Deceiving State of Terror

Chandler Olah

Muck

International Relations

Op-ed

Deceiving State of Terror

            In light of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, President François Hollande of France has declared war on the Islamic State. The president has named the Islamic State as its greatest enemy today however, France stands alone as no other state in the world claims ISIS to be the most severe issue threatening their safety. Now, there are many actors that have interests playing out in the Middle East. The Turkish government has stated very clearly that its main enemy is Kurdish separatism. The Syrian Kurds seek not to crush ISIS so much as to defend their new borders while those in Iraq see their main danger in the form of a strong central government emerging from Baghdad. As for the Saudis, the main enemy isn’t ISIS, who represent a form of Sunni radicalism they have always supported as their main target is Iran. Now, The Iranians, for their part, want to contain ISIS but not necessarily to destroy it. Its very existence prevents the return of the kind of Arab Sunni coalition that gave them such trouble during their war with Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Although there are several players in the ISIS terrorism conflict, many are not willing to send its forces to reclaims land from ISIS. Today, the United States’ strategy relies on waging war from afar, through aerial strikes. Having been involved in conflict in the Middle East for some time, Washington is reluctant to send ground troops. With France being the only one at “war” with ISIS, it may prove to be too much one the lone nation.

            Fortunately for France, if they lack the means to live up to its ambitions of war, so may ISIS. ISIS achieves its goal through the same means as any other terror cell, through shock and awe. The attack against Hezbollah in Beirut, the attack against the Russians in Sharm el Sheikh and the attacks in Paris had the same goal: terror. But just as the execution of the Jordanian pilot sparked patriotism among even the heterogeneous population of Jordan, the attacks in Paris will turn the battle against ISIS into a national cause. ISIS does not qualify as a “state” by any means and this ISIS system seems to have already expanded the farthest possible in their situation. Due to their fierce expansion tactics, they have reached the farthest they can before running into someone that has the means necessary to repel them from going any further. To the north, there are Kurds; to the east, Iraqi Shiites; to the west, Alawites, now protected by the Russians. Because ISIS has affected so many different groups of people negatively, they will hit the same consequences that Al-Qaeda hit once they globalized their terrorism efforts.

            The question remains, what is the appropriate response to the efforts put in by ISIS over the recent months? Putting US troops on the ground to repel the efforts of ISIS seems to be unlikely due to the fact that we have been involved in conflicts in the Middle East since we launched troops to Afghanistan in 2001. Another possibility would be the conjoined cooperation amongst the surrounding nations that are currently in conflict with ISIS. However, this also may be as unlikely as the US sending troop to combat ISIS due to the fact that the differences among their goals and ulterior motives are much different from one another. In my opinion, ISIS seems to be taking the same road as Al-Qaeda in the route to globalized terror which, ultimately, could be their downfall.