The capture of Mosul Terror’s new headquarters

Iraq’s second city has fallen to a group that wants to create a state from which to wage jihad around the world Jun 14th 2014 | 

SO ABSOLUTE was the rout of Iraq’s army in Mosul that soldiers stripped off their uniforms in the street and fled. The bodies of those left behind, some mutilated, were strewn amid burned-out troop carriers. Roughly 1,500 jihadists from the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS), outnumbered by more than 15 to one, reportedly seized six Black Hawk helicopters as well as untold plunder from the vaults of Mosul’s banks. They released thousands of prisoners from Mosul’s jails. As the black flag of jihad rose above government buildings, as many as half a million refugees sought sanctuary.

Two and a half years ago, as the last American troops left, President Barack Obama described Iraq as “sovereign, stable and self-reliant”. Today jihadists are tearing the country apart. Mosul is its second city. On June 10th the prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, called for a state of emergency and pleaded for outside help. The next day, in league with rebellious Iraqi Sunnis, ISIS took Tikrit, the home of Saddam Hussein, just two and a half hours’ drive north of Baghdad.

In coming weeks the jihadists may fall prey to overstretch (seearticle). Perhaps Iraq’s humiliated army will muster the resolve to make a stand, or even retake Mosul. But, with its symbolic victories and an endless supply of young men, that will be of little comfort. ISIS aims to redraw the map of the Middle East by creating a Sunni state, starting with eastern Syria and the heart of Iraq. Its brand of militancy is spreading poison and terror across the Arab world. One day, if they have their way, ISIS’s suicide-bombers will also target Europe and America. Without a change of heart in Baghdad and Washington, ISIS and groups like it will continue to cause mayhem. Even with a new approach, it will be hard to stop the jihad.

Too alarming for al-Qaeda

ISIS is born of regional warfare and Islamic fundamentalism. Battling against Bashar Assad in Syria, it recruited foreign fighters, some of them veterans. In the anarchy of Syria and Iraq, it has stuffed its robes with cash from kidnapping and extortion, and gained enough battlefield experience to outclass Iraq’s soldiery. It is so zealous and bloodthirsty that other rebel groups in Syria have turned against it. Even al-Qaeda renounced it, partly because al-Qaeda does not approve of the idea of creating a state just now, and partly because of ISIS’s savagery, including towards fellow Muslims.

Too violent for mainstream Syria’s rebels, too extreme for al-Qaeda, ISIS has many parents. At the start of the war in Syria, Turkey let foreign fighters cross its borders freely. European governments have handed ISIS millions of dollars to buy the freedom of kidnapped citizens. Mr Assad cynically helped ISIS gain an edge over the rest of the Syrian rebels by releasing extremists from his jails and selectively sparing it from attacks. He wanted the world to withhold aid for his opponents, for fear of what might come after him. It worked.

But the blame also lies with Mr Maliki in Iraq and with Mr Obama. Mr Maliki has governed as a proto-dictator on behalf of the Shia majority. The army has rotted as he has purged independent-minded officers and put his own men in their place. Just after the last American troops left Iraq, in 2011, he ordered the arrest of the Sunni vice-president—who promptly fled. He failed to maintain links with the Sunni clans who drove al-Qaeda and ISIS’s forerunner out once before, during the American occupation. He has used live fire on peaceful Sunni protesters. At the same time, life in Mr Maliki’s Iraq is miserable. Because of ISIS, monthly death rates have climbed back to the levels of 2008; the rule of law is weaker than in the time of Saddam; corruption is rife and the lack of jobs and education means that prospects are bleak.

A state of jihad

Mr Obama has helped ISIS by omission. No doubt, his predecessor’s decision to go to war—which we mistakenly backed at the time—was a disaster. But in quitting Iraq Mr Obama failed to win an agreement that left some American troops behind, or that provided American aerial support. Only last month he refused Mr Maliki’s calls for American airstrikes against the Jihadists. And in Syria, as many warned, the predictable outcome of Mr Obama’s vow to prevent America being sucked in has been to create a terrorist threat so grave that it risks sucking America into an even worse mess.

ISIS may now catalyse the disintegration of Iraq and Syria. Armed with weapons seized in Mosul and cash to pay its troops it can more easily hold its ground. In Iraq the Kurds may get their own state, which would leave a Shia-dominated rump under Mr Maliki at risk of communal violence. ISIS’s freedom to range through parts of Syria and Iraq creates a breeding ground for global terror. Although the group’s focus today is on territory, its people say that their targets include the wider region and the West. Hundreds of ISIS fighters may have European passports. Already, in eastern Syria, the group has built training camps. That is worryingly reminiscent of Osama bin Laden’s set-up in Afghanistan.

ISIS can be stopped. Its fighters are not numerous—it has up to 11,000 of them, boosted by the recruits it picks up along the way and the prisoners it frees from jails. Following elections that he won last month, Mr Maliki is struggling to form a coalition. The capture of Mosul gives him the chance to abandon Shia triumphalism and to form a government for all Iraqis, including moderate Sunnis and Kurds. That would help curb ISIS, especially if the Kurds committed their peshmerga militiamen to the fight. It might also persuade local Sunni groups backing ISIS to stop. Mr Obama can arm and train Iraqi soldiers and squeeze ISIS in Syria by doing more to arm and train moderate rebels. Only they have the local knowledge and the desire to see off ISIS and other zealots. Yet Mr Obama is so reluctant to devote resources to the opposition that one of his best Arabists has resigned in frustration.

Fighting ISIS may not work. Even if Mr Maliki prevails, another violent group could rise from the ashes of war in Syria or Iraq. But not fighting it means more bloodshed in the Middle East—and very likely in the rest of the world, too.