Austin Long on the Threat of ISIS
As the Islamic State continues its attacks in Iraq, Syria and now France, Columbia News asked professors from a number of disciplines to evaluate the threats posed by the group. Austin Long, an assistant professor at the School of International and Public Affairs, served in Iraq as an analyst and adviser to coalition forces and the U.S. military
Q. Is U.S. policy responsible for the creation of ISIS, as some critics claim?
A. Had the U.S. not invaded Iraq, there would probably be no Islamic State. In 2009 Al Qaeda had been pushed to the margins of Iraq, mainly because the group alienated a lot of Sunnis. Since then, the rise of ISIS in Iraq has had more to do with the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government’s refusal to deal with legitimate Sunni grievances, which led to a resurgence of resistance among Iraqi Sunnis.
Q. You were in Iraq with the U.S. military. Did you forsee something like this happening?
A. I could not have imagined the collapse of Syria. The Assad regime looked pretty stable.
Q. From the tone of media coverage, one is sometimes left with the impression that things are more ominous today. Is that true?
A. People forget how bad things were in Iraq in the mid- 2000s. It was orders of magnitude worse. What’s different now is the Syrian aspect.
Q. Could the U.S. have done anything to stop this?
A. I think the situation would be better, not great, had we left a military presence behind in Iraq—advisers and a small counterterrorism force of 10,000 to 15,000 U.S. troops. In Syria, the United States could have committed more quickly and forcibly to supporting anti-Assad forces that were not Islamic. But that route ran the risk of alienating Russia as well as Turkey. And there’s no guarantee it would have stopped it.
Q. How worried should we be about ISIS?
A. I don’t think they are going to commit resources to attacking people here in the United States. They are focused on establishing a caliphate. If you worry about regional stability in the Middle East, then ISIS is a huge problem. They’re good at generating money and converting resources into fighting power. They’re tough, shrewd and very well-organized.
Q. Are we eventually going to have to send in ground troops?
A. The Islamic State can point to success in seizing territory and creating a caliphate. As long as they can present this utopian vision, it’s going to be tough to defeat them. If they establish this caliphate and most regional opponents can contain them, probably not. But it will require some management. If you are deeply cynical, you could say worst-case scenario, the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah fight ISIS to the death.
Q. Could the U.S. have done anything to stop this?
A. I think the situation would be better, not great, had we left a military presence behind in Iraq—advisers and a small counterterrorism force of 10,000 to 15,000 U.S. troops. In Syria, the United States could have committed more quickly and forcibly to supporting anti-Assad forces that were not Islamic. But that route ran the risk of alienating Russia as well as Turkey. And there’s no guarantee it would have stopped it.
Q. How worried should we be about ISIS?
A. I don’t think they are going to commit resources to attacking people here in the United States. They are focused on establishing a caliphate. If you worry about regional stability in the Middle East, then ISIS is a huge problem. They’re good at generating money and converting resources into fighting power. They’re tough, shrewd and very well-organized.
Q. Are we eventually going to have to send in ground troops?
A. The Islamic State can point to success in seizing territory and creating a caliphate. As long as they can present this utopian vision, it’s going to be tough to defeat them. If they establish this caliphate and most regional opponents can contain them, probably not. But it will require some management. If you are deeply cynical, you could say worst-case scenario, the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah fight ISIS to the death.