Daily Times

The influence and territory seized by Islamic State (IS) in the Middle East and beyond is gradually on the increase. In June last year IS declared itself a state and gained global prominence as it occupied large territories and urban centres in Iraq and Syria, and now in parts of Libya. Global coalitions and strategies have all proved ineffective against the rising influence of IS. The governments in many countries in the Middle East, North and West Africa are to a large degree responsible for the rise in militancy due to poor governance, indecision towards corruption and repression. The US invasion in 2003, calling itself the war on terror is another contributing factor to the present crisis in the region. Unless political institutions and reforms are allowed to function by the governments in a truthful manner, it will be a far cry to dislodge IS and that too through military solutions.
The US and UK-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, based upon flawed intelligence assessment, has triggered events that have now brought an undeclared war almost in the entire Middle East. The invasion has left marks of physical destruction and psychological agony that have brought an irreversible and unfortunate change in the Middle East politically, culturally and demographically. Many dictatorial regimes could not cope with changes in the region as a consequence of the US invasion. The invasion brought instability to the region, which gave rise to many militant organisations, IS being one such organisation. These are some of the recorded facts of recent history, regarding the spread of recent militancy in the Middle East.
US troops invading Iraq in 2003 met with fierce and unexpected resistance by the Iraqi population in Mosul, Ramadi and Fallujah. By 2005, more than half of Fallujah had been turned into ruins due to the US-led coalition bombing. It was here in Fallujah that IS got the most ready recruits and organised its militant cadres. By 2012, IS had attained enough strength to challenge the authority of the Iraqi state. In June 2014, IS launched an attack from Fallujah seizing almost the entire northwest Iraq. The government of Prime Minister (PM) Nouri al Maliki was so mired in corruption to have taken any steps to defend its populations or territory. Due to poor governance the Iraqi army just vanished and surrendered huge quantities of military equipment to IS. Governments that do not develop honest and democratic governance patterns cannot be expected to effectively fight a determined and merciless terrorist organisation, and such is the fate of Iraq and other many states in the Middle East and North Africa. Kurds both in Iraq and Syria are the only forces to have won decisive existential battles against IS. Gradually, the militants are encroaching upon the state authority of countries in the Middle East and North Africa, who have not won a battle that would seriously damage the fighting capacity of IS. The retaking of Tikrit in Iraq by Iranian backed militias and coalition air force is significant but not a decisive victory.
The call of IS in 2012 – ‘breaking the walls’, a call for jail breaks in Iraq to help al Qaeda and other militants escape — did not seem to bother much the corruption riddled government of PM Nouri al Maliki. In 2013, IS carried out the threat of jailbreaks by attacking Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad and Taji prison near Baghdad. It should have been a wakeup call for the Iraqi government and also for the regimes in the Middle East. In the attacks, 120 security personnel lost their lives and 800 prisoners managed to escape, many held on suspicion of terrorism. All along, the government of PM Maliki knew that the Iraqi army could not face IS because of poor discipline and lack of interest in keeping the army in a state of readiness. Above all, in 2015, the international community was made to believe that the Iraqi army was in a position to retake Mosul entirely. There is a perception that US intelligence prepared exaggerated assessments in 2015, stating that IS was much weakened in Syria. The assessment was exposed in June this year when IS, in a show of its strength, seized Ramadi in Iraq and Palmyra in Syria, and carried out attacks on the Egyptian army in Sinai Peninsula, managing to sink, through missiles, an Egyptian naval vessel in the Mediterranean.
Most of Syria is under the control of IS or the al Nusra Front and President Bashar is left with only about a fifth of Syria, mostly around Latakia on the Mediterranean and Damascus, and that too is loosely held. Recently, IS captured the last of the major oilfields held by the Syrian government, the Jazal oilfields in central Syria. The fighting in Syria is not going to come to an easy or early ending. There is renewed Russian interest in Syria at this belated stage. Russia is trying to build a naval base in Latakia, which is a precious naval listening post for Russia. Russian presence in Syria will certainly draw in the US, thus the Syrian war can become a military contest and attain the global dimensions of military rivalry between the US and Russia.
Countries in the Middle East and North Africa must realise that winning this war only on the strength of their airpower and ground forces might not yield the results they want. They must respect regional diversity like the Kurds and introduce honest economic and political reforms. The recent deployment of troops in Yemen by major Middle Eastern countries, including Egypt, has made Saudi Arabia enter a seemingly long and costly war. The Houthis consider this intervention an attack on their political, religious and tribal identity. The Saudi Arabian attack in Yemen has resulted in more chaos and, resultantly, IS has managed to gain a strong foothold in Yemen, carrying out regular attacks there. If events of the recent past are an indicator it is well nigh impossible to dislodge IS from any of its areas of influence and Yemen should not be an exception. Moreover, the armies of the region are incapable of taking on a determined enemy and regimes must be well aware of the capacity of their armies. Houthis are certainly the wrong enemy of Saudi Arabia.
There does not appear to be a quest to find and fight the right enemy; it is not too difficult a task to find the right enemy, provided regimes have the courage to search. If regimes are interested in finding the right enemy, simply stated it is poverty, illiteracy, political suppression and an alienated youth from the mainstream economy. The riots in Baghdad in August all pointed towards the right enemy, which is corruption, unemployment, an economically and socially alienated population, and lack of electricity in a country having large oil reserves. Those living outside the various security zones in Baghdad have to bear all the hardships.
In the present circumstances, insurgencies and wars in the Middle East and North and West Africa are likely to continue for a long time to come. Many regimes might not have the initiative now to end these insurgencies and wars. Seen in the context of falling oil prices, unemployed youth, high rate of population growth and lack of modern scientific education, the future does not hold much for many of these countries. The present political set up of dictators and dynasties is not adapted to provide a liberal economic set up, pluralism and political freedom. Such regimes in most of the Middle East, North and West Africa hence do not have the capacity to face the challenges of terrorism or insurgencies.

The writer is a former member of the police service of Pakistan and can be reached at humayunshafi@gmail.com