The Rise of ISIS

ISIS is an acronym of Islamic States of Iraq and Syria. From the name itself, it is quite clear that the group has its roots in these two countries. As indicated in the abstract, it is true that ISIS is an affiliation of the Iraq group by the name of Al-Qaida which was run by the extremist Sunni Muslims. Their major aim was to drive away the United States out of Iraq. As the civil war in Syria escalated, the Islamic state of Iraq offered to join forces with the native rebel groups in Syria so as to reinforce their agenda of overthrowing the government of Syria.

After gaining a good ground in Syria, the ISIS group launched an offensive towards the Syrian government troops together with the Syrian Liberal Army, which was anti-government. It defeated them and began its occupation in the northeastern and northern regions of Syria. As it continued to expand, it demanded the Al-Nusra terrorist group of Syria to bow down to ISIS and join hands – a suggestion rejected by Abu Mohammed Al- Jawlani, the head of Al-Nusra. Later on, there was a confrontation that resulted to Al -Nusra surrendering with 80% of its forces joining ISIS (Sekulow 98).

ISIS-inspired terrorists have been connected to more than 75 attacks outside of Syria and Iraq since June of 2014. At least 1200 people have been murdered and countless hundreds injured. Some suggest that the deadly attacks in Western Europe, Turkey, the U.S., and elsewhere associate with the group’s thinning local power, but no one expects it to give up on a tactic that brings it a worldwide interest and indignation.

Christine Anderson (2015), published an article with the heading,” ISIS and the State of Terror: The Genesis, Evolution, and Impact of the Islamic State.” In this work, the author credited ISIS’ success to an exceptional self-assertion advanced on the assumption of its strength, which is dispersed through a consistent and in several ways clever media tactics. ISIS has inverted the traditional jihadist tale of incapacitation and harassment of Muslims against a dictatorial West, replacing it with the one of might and triumph.

Anderson noted that the group looked like a nationalist faction in its strategy to promote itself with well-organized structures. She indicated that ISIS had engineered a mechanism to make new species of human beings who are ruthless and programmed to execute the highest level of atrocities ever known by mankind. The sect exercises its own influence through highly visible showoffs of aggression together with a picture of life in a functioning state entity that receives not only the troop but also people from all professions.

These features lure potential recruits who are tired of the status quo governments and want to try something different without any limitation or barrier. ISIS group wants to “take back Islam to an illusion principle of how pure the religion was at the start”, and initiate a worldwide caliphate (Stern and Berger 75). On the one hand, the group is trying to rewind the clock back to go again to an undefiled model of Islam while, on the other hand, it is “reinventing its religion in a modern and harsh way” (Stern and Berger 75).

The group plans to get rid of all who go against its ideology. It uses this idea to appeal to many people. To some of them, ISIS is a display of a “rallying force” against the status quos in governments that have endured the insults and domination of the west. The United States of America is its principle enemy and the group is seeking to inflict collateral damage to the US. It is a fact that due to hopelessness, many people face the dysfunctional corrupt and skewed governments. Many Muslims even in the western countries are being recruited mostly through social media. In fact, social media has become one of their most effective weapons to advance their agenda and ideology which is to create a new world order.

The rise of ISIS has threatened to alter the United States strategic interests in the entire Middle East hemisphere. The Islamic State views the United States as its main adversary. The group’s increasing influence and assertion is in disagreement with the United States’ vital interests in the Middle East. It is improbable that the two will show their might and power swiftly, despite the fact that a battle is imminent. The group has changed its tactics after Obama’s administration declared air campaign against the ISIS in August, 2014. Since the group has captured several territories, it uses a human shield to evade that aerial bombardment from the US jets. The result of this tactic has been an ever escalating civilian causality which does not auger well for air offensive.

It has been said that the need for American boots on the ground is inevitable though it has been opposed vehemently by many politicians in the United States. The narrative that is being advanced concerning this matter is that America should train Iraqi and Syrians forces so as to eliminate the need for American troops on the ground. However, the United States government thinks that the Assad regime must have paved the way for a new regime so as to allow a closer engagement between the US and Syria. This fact has caused a divergence of views in the community of nations as Russia vows to support the Assad regime to fight ISIS. On the other hand, the United States supports rebel groups to fight ISIS – a conflict that is slowing down the effort needed to neutralize the group in Syria.

Conclusion

There is general agreement that all the policy options existing in the global community are unpleasant towards countering the rise of this new wave of insurgency. While it has become contentious to have the U.S. ground forces to handle ISIS, Washington together with the international community should employ all available tools and resources to proactively battle ISIS. By closely aiming at points that cut access between main ISIS occupations and diminishing the group’s Internet access and infrastructure, it is possible to go a long way in reducing their growth rate. The plain truth is that any impasse or disagreement within the global community represents a win for ISIS giving the group time to get bigger as it increases its international assertion.

The theory suggesting that ISIS will bring about its own collapse through its cruelty seems justifiable. Although this may sound encouraging, the truth of the matter is that waiting for the group to disintegrate would likely create a massive humanitarian catastrophe in the interim. To sum up the paper it is true that the global community slept and ignored the repercussions of this terrorist group. However, if no concerted effort is made to paralyze the groups machinery, it will become the worst nightmare the world has ever seen. Any effort to curb its spread inevitably will lead to loss of human capital because war is expensive.