As Iraq, Syria defeat ISIS, Al-Qaeda looms large

Mosul has been recaptured by the Iraqi Army from ISIS. ISIS-held Raqqa is currently besieged from all sides by the Syrian Kurds. And the Syrian Arab Army, bolstered by de-escalation zones in the west of the country, has massed its troops in the east, scoring victory after victory against ISIS in Syria.

While things are currently looking up for Syria and Iraq, Al-Qaeda still maintains its presence in Afghanistan. A resurgent Taliban is winning the war against the government led by Ashraf Ghani and, contrary to popular belief, the Taliban maintains its close relationship with Al-Qaeda, as the leader of Al-Qaeda still pledges allegiance to the leader of the Taliban.

This exposes fatal flaws in the previous President Obama’s strategy: killing Bin Laden did not stop Al-Qaeda from growing. Announcing troop surges and troop withdrawals in Afghanistan did not work. Negotiating with the Taliban was as impractical as negotiating with Al-Qaeda. And, finally, focusing on degrading, defeating and destroying ISIS has not stopped a resurgent Al-Qaeda from taking the limelight back.

Though ISIS is a long-term threat which is highly likely to return, Al-Qaeda is the more immediate threat, and the threat has grown. Not only has the Taliban filled the vacuum left by Obama in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has become a potent threat taking advantage of the Saudi war on Yemen. Al-Qaeda also has a strong presence in Libya and, finally, those “moderate rebels” in Syria are all allied with Al-Qaeda.

While President Trump can be blamed for Al-Qaeda’s presence in Yemen, President Obama is to blame for the Al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan, Syria and Libya. Libyan President Moammar Al-Qaddafi was overthrown in 2011, creating a vacuum in Libya, and Syrian rebels were supported by the US government from 2013 until this year. Ironically, it has been Russia who has been moving to quell the Al-Qaeda threat in Syria and Libya and, unlike President Obama, has had more success in rooting them out.

Afghanistan however becomes the responsibility of US President Donald Trump. Over the past 8 months there has been much debating in the White House about the way forward in Afghanistan, and President Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with US generals suggesting the way forward is to continue the same as before. President Trump has been exploring a wide range of options, including withdrawal and handing Afghanistan to private contractors, but the most enticing idea yet has been giving the US and Afghan troops a new goal: minerals.

Afghanistan’s minerals make up a large revenue for the Taliban, and depriving the Taliban of this revenue would weaken their influence in the country considerably. Minerals in the government’s hands would help Afghanistan stand on its own two feet and help win rogue Afghan tribes back to the government. It would also win Trump support back home for continuing the war.

But Afghanistan is not the only country from which Trump will face his counter-terrorism test: Yemen is the other. Trump has strengthened US support in the Saudi war against Yemen and this has resulted in an increase in Al-Qaeda’s presence there. The rise of Al-Qaeda in Yemen (commonly known as Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula) is not dependent on territory controlled, as ISIS is;

rather it is dependent on tribes which are loyal to and grateful for Al-Qaeda's presence in the region. And there are many such tribes in Yemen.

Even should Trump create a cohesive strategy to root out the Taliban from Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda will become even more powerful and resurgent in Yemen. This will likely strain US-Saudi relations and allow Russia a hand in solving yet another US-created quagmire.

The Al-Qaeda threat looms large, and calls for dedicated attention and skilful strategy.

Iran and Kurds greatest threat to Iraqi peace

Unlike Syria, Iraq's path to stability is not so straightforward.

Though ISIS has been driven out of its urban centres in Iraq, they still hold onto areas in Tel Afar, Hawija and western Anbar Province. Even should the Iraqi Army and affiliates crush ISIS from the region, there is every potential that ISIS may return. The trigger for an ISIS return is further conflict fueled by Iran and the Kurdish question.

September this year will see the Kurds vote for independence in a referendum. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi, though pro-American, is anti-referendum and as such Kurdish independence would weaken his hand considerably. This could lead to a civil war between the Iraqi Kurds and the rest of Iraq, putting America in a difficult position, as both Iraq and the Kurds are US allies.

