By Geoff LaMear
Following the U.S. raid which eliminated ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi, we should be asking ourselves, “What comes next?” Invariably, there will be voices crying out for a continuation of the anti-ISIS mission in Iraq and Syria. ISIS will no doubt exist after Qurayshi’s death and is likely to continue conducting attacks. But the idea that we have a binary choice between letting ISIS run wild or having a permanent presence in Iraq and Syria is a false one.
First, the environment which permitted ISIS’ explosive growth in 2014 doesn’t mirror conditions today. Other than the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF), there were no countervailing military forces in 2014 to stop their advance. Furthermore, the ISF was inept and corrupt, leading to its capitulation at Mosul. Today, tens of thousands of militiamen reinforce the ISF, the Syrian government is not on its last legs, the Kurds are organized and equipped, and Iranian and Russian firepower can be brought to bear. ISIS at its peak was obliterated by these forces; ISIS today won’t make a comeback.
Victory at a military level has been achieved. Research by counterterrorism scholars indicates that killing terrorist leaders like Qurayshi may lead to the long-term breakdown of ISIS as an organized group. Qurayshi’s death follows the elimination of ISIS’ first leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, under then-President Donald Trump’s administration. ISIS hasn’t just lost its leaders, either. It lost its oil fields, a major source of revenue, as well as the population centers from which it recruited and taxed the local populace. The remaining counterterrorism mission should be led by local partners since it is population-centric prevention that will make these gains permanent.
This piece was originally published in Task & Purpose on February 14, 2022. Read more HERE.