The state that isn’t — but is

Not only is IS a borderless state, it has territorial ambitions not far removed from the colonial and global caliphate

“The so-called Islamic State…” intoned the BBC newsreader, doubtless speaking what is editorial policy — but there is nothing ‘so-called’ about it at all. The Islamic State is described in a variety of mostly inconsistent ways. Some call it a terrorist group — well it was once but it is no longer. It might spread or induce fear and terror but in the conventional understanding of ‘terrorist group’ it moved past that label long ago. It is said to be the wealthiest terrorist group of all time and the terrorist part aside that at least is probably true — it is as wealthy if not wealthier than some states. It is a non-state actor to use the fashionable jargon — except that again it was but that is no longer the case. So what is this new creature? A state is what, just in an unfamiliar form.

The IS is misunderstood — or perhaps better described as ‘misinterpreted’. It is not some rag-tag network of loosely affiliated armed groups, neither is it a militia. It is an entity without borders in a conventional sense, has no representation on any internationally recognised body — nor would wish that — and has no publicly acknowledged centralised governance or constitution, but in the vast areas it now controls IS is the government.

All governments whatever their format have a social compact with the populations they govern. There are responsibilities that go with governance — state security, a justice system, a working economy, infrastructure like roads and bridges, water and power, a basic health service and a social safety net for the poorest in society.

Governance requires at least a modicum of cooperation from people like tribal leaders and elders, and given its sectarian nature and the fact that the majority of the territory they now hold is populated by people who at least nominally share the same sectarian orientation as IS, then compliance is relatively easily attained.

The IS has watched as al Qaeda has withered into virtual irrelevance, in part because it never controlled, or sought to control — territory. Ideology is not enough, it needs to be backed by a demonstrated ability to take and then hold and administer entire populations, irrespective of borders or sitting, indeed elected, governments. The populations that now find themselves governed by IS will include people who would be regarded as dissidents, and as the reported butchery in Ramadi amply demonstrates dissidents, and that is a term that IS interprets very broadly, are going to find immortality sooner rather than later.

Brutal it may be, but for some of the populations now under IS rule this is better than what they had before; and they are prepared to settle for the IS model even if it is uncomfortable for some of the time. The IS presents unarmed populations with little option, and people weary of war are able to accept a flawed peace.

Not only is the IS a borderless state, it has territorial ambitions that are not far removed from the colonial and a global caliphate is the ultimate end. In this it is unlikely to find success, though the narrative of success of the last two years will have created within IS a false sense of capacity to take, hold and govern.

It has been successful on the battlefield because in the case of Syria it moved into the ungoverned and lawless areas formed by the civil war, and in Iraq on the back of sectarian tensions generated by a failure of national governance in Baghdad. It had broad local support in many areas and quickly moved to secure the resources that would underpin the financing of an emerging state. On the downside it is operating extended and vulnerable lines of supply, but militarily remains on the front foot.

To continue with the fantasy that IS is just another terrorist group is folly. It is not susceptible to counter-terrorism measures, but it could be successfully fought if the military forces of both Syria and Iraq — to say nothing of the US — were unified, well led and had within them a sense of commitment to the state that was powerful enough to lay down lives for. Dream on. Islamic State — the state that is.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 28^th,  2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.