Unlike in Syria, Iran is a destabilizing factor in Iraq. With the Iraqi provincial and federal elections to take place in 2018, a new divide is emerging: on one side of the divide is the likes of Nouri Al-Maliki and Iranian-backed political parties and militias. On the other is Muqtada As-Sadr, Iyad Allawi and Haider Al-Abadi, who espouse Iraqi Nationalism and are more critical of Iran's role in the region. Yet both sides of this divide are Shi'ite.

With the establishment of Hash'd Ash-Sha'abi, or the Popular Mobilization forces, an intra Shi'ite war in Iraq is all the more likely, as many of the groups are fierce rivals and differ in how loyal they are to Iran or the Iraqi government. To strengthen his own hand, Abadi might unleash the Iranian-backed elements of Hashd Ash-Sha'abi on the Kurds, so that if the Kurds were victorious, Iran could be blamed and Abadi would remain Prime Minister.

In any case, Abadi and the Iraqi nationalists have support from certain groups that the Iranian-backed forces do not: the Iraqi Sunni Arabs and the US. Even should the Kurds break away from Iraq, the Iraqi nationalists are likely to prevail over the Iranian proxies, because the Sunni Arabs provide the additional weight needed and Trump is eyeing Iraq as the front line in the US' war on Iran.

But over the next 12 months, Haider Al-Abadi will have to tread carefully. His reputation has been made through defeating ISIS - how he handles the Kurds or Iran will determine his prominence in Iraq's future.

US continues to ignore Russian success in Syria

https://interfaceinstitute.org/2017/07/19/us-continues-to-ignore-russian-success-in-syria/

The uncomfortable truth about the Syrian Civil War is that Russia is helping to end it.

When the Arab Spring first began in 2011 in Syria, protests were quickly absorbed into an armed conflict between Syrian Sunnis from the countryside, backed by Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and the rest of Syria, backing Bashar Al-Assad. The reason why Bashar Al-Assad never fell in the 6 years of conflict is because he is too popular with Syrians.

Since 2011, Assad’s Syrian Arab Army have maintained a presence in all major cities in Syria except Raqqa in 2014 and Idlib in 2015. Even the inhabitants of Deir Ez-Zor city, populated by Syrian Bedouins, who are normally more receptive to ISIS, have remained allied to Bashar Al-Assad for the entirety of the war.

When rebels started making larger gains against the Syrian government in western Syria, Bashar Al-Assad called on Russia to assist his government in regaining control of Syria. Russia’s accomplishments in almost 2 years have been more profound than US gains in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last 15 years.

The Russians learned from the US’ mistake in Iraq: regime change leads to terrorism. The Russians, therefore, decided that the antidote to terrorism would be to do an “Iraq War in reverse”: strengthen an existing regime, rather than change it. And it has worked.

Since the Russians have entered the Syrian Civil War, the city of Aleppo has been stabilized. Many of the rebels previously holed up in other Syrian areas have been moved into the rebel-held province of Idlib. And, more recently, deconfliction zones were established to enable the Syrian Arab Army to focus more heavily on ISIS than the other rebels. This has resulted in the Syrian Government regaining vast swathes of countryside in Aleppo, Homs and Damascus provinces.

The US has been silent on this. The chemical attacks earlier this year – neither proven nor unproven to be initiated by the Syrian Government – led President Donald Trump to order an airstrike on a Syrian airbase – the first time the US intentionally launched a military attack on the Syrian Government in the war. And Rex Tillerson, who previously said the Syrians should decide who their President should be, began to call for the overthrow of Bashar Al-Assad.

Of course, the US is highly unlikely to engage militarily to remove the Assad regime in Syria. But it does show an attempt to undermine Russian efforts in Syria and focus the west’s attention on its own war on ISIS rather than on Russian success in Syria.

However, should the US not learn from Russian success in Syria, they would be unable to end either the Iraq or Afghan conflicts. And with 20 trillion dollars of debt, the US cannot sustain their current foreign policy.

Iran, Ikhwan and Salafi politics realigned

https://interfaceinstitute.org/2017/07/18/iran-ikhwan-and-salafi-politics-realigned/

In the modern Middle-East, the worldviews of Iran, the Ikhwan and the Salafis are the most prominent.

