ALLEGANY, N.Y. — St. Bonaventure University’s Dr. Ibrahim Zabad detailed the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — commonly known as ISIS — to a large student gathering Wednesday evening at Walsh auditorium.
In a talk titled “The Genesis of ISIS and American Policy Choices: Avoiding Blowback?”, Zabad depicted Iraq and Syria as countries ripe for bloody conflict and conquest through decades of regional political turmoil and sectarian ideology. And ultimately, the blowback — unintended consequences — of foreign policy decisions by the U.S. and its allies have stoked the flames, he said.
Zabad pointed to recent comments from Vice President Joe Biden calling out allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates for “blind-eye” support of the Islamic caliphate, which created a media spectacle through mass murders and the beheading of American journalists, as well as annexing a large territory in Syria and Iraq.
“The next day he apologized for telling the truth,” Zabad said.
Much like the U.S., those allies sought the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime, Zabad said. But support created a safe haven for extremist jihadists who have now turned their guns against anyone not of the Sunni Muslim faith.
Defeating ISIS won’t be easy, he said.
“(President Barack) Obama’s official strategy is to put up this coalition that included Turkey and Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the same countries that Joe Biden accused of being complicit in creating ISIS,” Zabad said after the talk. “So now we’re asking our allies, those who actually helped create ISIS, to help us fight ISIS. Now how exactly is this strategy going to work? I really have no idea.”
In recent months, the U.S. has taken to aerial bombing campaigns against Islamic State targets. That has not only been expensive, the political science professor said, but it has also been ineffective.
A recent Department of Defense statement indicated the bombings have cost roughly $700 million, Zabad said.
“So far it has cost close to $1 billion, and it hasn’t had much of an impact,” Zabad said. “This is not the kind of organization you can defeat by bombing from the air because they’re a militia. They are fighters, they leave, they don’t have a base you can attack. They spread (out), and you can bomb it as much as you want.”
But American boots on the ground wouldn’t accomplish much, either, he added. War-weary U.S. citizens wouldn’t have it.
“It’s not an army. You don’t defeat an insurgency in like two weeks,” Zabad said. “It’s a very long-term strategy. That means we have to be very much engaged on the ground. Are we willing to send 100,000 or 200,000 soldiers to Iraq and Syria to keep fighting?
“Remember, when you fight an insurgency, it’s a very costly endeavor — not only in terms of money, but lives.”
One of the only viable options, he added, is to apply more pressure on allies to stop their backhanded support.
Although the United States drew back troops from Iraq in 2009 with the promise of leaving a self-sufficient military, the Iraqi army has proven inadequate, Zabad said. Further American support, training and intelligence resources are sorely needed, he noted.
“The U.S. still has a chance because the Iraqi state now still controls almost two-thirds of Iraq. And we still have a chance to actually to strengthen the Iraqi army,” he said. “We can — against the wishes of the Turks — strengthen the Kurdish fighters. We can supply them with weapons and training and intelligence and everything we can do. The Turks will not like that, but what else can we do? We don’t really have many policy options.”
