IS may be down, but it’s far from out
A possible Islamic State response would be to disperse its forces, sending fighters to failed states or conflict zones.
Many experts are now speculating that Islamic State is experiencing its death knell. It is losing territory, its finances are being drained and the number of foreign fighters recruited has reportedly down to a trickle, dropped by as much as 90 percent from a high of 2,000 a month in the past year. Each week, the U.S.led coalition’s campaign to eliminate high-value targets seems to be achieving more of its objectives. In addition, substantial numbers of its fighters are defecting, especially from Syria.
Yet the recent reversals might only force Islamic State to adapt its campaign of irregular warfare — as other militant groups, including al Qaeda, have done. With foreign fighters unable to reach the battlefield, for example, Islamic State leaders could instruct would-be jihadists to remain home and launch attacks there.
This would not bode well for predictions of the group’s demise. Research shows that the median length of an insurgency is 10 years — and the greater the number of foreign nations involved, the more likely the insurgency will continue. The fight against Islamic State, according to historic trends, is only in its infancy.
On paper, Islamic State’s loss of territory, money and recruits would seem to demonstrate significant progress by the U.S.-led coalition. But wars aren’t fought on paper. If there is one accepted truism in the battle against Islamic State, it is that the group’s leaders intend to fight to the death to establish an Islamic caliphate.
This is not the first time the core of this group has adapted to changing circumstances. Islamic State is the progeny of al Qaeda in Iraq, perhaps the most ambitious of the al Qaeda offshoots and one that owes its violent legacy to the group’s founder, the Jordanian Abu Musab alZarqawi.
Some iteration of the group has existed for more than a decade, despite significant losses to U.S.-led coalitions following the war in Iraq and the current campaign against the group.
So it is far too early to celebrate. The conflict in Syria, of which Islamic State is just one of several violent nonstate actors — along with Hezbollah, al-Nusra and others — is only a few years old. It involves a significant intervention by forces from the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, as well as varying degrees of meddling by other Gulf countries including Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.
Yet it is reasonable to expect that Islamic State will continue as a coherent organization as it adapts to the ebb and flow of conflict. Its recent losses should be viewed in the context of a longer struggle. Coalition wins are ephemeral, according to Islamic State leaders, and viewed as prologue to future fighting.
Whether this fighting is conventional, sporadic attacks or low- intensity insurgency remains to be seen. But how this conflict unfolds largely depends on how Islamic State responds to changes in its operational environment.
Islamic States leaders could decide, for example, to instruct foreign recruits to remain in their native lands and conduct attacks there. There would be no need to dispatch fighters from Iraq and Syria to Europe — as the group did with the Paris attacks in November and the Brussels bombings in March.
In addition, it would allow aspiring jihadists to potentially link up with fighters Islamic State claims have already been sent as sleeper cells to several European countries, including Germany, Italy and Britain. ( Just this weekend, a message purporting to come from an Islamic State spokesman called on followers to attack the United States and Europe during the coming holy month of Ramadan.)
Conducting a spectacular attack on European or U.S. soil could serve to rally Islamic States recruits, improve morale and score a major propaganda victory for the caliphate.
It would also fit the pattern the group has laid out — responding to territorial and personnel losses with aggression, both within and outside of its immediate region.
In any case, requiring eager recruits to travel to Syria before returning to stage terror attacks in their homelands comes with trade-offs. Key figures in the Paris and Brussels attacks traveled back and forth between Europe and Syria.
But when operatives return from known battlefields, they increase the risks of being detected by Western intelligence and law enforcement authorities.
Islamic State would clearly prefer that members have training and combat experience – in particular, instructions from its logisticians and bomb-makers. Technical expertise can be difficult to transfer in writing and is usually acquired though extended apprenticeships. This means highly skilled mentors work with new recruits to transfer specialized knowledge.
As Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev demonstrated with the Boston Marathon bombings, young militants can successfully build lethal explosives by following instructions available on the internet. Still, Islamic State is trying to have its recruits get hands-on experience to mitigate the chances of failure.
Another possible Islamic State response would be to disperse its forces throughout the globe, sending fighters to failed states or conflict zones throughout the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. There is already evidence it is building affiliates in Libya, the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, Bangladesh and several other countries, in- cluding a growing presence in Saudi Arabia.
Given that the group has already established operational hubs in these areas, shifting its focus out of Syria and Iraq, however temporarily, would allow the group to consolidate and evade the coalition’s surveillance systems in the two countries.
