The Islamic State has no future and is bound to fail. But more importantly, it is a lost opportunity for a genuine change in the countries of the Middle East. Here is why. The Islamic State declared "war" and expressed the desire to conquer the World. It called Muslims all over the world to fight the "non believers" in their country. This communication strategy is extremely short sighted as completely ignores how our societies and governments function. Public opinion can be swayed to either explicitly or implicitly support controversial government decisions by the information it is being fed. Just like massive communication and media coverage of the Pearl Harbor incident swayed public opinion to give in and support war against Japan, so too, media coverage of the horrors of the Vietnam war swayed public opinion to pressure the government to end war in Vietnam. The Islamic State's communication strategy and the actions it is carrying out across the world will inevitably fuel the success of extreme right wing parties and governments. The violence and racism against Muslims all around the world is already increasing steadily and it is only a matter of time, should the Islamic State persevere in its current strategy, before neo-fascist or neo-Nazi governments take power in key countries around the world. Examples of the stupidity of their actions can be exemplified by the recent terrorist attacks against the journalists and cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo. The Islamic State openly supported the attacks and encouraged others to do the same. But let's look at the actual impact of the attacks. Charlie Hebdo was a dying journal. Before the attacks it had about 8000 subscribers and was printed at between 25.000 and 50.000 copies. It was in a very tight financial situation and was ignored by the majority of people, many actually criticizing it for being racist. Perhaps a few more years, and the journal would have died out, just like its predecessor, Hara-Kiri. After the attacks, the number of subscribers was multiplied by 25 and the journal printed following the attacks was sold by the millions, securing it's financial revenues. The attacks also severely increased racism and violence against Muslim communities and contributed to the ever increasing popularity of the "Front National" (the french extreme right party). Another blatant example of the stupidity of the Islamic State is the videos published showing the decapitation of kidnapped tourists or the training of women and children to become warriors of the Islamic State. How many videos showing women and children training to kill and how many newspaper articles and reports about women and children committing terrorist attacks will it require before the entire population living in Islamic State controlled territory will not be seen as "victims" and potential "collateral damage" by the wider public but simply cold blooded terrorists that deserve to die? An interesting question to ask is why are our countries relatively "passive" in the wake of an enemy that openly declares its wish to take over the world. Some would say that our own governments are busy with other more pressing issues such as restoring our broken economies and secure economic growth which is indispensable to the survival of our economic system. In my opinion, the Islamic State is allowed to exist because it serves the interests of many governments across the world. First, it is a source of revenue for the weapon industry, selling weapons to those fighting against the Islamic State, and perhaps even indirectly selling weapons to the Islamic State. Second, for some governments, it is the perfect way to get rid of troublesome minorities in their own countries. Turkey for instance, probably wouldn't mind if the Kurds and the Islamic State slaughtered each other. Third, the strategy of the Islamic State is not a major threat to the continued existence of our economic and political system. Osama Ben Laden and the September 11th attacks targeted the World Trade Center, which represented the heart of our financial and economic system. "Smart" terrorism that chooses highly sensitive targets that can shake the economic and financial system is extremely dangerous and our governments will go out of their way to ensure that it is eliminated. The Islamic State, on the other hand, encourages "petty" terrorism, choosing civilian targets which do absolutely zero effect to the stability of the economic and financial system. Growth in France will certainly not suffer from the death of a dozen cartoonists, but on the other hand, such attacks give governments more political leverage to progressively put in place a less democratic and more authoritarian political system. Fourth, the region of the Middle East has been hostile to our governments for decades, but keeping them fighting against each other is the perfect way to divert their attention. The US has already successfully played the game in the 1980s when it sponsored the war between Iraq and Iran. Now, we hear of better relations between the US and Iran, made possible by the "common enemy" that is the Islamic State. Finally, the Islamic State solves an enduring problem of our societies: capitalism cannot secure the happiness of everyone. Some people in our society are unhappy, depressed, unemployed, poor, uneducated,... They