ISIS Everywhere: Have Saudi Chickens Come Home To Roost?

Taj Hashmi

Since its occupation of Mosul and parts of northern Iraq last June, the ISIS (aka ISIL) has emerged as the most dreadful terrorist organization in the world. Al Qaeda and its ilk seem to have receded to the background. Now ISIS is not only the most organized terror outfit, but is also the most powerful insurgent group in the world. The ISIS proclamation of statehood in territories it has occupied across Syria and Iraq (larger than the area of France) is only comparable to what the Taliban did in 1996 in Afghanistan, in modern history.

However, far from being a “Sunni jihadist group”, ISIS is yet another creation of botched up U.S. foreign policy in the Muslim World. Attributing anything Islamic to the group is as ridiculous as attributing American invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, and illegal detention of “illegal combatants” at Guantanamo Bay to Christianity. Nevertheless, ISIS is an enigma, a by-product of the Saudi-Iranian proxy war, and last but not least, an integral part of Washington’s false flag operation in the Muslim World.

While the Taliban Emirate disintegrated in the wake of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001, it’s too early to predict if the ISIS Caliphate will go the Taliban way in the near future. Soon after ISIS fighters had defeated Iraqi troops at Mosul ignominiously, some top U.S. generals believed it would take five to seven years to defeat the Islamist rebels. And interestingly, when Mosul fell, ISIS had around 30 to 50 thousand fighters, less than 60 artillery pieces and similar number of tanks, and no air force. By now the enigmatic terrorist-cum-insurgent group has enlisted thousands of fighters – Muslim men and a few women – from across the world.

Its popularity among jihadist ideology-motivated Muslim youths is phenomenal. Being disillusioned with their top leaders for negotiating peace with American and Afghan governments, some Afghan Taliban fighters have joined the group. A news report in a Bangladeshi daily (Bangladesh Pratidin, March 24, 2015) reveals that several Islamist groups in Bangladesh, India, Myanmar and Pakistan are also getting organized to fight for their own “Islamic State” in South Asia. Now it seems, ISIS is everywhere.

As ISIS victory in Iraq shocked analysts and observers, so did the way the White House, State Department and the Pentagon reacted to the fall of Mosul. While the decisive defeat of Iraqi troops by ISIS caught the White House by surprise, American analysts since then have started drawing alarmist pictures about the future of Iraq and the entire Muslim World. They think a) not only Iraq and Syria but also the entire Muslim World, and even the United States, are going to face the ISIS attacks in the near future; b) Iraq is going to be fragmented into three entities – the Kurdish north, Sunni central, and Shiite south – and c) eventually an ISIS-led Caliphate would transcend the entire region from Turkey to Iraq, and Egypt to Yemen, and beyond.

However, we know Washington loves to fight deceptive proxy wars in different corners of the world on a regular basis, and often over blows things to justify false flag operations. Ever since President Johnson lied about a communist attack on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin on August 4, 1964 as the pretext for a full-fledged invasion of North Vietnam, Washington has never looked back. It lied about Saddam Hussein’s non-existing WMD to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. And Washington has never stopped patronizing and promoting the reactionary Saudi regime – even by condoning its gross violations of human rights for decades. America’s ongoing support for Saudi-sponsored violent Islamist rebels in Syria may be mentioned in this regard. In view of this, one may raise the question: Aren’t ISIS fighters America’s Saudi chickens, which have come home to roost finally?

Although ISIS hates democracy and secularism, and seem to be on a killing spree, eliminating Shiites, liberal Muslims, Christians and Western hostages, its controlling Iraqi territories is not all bad news for America. This possibly legitimizes American boots on the ground, which would signal another windfall for its Military-Industrial Complex. Then again, proxy wars and false flag operations sometimes backfire.

Like its precursors in Afghanistan – the Mujahedeen, al Qaeda and Taliban – the ISIS seems to have emerged as the latest Frankenstein’s Monster for Washington. Nevertheless, ISIS’s anti-Shiite position accentuates the Shia-Sunni conflict (an important catalyst in the Saudi-Iranian proxy war), and legitimizes Washington’s false flag operations across the region. At the end of the day, Washington is likely to get rich dividends from the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, being fought in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen

American obsession with the Islamist regime in Iran and the Baathist regime in Syria are at the core of the ISIS problem. American support for the Free Syrian Army was a step towards strengthening Syrian rebels, including the obscurantist Islamic State. By early 2012 American- and Israeli-armed and Saudi financed Arab mercenaries infiltrated into Syria in the guise of Free Syrian Army. Interestingly, they were fighting along with al Qaeda fighters against the Assad regime. Secretary Hillary Clinton later admitted that anti-Assad rebels and al Qaeda had fought together against Syrian army.

There are dozens of anti-Assad al Qaeda affiliates among Syrian rebels. Saudi Arabia backs some of them. Among others, al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra strives for a caliphate in Syria, Iraq and beyond. In mid-2013 they merged with another al Qaeda affiliate, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) to establish a bigger Islamic entity out of Syria and Iraq. And the rest is history. However, we may not take America’s alarming views seriously. Iraq is least likely going to be divided into three independent entities; and the so-called Caliphate will fizzle out, soon. Wishful thinking and geopolitically unattainable goals do not converge.

The conflict is likely to overflow into Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq among Kurds and others. Syrian Kurds might also strive for autonomy. The spillover effect of the Syrian sectarian conflicts would further destabilize Iraq. Since Hezbollah in Lebanon depends on Syrian support, a Sunni Islamist regime could be lukewarm to hostile to the Shiite militia. One is not sure if the post-Assad Syria could be still friends with Iran and Hezbollah. However, Iran is likely to control Iraq for decades, and through Iraq is likely to keep an eye on Syria and influence Syrians.

It’s time the Obama Administration realize its support for pro-Islamist rebels in Syria was the main catalyst behind the rise of the Islamic State. By maintaining positive neutrality in the Saudi-Iranian proxy war in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, Washington should allow the U.N., Arab League and Iran free hand to resolve the crises. Obama should realize if rebels win in Syria, they would certainly form a government hostile to the United States and Israel. It could become a replica of post-Saddam Iraq and even worse, a failed state. As Bush’s Iraq invasion empowered Iraq’s Shiite majority and turned Iraq into an Iranian satellite, Obama’s support for Sunni extremists in Syria greatly contributed to the rise of the Islamic State.

In sum, America must not play the Israel card in its negotiations with Iran, and should discard the Saudi card to resolve the Syrian civil war. While the Saudi regime is the most reactionary and intolerant in the Muslim World – only marginally better than the erstwhile Taliban regime in Afghanistan – Washington must abandon all conservative ideas about “stopping Iran’s bomb, by bombing Iran”. Nothing short of engaging Tehran by Washington as a partner for peace and progress, all the major crises in the region, including the growing menace of Islamic State, will remain there to haunt us for decades.