For the coalition to respond in kind would require substantial effort. The assembled forces would likely need to shift massive amounts of resources to another conflict zone. Washington, as well as its allies, might be unwilling to expend this major expense and effort.
Neither of these changes — shifting attacks overseas or developing other hubs of operations — would signal Islamic State’s demise. They would also not be good news for the coalition.
It is important for Washington and its allies not to become overly complacent with the status quo in the Middle East conflict. Even successful counterinsurgent practices, once adopted, must be maintained nearly four-and a-half years, on average, if they are to prevail. In a fight against an organization like Islamic State, that can seem like an eternity. Having completed two years in office with a number of promises yet to fulfilled, the Narendra Modi led NDA government at the Centre had much to celebrate during the course of the week. The government may not have scored 100% marks in areas such as governance and development, yet it remains on course for achieving its overall political objective of a “Congress Mukt Bharat” (A Congress free India).
Modi has proved that he is the most successful mascot for his party, despite the fact that his popularity has waned since the BJP came to power in 2014. However, he remains the tallest political leader in the country, given that there is hardly any challenge from his main opponents from the Congress, and as Finance Minister Arun Jaitley aptly put it, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is in no position to anchor a national alliance against the NDA.
Throughout this week, Modi and his ministers, as well as senior functionaries of the BJP, showcased the achievements of their government in an attempt to silence critics who have questioned the failure of several ministries to attain their targeted goals. A minus point is that the Prime Minister has been in a constant campaign mode and as a consequence has not been able to live up to the expectations of the youth, who reposed their full faith in his leadership in the last parliamentary polls.
In fact, the government, while highlighting its achievements, has not been outspoken about its scorecard on several points such as battling inflation, arresting rising prices, generating employment and its determination of unearthing black money. The government has attempted to offset its shortcomings by flaunting its corruption free record seen as a big contrast vis-a-vis the tainted and scam ridden last few years of the UPA government. It is true as well that the present regime has not provided ideal governance though some of the ministers have done remarkably well. Modi has kept track of his non performing ministers and they could be eased out when the re-shuffle takes places shortly. BJP chief Amit Shah on Friday gave sufficient indications that a Cabinet rejig was on cards, though he did not give a timeline for this to happen.
To be fair to the Prime Minister, it has taken two years for many of his colleagues to settle down, given their inexperience to deal with mega issues at the Centre. Modi himself is also aware of their limitations and while encouraging them to carry on with their work, has monitored their performance silently. He will pronounce his judgement on the day of the reshuffle, when ministers may either get dropped or moved to other departments that are compatible with their ability.
Modi’s greatest asset is his knack for assessing the political situation down to the last letter and thereby humbling his opponents, with the timing as well as disclosures. The Congress, for instance, is gasping for breath after sensational revelations which show its leadership in poor light. The NDA government may not have collected sufficient evidence as yet to nail its political opponents, but has been successful in creating a perception against them.
The result is that the Congress leadership is struggling to clear its name in charges being levelled against it through a carefully planned and executed campaign. Perception is very important in politics and it is on this front that Modi has reaped dividends. Given that there has been a marginal diminishment in his popularity chart, he has ensured that the graph of the Gandhi family in particular remains at its lowest ebb, thus posing no threat to his overall political dominance.
The Prime Minister is an exceptional communicator who needs to now use this skill to send down a strong message to his party and ministerial colleagues. They need to be firmly told to emulate Modi’s tough and punishing schedule to work towards excellence. There can be no half measures while executing government policies and every minister has to be made conscious of this. Simultaneously, there are elements within the BJP that seek to constantly push the clock of time backwards. They should be singled out and told to rectify their ways in order for this regime to get universal acknowledgement.
The recent poll results have given the BJP a leg up since it has managed to score an emphatic victory in Assam, a key border state described as its gateway to the Northeast. The party must not squander this opportunity created due to the unsatisfactory functioning of the Congress. At the same time, it should ready itself for the uphill task in UP, where it has 73 MPs, but would find the going really tough.
The Assembly polls next year may not necessarily herald in good news. Therefore, to offset an adverse eventuality, the Central government must cover itself with greater glory when it celebrates its three years in office. Modi is capable of a long innings and the BJP must consolidate its position while he is still at the crease. In Robert Frost’s words, he has promises to keep and miles to go before he sleeps. The Prime Minister should concentrate on his pre-poll pledges. Between us.