usually are more of a "cost" than a benefit to our economic system because of their increased delinquency rates and the need to fund police and prisons to keep the delinquent elements locked away, and because of direct subsidies such as unemployment benefits or social security they receive since our modern societies would not accept that they were simply left to die. Some of these people will be seduced by the Islamic States' rhetoric and rally it's cause, buying a ticket to fight by its side in Syria, Iraq or Libya. It's the first time in history that people willingly buy a ticket to go to a massive concentration and extermination camp. For our governments, rather than feeding a part of its population with anti-depressants, shelling out government money to keep them living in barely acceptable social conditions through social security and locking up the inevitable violent elements that can no longer bear their degraded situation, they can simply be left to fight and die in the Middle East for the mere cost of an airplane ticket, paid with their own money. If by chance, they manage to return, they are branded like livestock as terrorists and can be legitimately monitored and spied on by the government without fear of breaching any kind of laws protection individuals. Should they plan any terrorist attack, they can be shot on sight as was already the case in the Netherlands, Belgium and the US, governments capitalizing on the news of such failed attacks by pushing even more controversial policies heading towards the direction of totalitarian states. But it goes even further. Should the Islamic State endure in its current strategy, in a couple of years, public opinion will be ripe to give it's governments total freedom to annihilate them entirely. Since women and children are being trained as soldiers fighting for the Islamic State, anyone living inside the territory controlled by the Islamic State can be considered an enemy. Moreover, the impact on the world economy of a total destruction of the territories controlled by the Islamic State is negligible if at all existent. It could even spur a much needed rebound in the currently low oil prices for the oil industry. Once public opinion is ripe to the idea and extreme right governments took root in key countries, nothing will prevent them from dropping a dozen nuclear weapons on the Islamic State or use more traditional massive bombing campaigns to eradicate them. Thus the Islamic State is the first massive concentration and extermination camp where people disenfranchised with our societies go to die. To finish, I would say it is quite sad to see how the situation develops. European States, followed by the United States, have meddled in the internal affairs of the Middle East for nearly a millennium. First with the crusades to take back "Christian" holy land, then with colonization and finally through economic and political control over their governments' heads, supported by our governments so long as they did not go against our interests. Progressive revolutions were quashed such as the Iranian revolution in the 1950s, replaced by a ruthless dictatorship supported by our governments. The Middle East region deserves a true independence, and a government that works in the interest of its populations that have seen an endless alternation between war, poverty and violent dictatorships. A government that will defend their interests at the international level, strive to diversify and support the local economy without falling prey to multinational companies only willing to suck out natural resources at an advantageous price. Instead, they have fallen into chaos and obscurantism, blinded by hate and shortsightedness. If history tells us anything, it's that the most successful revolutions of all time came about by highly educated and visionary personalities: Ghandi, Mandela, San Martin, Bolivar... Even Martin Luther King brought about more change in the United States by a few thousand words than could have been possible with a million guns. Knowledge is power and so far, the Islamic State has showed only signs of blatant ignorance and stupidity. It opened a window of opportunity for a genuine change in the Middle East, and slammed it shut right in its own face.
I hope that I am wrong, that the sad followers of ISIS wake up and realize where they are, what they are doing and that they are pawns in the hands of bigger forces than they could have imagined and start reading books about history and geopolitics to think of a viable solution for peace and independence. I forgot to say that unfortunately, violent revolutionaries usually only agree to lay down their weapons and start planting potatoes and rebuilding houses when their goal has been achieved... Unfortunately, since their aim is world conquest, by the time they realize it's impossible, they won't know how to do anything else but to kill people, thereby condemning them to fight and die on a battle field, never to know peace.
I do understand your reasoning and your post is well thought out, but I think that ISIS is fixing to get the crap kicked out of them in the coming week. First place.............. most Arabs don't want a Caliphate.
You mean the old autocratic despot of the KSA... The young Muslim are joining Isis in drove, they do want a caliphate.
