Power vacuum could lead to split and greater threat

Isis has not been destroyed by the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, its leader. Like most terrorist groups, the organisation is more than its leader.

There are three key questions to consider when considering his death and what it means for Isis (Islamic State) and terrorist threats more broadly.

The most immediate concern will be the army of fanboys that exist around the group and its ideology across the world. For some of these isolated individuals, his death might be read as the moment at which they should leap into action to conduct an atrocity. The group will undoubtedly claim any attacks as planned revenge, when in reality they are at best opportunistic. But given the growing preponderance of copycat incidents after significant terrorist events, it will be a major preoccupation of security forces around the world.

For Isis, the question will be whether it can continue to maintain its coherence in the absence of a leader who led them at their most totemic moment. He may not have had the personal charisma and back story as Osama bin Laden, but he was the significant figure when it was at its apex. This kept the group coherent.

The danger will be fragmentation among the regional affiliates who may now decide to reprioritise local concerns over the group’s globalist agenda. But a greater question might exist between the group’s Syrian and Iraqi followers.

Isis is a group made up of Iraqis who took advantage of the conflict in Syria to grow and expand. As they grew in Syria, more locals flocked to their cause.

Over time this will have created two groups who were driven together by the joint cause of building a Levantine (and global) caliphate led by al-Baghdadi, their long-standing leader. His removal might precipitate a clash between the two groups that might lead it to fragment.

This fragmentation might make it more dangerous. Historically, the removal of terrorist leaders gives rise to eager pretenders who use dramatic violence to announce their arrival and eclipse their predecessor. It can also lead to in-fighting, which can have a knock-on effect on their environment.

At the same time, his removal might raise interesting questions about Isis broadly and its historical conflicts with al-Qaeda and other groups in Syria. Some early commentary by jihadist groups who were against Isis on the ground in Syria suggests they are dancing on his grave and mocking his group. But cooler heads might prevail at a strategic level and try to use this as an opportunity to forge a rapprochement between the groups.

Lots of death and bad blood between Isis and al-Qaeda stands between this potential outcome, but the death of a significant leader does potentially change the dynamic.

Whatever the case, al-Baghdadi’s death is undoubtedly a victory for the West. It does not mean the end of Isis, but it is a successful strike and further evidence of the importance of maintaining a war of attrition against such groups.