W. Andrew Terrill

The United States is currently a leading player in the military coalition waging war against the Islamic State Organization (often called by its older name of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham or ISIS) in Iraq and Syria. The purpose of this coalition was initially to rollback and degrade ISIS capabilities and then ultimately to destroy the organization. This effort has been made in coordination with the Iraqi government, regional allies, allies from outside of the region, and local anti-ISIS groups including various Kurdish organizations. An important part of this strategy is to disrupt, reduce, and if possible, eliminate major sources of ISIS revenue, thereby hollowing out the organization from the inside while it is under pressure. The most well-known sources of ISIS funding are oil stolen from the areas the group now occupies and taxes and fines levied on the populations under their control.

The Middle East is currently in one of its most dramatic periods of turbulence since the post-World War I emergence of the modern state system in that region. Recently, the United States and its Arab allies have been concerned by a number of distressing regional trends including the uncertain future of Iranian influence throughout the region, the rise and persistence of the Islamic State (IS) organization, the ouster of Yemen's Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi government from the capital of Sana'a and that country's subsequent civil war, and the rise of insurgencies in Libya, Egypt, and especially the Sinai. The intense unrest in the Middle East has created new conflicts, but it has also brought some of the regional status quo powers into a greater level of cooperation to help address these problems. Saudi Arabia has emerged as a significant regional leader, almost by default, as other important Arab states such as Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Libya have been struggling with domestic crises.

During World War II, the U. S. military's extensive planning for the occupation of Germany was a major factor in achieving long-term strategic objectives after the war was won. More recent examples of military operations also emphasize the challenges of post-conflict operations and the criticality of detailed planning and preparation. As the possibility of war with Iraq looms on the horizon, it is important to look beyond the conflict to the challenges of occupying the country. In October 2002, the U. S. Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, in coordination with the Office of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff/G-3, initiated a study to analyze how American and coalition forces can best address the requirements that will necessarily follow operational victory in a war with Iraq. The objectives of the project were to determine and analyze probable missions for military forces in a post-Saddam Iraq; examine associated challenges...

During World War II, the U. S. military's extensive planning for the occupation of Germany was a major factor in achieving long-term strategic objectives after the war was won. More recent examples of military operations also emphasize the challenges of post-conflict operations and the criticality of detailed planning and preparation. As the possibility of war with Iraq looms on the horizon, it is important to look beyond the conflict to the challenges of occupying the country. In October 2002, the U. S. Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, in coordination with the Office of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff/G-3, initiated a study to analyze how American and coalition forces can best address the requirements that will necessarily follow operational victory in a war with Iraq. The objectives of the project were to determine and analyze probable missions for military forces in a post-Saddam Iraq; examine associated challenges; and formulate strategic recommendations for transferring responsibilities...

U. S. political and military diffi culties in Iraq have prompted comparisons to the American war in Vietnam. How, in fact, do the two wars compare? What are the differences and similarities, and what insights can be gained from examining them? Does the Vietnam War have instructive lessons for those dealing with today's challenges in Iraq, or is that war simply irrelevant? In the pages that follow, two highly qualifi ed analysts address these questions. Dr. Jeffrey Record, formerly a civilian pacifi cation advisor in Vietnam and author of books on both the Vietnam and Iraq wars, and W. Andrew Terrill, author and co-author of several SSI studies on Iraq, conclude that the military dimensions of the two confl icts bear little comparison. Among other things, the sheer scale of the Vietnam War in terms of forces committed and losses incurred dwarfs that of the Iraq War.

The U. S. military presence in Iraq is currently in a transitional phase. Either the anti-U. S. insurgency will be brought under control and security will be provided to those forces involved in nationbuilding; or the insurgency will expand, and U. S. goals in Iraq will be undermined by increasing civil unrest. It is imperative that the former objective be accomplished while the later fate be avoided. To ensure this outcome, U. S. policymakers must understand the internal dynamics of Iraq, including the role of Iraq's Shi'ite clerics. This monograph by Dr. W. Andrew Terrill helps to address the critical need to gain the cooperation or at least the passive tolerance of the Shi'ite clerics and community. Such an effort could become more challenging as time goes on, and one of the recurring themes of this monograph is the declining patience of the Shi'ite clergy with the U. S. presence. By describing the attitudes, actions, and beliefs of major Shi'ite clerics, Dr. Terrill underscores a set of worldviews...

The future of Iraq is uncertain. The country is in a dangerous phase. The removal of a brutal dictatorship by coalition forces in April 2003 has given the Iraqi people hope for a new and better political system, where individuals do not have to live in continuing fear and uncertainty. Nevertheless, the Iraqi people must also address the difficult challenges of self-government for a diverse population, with major ethnic and sectarian groups that often maintain widely divergent agendas. If they fail to do this and an ethnic/sectarian war ensues, the consequences will be dire, not only for Iraq, but for the entire Middle Eastern region. This monograph, by Dr. W. Andrew Terrill, does not predict an Iraqi civil war, which is the worst-case outcome for the current struggle in Iraq. Neither can this monograph fully rule out this possibility since the responsibility for preventing such an eventuality is ultimately Iraqi and not American, and U. S. analysts cannot predict...

