If properly contained, Isis will not be able to sustain itself on rapid growth alone, and will begin to fracture internally. Photograph: via AP <\/p>\n
The Islamic State (Isis) is without question a very brutal extremist group with origins in the insurgency of the United States occupation of Iraq. It has rapidly ascended to global attention by taking control of swaths of territory in western and northern Iraq,including Mosul and other major cities. <\/p>\n
Based on my experience as an all-source analyst in Iraq during the organizations relative infancy, Isis cannot be defeated by bombs and bullets evenas the fight is taken to Syria, evenif it is conducted by non-Western forces with air support. <\/p>\n
I believe that Isis is fueled precisely by the operational and tactical successes of European and American military force that would be and have been used to defeat them. I believe that Isis strategically feeds off the mistakes and vulnerabilities of the very democratic western states they decry. The Islamic States center of gravity is, in many ways, the United States, the United Kingdom and those aligned with them in the region. <\/p>\n
When it comes to regional insurgency with global implications, Isis leaders are brilliant strategists. Its clear to me that they have a solid and complete understanding of the strengths and, more importantly, the weaknesses of the west. They know how we tick in America and Europe and they know what pushes us toward intervention and overreach. This understanding is particularly clear considering the Islamic States astonishing success in recruiting numbers of Americans, Britons, Belgians, Danes and other Europeans in their call to arms. <\/p>\n
Attacking Isis directly, by air strikes or special operations forces, is a very tempting option available to policymakers, with immediate (but not always good) results. Unfortunately, when the west fights fire with fire, we feed into a cycle of outrage, recruitment, organizing and even more fighting that goes back decades. This is exactly what happened in Iraq during the height of a civil war in 2006 and 2007, and it can only be expected to occur again. <\/p>\n
And avoiding direct action with Isis can be successful. For instance,in 2009 and 2010, Isis attacked civilians in suicide and car bombings in downtown Baghdad to try and provoke American intervention and sectarian unrest. But they were often not effective in their recruiting efforts when American and Iraqi forces refused (or were unable) to respond, because the barbarity and brutality of their attacks worked against them. When we did respond, however, the attacks were sold to the Sunni minority in Iraq as a justified response to an occupying government favoring the Shia government led by former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki. <\/p>\n
Based on my intelligence work in Iraq during that period, I believe that only a very focused and consistent strategy of containment can be effective in reducing the growth and effectiveness of Isis as a threat. And so far, Western states seem to have adopted that strategy. With very public humanitarian disasters, however, like the ones onMount SinjarandIrbilin northern Iraq, and the beheadings of journalistsJames FoleyandSteven Sotloff, this discipline gets tested and can begin to fray. <\/p>\n
As a strategy to disrupt the growth of Isis, I suggest focusing on four arenas: <\/p>\n
Eventually, if they are properly contained, I believe that Isis will not be able to sustain itself on rapid growth alone, and will begin to fracture internally. The organization will begin to disintegrate into several smaller, uncoordinated entities ultimately failing in their objective of creating a strong state. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n