Iran’s influence on the Middle-East has manifested itself in a variety of different ways. Since the revolution of 1979, it has developed its reputation as a meddler in Arab affairs through creating Hezbollah in Lebanon in 1982 and backing Palestine against Israel. As a result of the Iran-Iraq war, Iran and Syria created an alliance, which has benefited both countries.

Because of the Iraq War (2003), Iranian and Shi’ite dominance in the Middle-East increased greatly. This has been further consolidated by Iranian support for Bashar Al-Assad in the Syrian civil war, and the Arab Spring even allowed Iran to extend its influence into Yemen (though Iran’s influence on the Houthis is mostly political, counter to the Media’s narrative.) In any case, Iran has benefit enormously from the affairs of Arabs.

The Ikhwani influence on the Middle-East was most prominent in Egypt, where President Mohammed Morsi rose to power in 2012. The Ikhwan, or the Muslim Brotherhood, have long dwelt in Egypt, but never held power before 2012. However, 2013 saw a great reversal in Ikhwan dominance, with Egyptians protesting Mohammed Morsi’s rule and forcing him out of office. The Egyptian protest of 2013 was the largest protest in history.

Under the Morsi government, ties between Iran and Egypt were strengthened after decades of hostility. This mirrors Iran’s strong ties to Qatar, Turkey and Hamas. In every country where the Ikhwan worldview dominates, a close yet complex relationship develops between said countries and Iran. Both the Iranian and Ikhwan worldview are more pro-Palestinian than their Salafi counterparts.

Understanding this, then, helps us glimpse into what is going on between Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia would like Qatar not to continue its support for the Ikhwan ideology and stop being as close to Iran. This is an affront not only against Iran, but also against Turkey and Hamas, who share Qatar’s ideology. UAE (Dubai) and Egypt have sided with Saudi Arabia because the Ikhwan threatens the Egyptian government, which the UAE supports.

Dangerously for Saudi Arabia, targeting Qatar for supporting the Ikhwan exposes Saudi Arabia’s own implicit alliance with Israel. The reason for this alliance is that Israel benefits from the instability created by Salafi ideology in Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Israel benefits from its enemies fighting each other, and Saudi Arabia provides the perfect ideology from which wars and instability are created.

However, the US is showing impatience at Saudi’s own meddling and churning of instability. The US has remained in Afghanistan for the past 16 years and has been in and out of Iraq, from 2003 – 2011 and then from 2014 until present, and the instability in both countries is set to continue. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, the US has continued fighting proxies of Saudi Arabia with no end in sight.

What we are currently witnessing is a realignment of political alliances as a result of impending peace in Syria. In Syria, the Salafis and the Ikhwan were allied against Iran and the Syrian Government. But Russia has forced Turkey – and with it, the Ikhwan support of the Syrian Opposition – into dialogue, and violence has correspondingly been greatly reduced in Syria.

However, with two of Iran’s allies decimated – Syria and Iraq – and with the Ikhwan suffering yet another terrible loss, both the Ikhwan and Iran are looking for a new target. Saudi Arabia is that target. This is signaled by Iranian and Turkish support for Qatar in the Gulf crisis.

It seems that, instead of the more recent Qatar-Turkey-Saudi axis against Syria, the Qatar-Turkey-Iran axis will be formed against Saudi Arabia. The deal between Iran and the Ikhwan is probably for the destruction of the Saudi state, replaced by a state run by the Muslim Brotherhood, to decimate Salafi doctrine and reward Turkey for its role in restoring peace to an Iran-backed Syria.

However, such a project would be dangerous at the least. ISIS is eyeing Saudi Arabia as its next target, so the Iran-Ikhwan plan may backfire, and badly.

Why ISIS is set to grow – not shrink – in the Middle-East

https://interfaceinstitute.org/2017/07/14/why-isis-is-set-to-grow-not-shrink-in-the-middle-east/

People who believe ISIS will be destroyed after the liberation of Syria and Iraq are not seeing the whole picture.

Many strategists of counter terrorism believe that, should ISIS be destroyed from Syria and Iraq, they won’t be able to come back, and that Al-Qaeda is making more inroads by playing the “long game”.

