Nothing Succeeds Like Success
ISIS Becomes the Cool Group to Join
show comments
  • Boritz

    They are in competition with The Last Ship which should improve USN recruitment.

  • rheddles

    Fly paper.

  • gabrielsyme

    Because America is continuing to insist on anachronistic and irrational borders, it has creating the permanent conditions for insurrection both in Syria and Iraq. The best opportunity for sectarian recociliation in Iraq has passed, and some kind of partition in the best interests of both Sunni, Shia and Kurd. Likewise, a reasonable settlement in Syria might involve the division of the country into a Eastern quadrant (perhaps united with Sunni Iraq) and a Western half.

    Of course, in order for a new, mainly Sunni state in Mesopotami to be stable, there will have to be some sort of central, moderating force. The best candidate (and perhaps the only candidate) would be a branch of Jordan’s royal family, the Hashemites.

    • Andrew Allison

      It’s more than just Syria and Iraq; it’s the whole post-Ottoman carve-up. Trouble is, it not up to us to fix it even if we could. Those in power will not relinquish it without a fight (Assad being just the latest example), and history tells us that national boundaries get redrawn by the winners of wars. In Iraq, the Kurds have the means to defend the territory they have acquired, but a new de jure boundary would have to be recognized by whoever controls the other side of it when the dust settles on the latest Sunni/Shiite fracas.

      • gabrielsyme

        I think you’re underestimating the power of the West to change things if it chose to. The United States could signal to Kurdistan that it would recognise a UDI over certain borders, much of the west would follow. Much the same could happen with a new state of Upper Mesopotamia.

        Recognising a new state is actually not terribly difficult, the question is whether the US has the power to get other interested parties to at least grudgingly accept the new settlement. Shia Iraq doesn’t have the power to effectively evict ISIS, much less a nation with greater public support and international recognition. Nor really, do the Shia have much of an incentive to hold on to the Sunnis, given the instability they cause, and the fact that the Sunni areas don’t hold any significant amount of oil. Leave Baghdad to the Shia and they ought to be happy enough.

        Syria is a more difficult proposition. That said, Assad might easily be convinced to allow some of the restive and purely Sunni areas of Syria to go their separate way in exchange for an end to the war and the stabilisation of his regime.

        • Andrew Allison

          There’s no question in my mind that the US lacks “the power to get other interested parties to at least grudgingly accept the new settlement.” The good news is that you are mistaken about the oil in Sunni territory, so partitioning could be feasible if the parties were to agree upon it; the bad news is that they show no sign of being willing to do so (http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/06/26/Map-Shows-How-Save-Iraq). Another problem is that half of the “Shia” region on the map is, in fact, mixed Sunni/Shiite.

          • gabrielsyme

            Well, my point is that I don’t think the United States actually has to exert much power to effect a partition of Iraq on acceptable terms. After ten years of internal conflict, the three main groups would be in large part relieved. Probably the Kurds would be most pleased and the Shia rump and Iran least happy, but the Shia don’t have any essential interests in northern Iraq and it’s hard to see them going to war to preserve a unified Iraq when their only likely support is going to be Iran.

            History tells us that national boundaries get redrawn by the winners of wars.

            A major problem right now is that the current international order makes it nearly impossible to obtain secure and permanent border changes by conquest. And the United States is as culpable as any in clinging long-redundant borders that merely result in instability, poverty and continued conflict. Recognition of Crimea’s annexation by Russia needs to be a potential option if we rapproachement with Russia becomes desired; partition of Iraq not only ought to be considered but implemented. Other frozen conflicts (e.g. Nagorno-Karabakh, Transdniester) should at least have border changes open for discussion.

  • FMAWG

    All the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put poor Humpty together again.
    Are we obligated to buy all The Pottery Barn after some one renamed it The Pottery Bomb with American made RPG’s?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.