I've often questioned whether ISIS was a real organization guided by people who sought their own autonomy, or whether it was some fallacious construct of foreign design made to eventually validate the extreme removal of this state- whether directly or indirectly. The reason why I thought this was based on some of the reasons in your statement. Their actions do not make sense. They are not strong enough to really claim stable control over their own territory, but they make war against the entire world. Unless I'm to believe these people are sheer idiots, how does a modern state flourish by having enemies everywhere? They attack their own people, Afircans, Asians, Europeans, and Americans. Apparently, Islamic Terrorism is universal. But you can't build an economy from that, and this rag-tag nonesense they call an army would be obliterated by any of the formal powers of the world. If you can make sense of their actions, good on you, but I can't. Every thing they do is self- desturctive. They seem to exist simply to (*)(*)(*)(*) as many people off as possible and that's why I had a really hard time accepting them as a valid Islamic State guided by people wishing to create their own future.
They will destroy their infrastructure including clean water, roads and power plants.. lose a generation to illiteracy and in general set the Arab world back a couple hundred years.
Well, you've summarized my long post, this is exactly what I say so I concur fully. I think the reason they exist is simply because they are uneducated or religiously fanatic (down right crazy) which clouds their vision. They make me think of the "Directoire" regime that was lead by Robespierre after the French Revolution: terror, decapitations, autocracy and violence but no "realistic" plans for the future. They are like a Russian revolution without Lenin and Trotsky: a bunch of angry peasants that understand nothing about the world and the forces at play...
I don't personally know the pope but I do know his position on many subject. You don't have to go to the KSA to know they're a despotic regime who finance terrorism and use slave labor. You're starting to be a bore always asking those same two silly question as if they matter. I didn't know hitler personally or been to Germany but I still know he was a homicidal dictator...
Attacking Europe and Western countries is just PR for back home, they want an Islamic state from Iraq to Syria and Jordan, they need local support for that and that's gained - among other things - by humiliating the west, showing how decayed and weak its society is, the Islamic state stands for everything opposite from that and they gain support, It doesnt matter how fasict Europe might get from it, Polish soldiers will not travel to the desert to fight them. - - - Updated - - - Most Arabs where and how do you know that ?
Yes, but like I said, it's nothing that bothers the west since they do not threaten our Nation States and our own capitalist and oligarchic politics system. The PR they are doing is actually playing exactly in the hands of the West since it's making sure that all the "deviants" self-manifest themselves and are either shot or left to go battle in the middle of the desert. As far as ISIS in Syria, Iraq and Jordan, it is bound to fail. We saw what fanatism and craziness does to a country's economic and social development. Take Stalin for example, a crazy dictator if there ever was one. He sponsored really stupid scientists just because their "theories" matched the communist ideals. For instance, he forced farmers to plant several seeds in the same whole because allegedly they would germ even stronger by developing "solidarity" between themselves (of course, in reality, they mutually suffocated each other which resulted in wide spread famines!) Anyways, just to say that in today's world, it is impossible to rule a country with all the complexities that come from a globalized world and the demographic reality if you are just a crazy religious fanatic. The people at the head of ISIS want to live like at the times of the prophet. I'm not sure that using rakes and shovels will enable them to provide food for the population. Anyways, the West doesn't care, even IF ISIS succeeds, it's still not a big deal unless they really start developing like a Nation State. But that's highly unlikely.
The current manifestation of ISIS will eventually fail for sure. The first order of business in revolutions is to get rid of the revolutionaries. The idea of forming a new caliphate probably will not fail. I do not expect a map of the Mddle East to look the same in 20 years as it does today.
Besides, the only thing you can count on in the ME is opposion and resistance! let them have it and they will revolt against that as well
They have refused a Caliphate since the early 1920s... The Ottoman Caliphate plunged most of the Arab world into an illiterate backwater... and, in fact.. Arab countries have diverse interests.
I think things may be changing, by the looks of things... Facts are, they are pretty much alone in dealing with Da'esh, allied bombs will not clear the cities and will not assist in an urban battle, sooner or later the moderate Sunnis will have to decide to openly support Da'esh or run away towards the Shiates, Now I dont know what's the general impression the Sunni have on the shia in Iraq but chances are its not favorable considering Malikhi and other past events, so what do you think? who are they likly to follow ? the rising power Da'esh of same faith or the Shia ?
