The Westphalian State and Iraq

More than enough ink, digital or otherwise, has been spilt on macro-level commentary of the destabilizing events around the globe this summer, namely in Iraq, Gaza, and Ukraine. This is not remotely close to being the first blog to look at the conflicts as a collective phenomenon. What does appear to be striking, especially to this editor of the Drugs and Thugs Blog, is the level in which these conflicts, among many others worldwide, are primarily dictated by non-state actors. The Westphalian state is certainly not broken, but non-state actors appear to be more capable now than they have been at any time in the preceding six hundred years. This alone is a dramatic result in the field of international security.

One of the more fascinating elements of the conflicts of 2014 is the ability of these non-state actors to take on state-like behavior. More than anything, this is exemplified in Iraq by the Islamic State. Although the Islamic State considers itself the caliphate, it only represents a subsection of Iraq, run by an offshoot of al-Qaeda. Vice News’s recently released five part documentary is an excellent depiction of the governance of IS. Although all five parts are exceedingly interesting, there are some more intriguing sections of the documentary in terms of international security. First off is the sheer bureaucracy and governance that has been put in place in IS-controlled areas. Magistrates, city councils, welfare systems, and vice police were displayed in the documentary. Despite the small span of time since IS broke out onto the international scene, they have established intricate systems of governance and control over their populace. One of the more notable scenes in Vice’s documentary is their coverage of the IS claims court. Although IS is an insurgent group with nearly millenarian goals, their governance appears as benign as the DMV. This is indicative of many non-state actors; although they attempt to overthrow the existing regime, they explicitly exemplify the state in their individual organization and management. Revolution and imitation are the most sincere forms of flattery, at least in case of insurgency and revolution. 

Progressing from this realization of state-like behavior is the more noticeable power of non-state actors to influence and destabilize existing states. This is not a new phenomenon by any measure, but it is certainly striking this year. IS swept rapidly from its long-term battle against Asad’s Syria to severely threaten Maliki’s Iraq, all with limited resources and backing. The power of this relatively ragtag group of jihadists was enough to force an attempted coup in Baghdad and the aid of an increasingly isolationist US. Clearly, it is impossible for states to ignore the IS. In the Vice documentary, there is a scene in which IS clears the Iraq-Syrian border in an effort to build the continuity of the Iraq state. More interestingly, they mention the Sykes-Picot Agreement as a driving impetus to destroy the borders in the Middle East. Non-state actors are aware of the international agreements in which they have formed, and deny the supremacy of those international agreements. It is foolish to think that these organizations  don’t have an understanding of the international relations realm in which they have begun to operate, just as it is foolish to ignore their ability to act similar to state-like operations. The takeaway realization from IS’s time in Iraq is that insurgency and terrorist groups, more than ever, are adaptable to the necessities of their surroundings. This should be concerning; they can react to our actions more deftly than at any time previous.