Skip to main content
Support
Article

Middle East Countries Respond to IS Threat

The Islamic State (IS) poses a challenge to the broader Middle East as it consolidates authority in Iraq and Syria. But the situation is complicated by the multitude of regional actors using the crisis as an opportunity to pursue their own domestic and political agendas.

            The Islamic State (IS) poses a challenge to the broader Middle East as it consolidates authority in Iraq and Syria. But the situation is complicated by the multitude of regional actors using the crisis as an opportunity to pursue their own domestic and political agendas. A series of essays from the European Council on Foreign Relations maps out the driving forces behind IS and how it relates to the interests and priorities of key Middle Eastern actors. The following are excerpts from the series.

Iraq

            The Iraqi government has struggled to stall the IS offensive following the army’s initial collapse and has only recently, based on the strength of Shia militias and with external assistance from Iran and the United States, slowly retaken some territory. An attempt is now being made, on the back of the formation of a new government, to shape a new inclusive system that is hoped to see Sunnis turn against IS. The future of Iraq now hangs in the balance with the prospect of protracted sectarian conflict and break-up looming large.

            This population is now faced with very difficult choices. The failure of the previous government to win them over and indeed their direct alienation through heavy-handed security policies, including in response to peaceful protests, has left little trust in regaining influence through the political process in Baghdad. However these grievances, aired prior to the rise of IS, are now being lost in the language of war. Some, alarmed at the brutality of IS, are joining the likes of Ahmed Abu Risha, a key figure in the Anbar Awakening against Al-Qaeda over the past decade, working alongside government troops to counter IS. Even so, much more will still be needed.

Click here to read the full essay by Sajad Jiyad

Syria

            After more than three years of civil war in Syria, the Islamic State’s (IS) tightening grip on territory marks a critical moment in the development of the devastating conflict. Radical Islamists now undisputedly represent the most powerful force among the armed opposition to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a reality that is bringing to completion the internationalisation of the conflict. The United States, together with a number of regional allies, has now launched military strikes against IS positions in Syria, with the immediate stated aim of counter-terrorism rather than regime change.

            But with US action unlikely to be decisive, especially given the absence of ground troops, the prospects for success remain very uncertain. Both Assad and the non-IS rebels are actively trying to position themselves as the West’s natural partner in the fight against extremism (as are Syrian Kurds). But they, as well as some of the regional players now supporting air strikes, remain at cross-purposes with the US about the aims of the war and about the threat posed by IS.

Click here to read the full essay by Julien Barnes-Dacey

Saudi Arabia

            As the threat posed by the Islamic State (IS) grows greater and ever more sinister, Saudi Arabia stands at the front line of the battle against these extremists. Saudi Arabia is adamant that it has unique knowledge, expertise, and legitimacy to effectively lead the effort to defeat IS. The country’s guardianship of the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina underpins Saudi credibility in pushing back against the misguided interpretation of the Islamic faith that IS is now propagating in the heart of the Arab world.

Click here to read the full essay by Nawaf Oid & Saud al-Sarhan

Turkey

            Turkey’s response to the Islamic State (IS) has baffled observers. As Washington has sought to build a regional alliance of forces against the group, Turkey has stood conspicuously apart by refusing to allow combat missions to be launched from its territory. NATO’s only Muslim member state, Turkey agreed to fight IS at the Western military alliance’s recent summit in Wales, but it did not sign a subsequent declaration arranged in Jeddah by the United States with Gulf countries, plus Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq.

Click here to read the full essay by Andrew Hammond

Jordan

            Since the Islamic State (IS) spectacularly took over Mosul in early June and soon after declared an Islamic Caliphate on Syrian and Iraqi land, many Jordanians have been worried that they will be next.

            This fear is not unfounded. Jordan has long been an exporter of jihadi fighters – IS itself evolved out of a group founded by Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Footage of IS fighters tearing apart and then burning their Jordanian passports as well as threatening to slaughter King Abdullah II only confirms that Jordan, and its leader, are in their sights. An estimated 2,000 Jordanians are currently fighting in Syria, and many of them are doing so under the banner of IS. In response, the government pushed through a controversial anti-terror bill earlier this year, which broadens the definition of terrorism to include “joining or attempting to join”, the “direct and indirect funding” of, and “attempting to recruit” for “any armed group or terrorist organisation in the Kingdom and abroad.” This makes it impossible for Jordanian fighters to return to the country without facing prosecution.

Click here to read the full article by Saleem Haddad

Lebanon

            When Sunni Islamist fighters launched a series of deadly attacks in August in the Bekaa Valley border town of Arsal against the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the Internal Security Forces (ISF), the immediate repercussions for Lebanon and the wider region could have been particularly damaging. If the militant surge had been successful, those who carried out the attack, including members of the Islamic State (IS) and Jabhat al-Nusra (JAN), could have established an open beachhead for expanded violent operations within Lebanon. Simultaneously, the perception of IS’s ascendency and potency in the region would have been bolstered, further fuelling the group’s momentum and complicating efforts to contain it.

            Yet, even as IS has found success elsewhere, Lebanon was able to quickly repel the threat – due in large part to a shift in trajectory predating IS’s surge into Iraq away from political confrontation between domestic parties to unprecedented co-operation geared towards combating the threat of extremism. In a region where security arrangements and political structures are both widely and violently breaking down, Lebanon can now be described, especially after the battle for Arsal, as one of the few states moving in the opposite direction.

Click here to read the full article by Nicholas Noe

Egypt

            The rise of the Islamic State (IS) has helped the regime of General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to justify its security-orientated policies as a necessity in the fight against terrorism to both a domestic and international audience. IS’ links to Egyptian radical groups remain tenuous, yet Cairo has portrayed IS as part of the spectrum of Islamists groups, linking it to the Muslim Brotherhood and to plots facing the country. Ironically, however, the ongoing authoritarian crackdown that has followed the 2013 Egyptian military intervention is itself fueling new violent extremism. In such an environment, IS could find fertile ground to expand its influence in Egypt.

Click here to read the full article by Abdallah Helmy

Related Program

The Islamists

Learn more about Hamas and how it relates to similarly aligned organizations throughout the region.   Read more