The Islamic State’s Caliphate as we know it has ended. Last week Raqqa, the self-proclaimed capital of the caliphate, became liberated. U.S. Backed forces have stated that all major military operations in the Syrian city have ceased. Does this mean the end of ISIS? Certainly not. But it does raise the question, what is next for the caliphate and organization itself?
In the next several weeks we will explore different aspects of life after ISIS in a series of articles. Many foreign policy strategies the last three years have focused on counterterrorism and not long term strategic developments. Conflicts between state actors and their affiliated groups will now take center stage in the Middle East.
We will be taking a deeper dive into aspects like who governs parts of Syria such as the huge city of Raqqa, which has experienced over 3,000 bombs being dropped on the city, and only 1% of its pre-war population remaining. Aspects such as Iran’s influence on the region. And aspects of how will ISIS and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi adapt now that they have no territory, if he is even still alive (which I believe he is).
The first post-caliphate aspect is taking place as we speak in norther Iraq. Northern Iraq is largely populated with Kurds, whereas the rest of Iraq is mainly Arab. The Kurds would like to create their own independent country, Kurdistan, and voted on an independence referendum on September 25th. Since the referendum was passed, things have deteriorated quickly in Kurdish held lands. The main point of contention is in Kirkuk, and surrounding areas the Kurds have controlled since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003 as well as the expelling of ISIS since 2014.
The Kurds, and their armed fighters in Iraq the Peshmerga, have been central in the fight against ISIS. They are even backed, trained, and armed by the U.S. With ISIS now expelled from most of Iraq, and any major population center like Mosul, the Kurds and the Iraqi government are shifting focus. The Kurds want to control and govern lands they’ve seized, and the government of Iraq and the Iraqi army want to take back lands they claim are rightfully theirs, because the land is inside the borders of Iraq.
The Iraqi government, not pleased with the Kurdish independence referendum, and after weeks of threats, moved to retake Kirkuk and surrounding areas last Monday. They also moved to retake the Kurdish controlled oil fields. The Kurds in Iraq make a good deal of their revenue from oil, and half of their oil comes from the oil fields in Kirkuk. The Iraqi army and Iraqi federal police are also US trained and equipped after the invasion of Iraq and more recently for the fight against ISIS. So late Monday and early Tuesday morning you had one group with US supplied weapons fighting another group using US supplied weapons. Reports are that 5 US Humvees used by the Iraqi army were destroyed. Assisting the Iraqis were Shia fighting units backed by Iran called the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF).
The Kurds vowed that they would not hand Kirkuk back, but that is exactly what happened Monday as the Iraqi army and the PMF’s moved into town. Tens of thousands of civilians fled the city, and the Peshmerga forces also withdrew after little fighting. Fighting the US Military described as a “misunderstanding”. Reports are surfacing that Iran and the Kurdish Peshmerga forces reached an agreement for them to peacefully leave Kirkuk. We will explore that scenario in a future article.
This conflict puts the United States into a very difficult spot. The US has remained adamant that they won’t take sides in this conflict, as they do not want two groups they have armed, trained, and supported fighting one another. The US led coalition in Iraq supported both groups in the fight against ISIS. Although, the US and coalition’s focus was much more on counterterrorism and not on long term strategic development in the Middle East. On one hand we have fully supported the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria. They will see any move to side with Iraq as a betrayal to them. Also, siding with Iraq means also siding with the PMF groups, and Iran, when President Trump just declared Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps troops as a terrorist organization. Iraq could see siding with the Kurds as a blow to an Iraqi government who we’ve tried to create, restore, and support for going on 15 years now.
The US has warned the Iraqi government that the weapons were supplied for the fight against the Islamic State, and not the Kurds. They have gone as far as to say if the weapons are used improperly, the train-and-equip program will stop. We currently have 5,000 troops in Iraq, with US commanders and advisers in the vicinity of Kirkuk. The US also needs to hinder any further movement by Iran into Iraq just as they have done in Syria. The US criticized the Kurdish independence referendum, which included areas outside of their autonomous control, just like Kirkuk. As well as the fact that they did not want the US to oversee the negotiations between the Iraqi government and the Kurdish government.
This is a situation of high intensity, and one that probably won’t be resolved quickly. Although, unless a plan is put into place soon, ISIS and Iran will benefit from Iraqi in-fighting. ISIS is still not completely defeated, as we will talk about in a future article. And Iran is trying to influence more and more groups as we will also see in an upcoming edition. The time to develop a long-term strategy for state actors is now, or the US could be spending many more years bogged down in the Middle East.
Sources:
Browne, Gareth,, “”Abadi’s capture of Kirkuk might just save Iraq” The New Arab, 10-17-17
Cafarella, Jennifer, “The “War after ISIS” begins in Iraq”, Institute for the Study of War, 10–15-17
Collard, Rebecca, “Kurds feel twice betrayed as Iraqi forces take disputed Kirkuk”, Time Magazine, 10-16-17
Gould, Joe, Copp, Tara, ‘Pentagon says Iraqi train-and-equip mission could end if attacks on Kurds continue”, Defensenews.com,, 10–16-17
Gramer, Robbie, McLeary, Paul, “Iraqi–Kurdish Clash in Kirkuk Opens Door to More Iranian Influence”, Foreignpolicy.com, 10-14-17
Lister, Tim, “Kirkuk: A crisis waiting to happen, with consequences for region”, CNN.com, 10-16-17
Loveluck,, Louisa, Sly, Liz, “The defeat of ISIS in Raqqa test U.S. Commitment to Syrian Kurds”, The Washington Post, 10-17-17
Petkova, Mariya, “What will happen to post-ISIL Raqqa?””, Al Jazeera, 10-17-17
Stewart, Phil, Ali, Idrees, “A divided Iraq tests U.S. Influence as fight against Islamic State wanes”, Reuters.com,, 10-16-17
Trofimov, Yaroslav, “Iraqi Kurdiistan’s Losing Gamble”, The Wall Street Journal, 10–16-17
Wing, Joel, “Fighting breaks out between federal forces and peshmerga in salahaddin and Kirkuk”, Musings on Iraq, 10-16-17
Zucchino, David, “Iraqi forces seep into Kirkuk, checking Kurdish independence drive”, The New York Times, 10-16-17