This ignores how much weaker Al-Qaeda has become since the death of Osama Bin Laden and the rise of ISIS. The only reasons why we’re still talking about Al-Qaeda is because they represent a serious threat to Yemen and Afghanistan. In Syria, Al-Qaeda would join ISIS if the Assad Government were removed. They are only separate today because it is more acceptable for countries to fund Al-Qaeda than ISIS.

As it is, should the Assad Government stay in Syria, it is near impossible for Al-Qaeda to remain in Syria at the conclusion of the civil war. They will be completely obliterated – Jabhat Feteh Ash-Sham will be but a memory of the Syrian Civil War.

But ISIS… ISIS’ origins are in Iraq, and as long as Iraq is as unstable as it has been since 2003, ISIS will also remain in Iraq. While Iraqi military gains have been impressive, ISIS has been gaining ground in suicide bombs and insurgent attacks, especially in Baghdad. While crushing terrorism in Syria is much easier – letting the dictator stay in power – this is unlikely to work as well in Iraq.

With Russia set to stabilize Syria and Libya, ISIS will be forced to dig deeper into the fabric of Iraq in order to survive. This represents one of the most serious challenges to the Trump Administration: how to stabilize Iraq and deprive ISIS of an underground safe haven.

Worryingly, while ISIS will be continuing to destabilize Iraq, their efforts will be turned towards Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. For further information on how ISIS threatens Saudi Arabia, read the following article by Alistair Crooke.

In fact, it is easy to see how this has been the aim of ISIS all along: declare a Caliphate across Syria and Iraq, force all enemies to utterly destroy the Caliphate, then to “rebirth” the Caliphate in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.

So far, no one in counter terrorism is addressing this. They are looking at the paper tiger of Al-Qaeda in Syria, when they should be looking at the threat ISIS is to the Arabian Gulf!

Not only is war and instability coming to Saudi Arabia, but also to most of the other Gulf states: Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and U.A.E (Dubai), which may lead to the fall of these smaller kingdoms to ISIS. Such instability will cause an oil shortage – greatly increasing oil prices and forcing the whole world to gaze in horror at Saudi Arabia as they have been in Syria.

Destroying ISIS from the Arabian Gulf will be a near impossible task. Once ISIS detonates there, it will be easier for America to stabilize Iraq than drive ISIS out of Saudi Arabia.

The divide across Europe

https://interfaceinstitute.org/2017/07/13/the-divide-across-europe/

There is a divide across Europe between Globalists and Nationalists, a divide which President Donald Trump is making more observable to the world.

Across the Scandinavian countries, Germany, Netherlands and France, there is a championing of the perspective of the EU, globalism and heightened immigration. In other central European countries, such as Poland, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, there is a drive to preserve national identity, borders and stem Muslim immigration.

Enter President Trump. His decision to begin his second visit in Poland signals to Europe that the American priorities are changing. The US is stepping into a void – a central Europe alienated by the EU. This alienation was caused by economic sanctions on EU countries who resist legislation on immigration. Prior to President Trump, Russia was starting to fill the void in central Europe. Now, the US is signalling that it intends to fill that void.

We are witnessing a realignment of global politics. Poland is now a more significant player than before. The opinions of France and Germany matter less to the US than before. Three different superpower blocks are emerging: one, dominated by Russia and China, succeeding the previously socialist block; the second, with the US, India, Japan, South Korea and central Europe, in which capitalist nationalism is pertinent; the third, with the EU and Turkey leading the way in tense but reciprocal ways.

This rupture between EU and self-determining European countries – created by alienating EU policies – is welcome news by Russia and China. However, it presents a difficulty for Britain. While it has voted for Brexit, there is much damage that has been caused by previous immigration policies similar to those of the EU, and much pressure from the political left to implement a soft Brexit, which would keep Britain in the orbit of the EU. Britain is stuck between the two worldviews of the EU and self-determining nationalism of President Trump.

Western Europe, under the grossly ideological views of the EU, is set to collapse and perhaps even become a new area of dominance for the Islamic world. Time will tell how this will affect the western nationalist and Russian/Chinese blocks. Sadly, for Britain, such a collapse might lead to unrest and even civil war.