By Bonnie Kristian |
The Islamic State is losing. It is losing land, including all access to the Syrian-Turkish border and 60 percent of the territory it once controlled. And it is losing money—an estimated 80 percent of the terrorist group’s income has dried up as a shrinking caliphate means declining access to oil wells and tax revenue. Even looting isn’t what it used to be.
That ISIS is losing raises the question of what the United States will do once ISIS has lost. The House Armed Services Committee held a hearing on the topic last week, and rightly so: After 14 years of war in Iraq, the end of ISIS offers a welcome opportunity to re-evaluate U.S. interests, and therefore goals, in the Levant.
The temptation in Washington will be recommittal, to maintain long-term military intervention in Iraq to solve that country’s political challenges, giving relative priority to nation-building projects while functioning as a permanent subsidy of the Iraqi military. That would be a grave mistake, an ill-considered pledge of participating in the regional cycle of terrorism and sectarian conflict, for it is predicated on a fundamentally unrealistic assumption about what outside forces, even U.S. military action, can achieve.
Source: News Now / Washington Examiner