and extending into Pakistan and Iran?
Here is President Obama's op-ed in today's LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/
Herein note that:
a. While Mr. Cronin may be right that ISIS is not the same as AQ,
b. This does not seem to matter to our presidents -- past and/or present --
c. Who, together it would seem,
d. See virtually ALL the worlds' problems through the lens of
e. States and societies not being organized, ordered and oriented more along modern western political, economic and social lines.
In this context (how AQ and ISIS are alike, in our presidents eyes) to note the President Obama's words in today's op-ed:
"More broadly, groups like al Qaeda and ISIL exploit the anger that festers when people feel that injustice and corruption leave them with no chance of improving their lives. The world has to offer today's youth something better. Governments that deny human rights play into the hands of extremists who claim that violence is the only way to achieve change. Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies. Those efforts must be matched by economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so people have hope for a life of dignity."
Thus, whatever the problem (ISIS; AQ; et al) "development," more along modern western political, economic and social lines, this is the only cure.
Strategy, thus, to be crafted with this overarching/overriding goal in mind.
Such strategy acknowledging that:
a. The use of military force,
b. To achieve such an objective,
c. Has limited/little utility?