Why the existence of the Islamic State is a boon for US Middle East policy

The general wisdom holds that the rise of the Islamic State has represented a major threat to US interests in the Middle East.

This is certainly true in the sense that the Islamic State has declared itself openly hostile to the United States.

However, I want to point out at least three reasons why I believe that the presence of this latest extremist threat actually serves important US interests in the region.

1) The Islamic States is perceived as a threat by both the United States and Iran. The existence of this common enemy has created the conditions for indirect cooperation between leaders in Washington and Tehran. Such a limited cooperation (again, indirect in nature but unthinkable before the rise of IS) could represent an important step in the difficult process of confidence-building between the two countries; a process that could eventually result in a successful US-Iranian nuclear deal by mid 2015.

2) The Islamic State is deeply involved in the Syrian civil war. IS fighters arguably represent the greatest challenge to President Assad forces. Prolonged fighting between IS and Syrian government forces will presumably weaken both. Since they are both US enemies, leaders in Washington may not dislike such an outcome, at least in the short/medium term.

3) The rise of the Islamic State has allowed the United States to renew its direct military presence in a strategically important region (US troops had to leave Iraq at the end of 2011). Along with the use of US airpower, the United States has so far deployed at least 3,000 troops to train Iraqi and Kurdish forces and has recently announced its intention to deploy 400 troops more to assist vetted Syrian rebels.

The Obama administration’s approach to the fight against the Islamic State has been extremely cautious. It looks like the US administration is more interested in “containing” the threat rather than “eliminating” it. Could the US approach be explained in part by the above considerations?

Advertisements

2 comments

  1. Anonymous

    Eugenio, That is an interesting take on the situation…Though, I would refute the position on many bases. The US has lost, and continues to lose ground on every issue of substantive importance in the region. With further consideration the US has continued to appease Iran and the IS phenomenon has resulted in little advantage for the US and much greater advantage for Iran, Syria and Russia, to name just a few states implicated in the current power calculus. My view is not derived from any dominant logic or conventional wisdom, rather from my own lengthy interest in the region and especially Iranian affairs. The following links to articles summarize some of the rationale. Respectfully, in agreement to disagree.

    http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141204012613-52411898-isil-idelogy-and-islamic-militancy-where-is-the-centre-of-gravity?trk=mp-reader-card

    http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141204163957-52411898-us-policy-isil-quds-force-human-rights-retying-the-gordian-knot?trk=mp-reader-card

    http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141207025403-52411898-russia-and-iran-issues-and-implications?trk=mp-reader-card

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s