The United States is engaged in a massive effort to rehabilitate the government and political culture of Iraq, following the destruction of the Saddam Hussein regime in spring 2003. The U. S. goal and ideal for Iraq is the establishment and maintenance of a strong, self-sufficient, and forward-looking government. Currently, Iraq is in transition, as that country's political leaders seek to establish a new, more representative form of government, while at the same time attempting to cope with a vicious ongoing insurgency. To accomplish these tasks, the government needs significant U. S. military support which will be reduced and then eliminated over time as the Iraqis hopefully become more self-sufficient. According to President George W. Bush in his June 25, 2005, address to the nation, "We will stay in Iraq as long as we are needed-and not a day longer."

The United States has a core national interest in maintaining peace and stability in the Middle East as well as containing or eliminating threats emanating from that region. Yet, if most American strategic analysts can agree on this assumption and these goals, there is often disagreement on the ways to best achieve them. In this monograph, Dr. W. Andrew Terrill presents his analysis of how the United States and other Western states might best address their military cooperation and basing needs within the Middle East, while still respecting and working with an understanding of regional and especially Arab history and concerns. He also provides the reader with policy recommendations based upon his analysis. This monograph is not intended to be an exhaustive examination of all U. S. basing activities or military cooperation in the Middle East. It also does not include a discussion of Israel, which would be a separate and important study in and of itself. Rather, it is an examination of other Middle Eastern...

The United States and Jordan have maintained a valuable mutually-supportive relationship for decades as a result of shared interests in a moderate, prosperous, and stable Middle East. In this monograph, Dr. W. Andrew Terrill highlights Jordan's ongoing value as a U. S. ally and considers ways the U. S.-Jordanian alliance might be used to contain and minimize problems of concern to both countries. Although Jordan is not a large country, it is an important geographical crossroads within the Middle East and has been deeply involved in many of the most important events in the region's recent history. Now, the importance of this relationship has increased, and Jordan has emerged as a vital U. S. ally in the efforts to stabilize Iraq and also resist violent extremism and terrorism throughout the region.

The United States has found no shortage of difficulties in recent years as it has moved forward in implementing its security policies toward the Middle East and especially the Persian/Arabian Gulf. Security threats resulting from an Iraq in turmoil and an assertive Iran are near the top of U. S. concerns about its future security. Efforts to deal with terrorism and to encourage and support the efforts of regional states to stem the rise of violent terrorist groups are also important. Kuwait, while a small country with a limited population, nevertheless has many of the same concerns as the United States in that part of the world. While Kuwait cannot act as a major regional power, it can nevertheless still serve as a valuable ally, whose contributions to regional security and democratization should not be overlooked. These contributions center on strategic geography, economic strength, and a willingness to host U. S. forces that is long-standing in a region where such actions can sometimes be seen as...

The Iraq war has been one of the dominant factors influencing U. S. strategic thinking in the Middle East and globally since 2003. Yet the problems of this highly dynamic and fluid war have sometimes forced U. S. policymakers to address near-term issues that cannot be safely postponed at the expense of long-term strategic thought. Such a technique, while understandable, cannot continue indefinitely as an approach to policy. Long-term planning remains vital for advancing regionwide U. S. and Iraqi interests following a U. S. drawdown from Iraq. Such planning must include dealing with current and potential "spillover" from the Iraq war. In this monograph, Dr. W. Andrew Terrill presents ideas, concerns, and strategies that can help to fill this gap in the literature and enrich the debate on the actual and potential spillover effects of the Iraq war that will face U. S. policymakers, possibly for decades.

A central purpose of this monograph is to reexamine two earlier conflicts for insights that may be relevant for ongoing dangers during limited wars involving nations possessing chemical or biological weapons or emerging nuclear arsenals. These conflicts are the 1973 Arab-Israeli War and the 1991 Gulf War. Both of these wars were fought at the conventional level, although the prospect of Israel using nuclear weapons (1973), Egypt using biological weapons (1973), or Iraq using chemical and biological weapons (1991) were of serious concern at various points during the fighting. This monograph will consider why efforts at escalation control and intrawar deterrence were successful in the two case studies and assess the points at which these efforts were under the most intensive stress that might have caused them to fail.

This monograph considers both the future of Iraq and the differences and similarities between events in Iraq and the Arab Spring states. The author analyzes the nature of Iraqi de-Ba'athification and evaluates the rationales and results of actions taken by both Americans and Iraqis involved in the process. While there are differences between the formation of Iraq's post-Hussein government and the efforts of Arab Spring governing bodies to restructure their political institutions, it is possible to identify parallels. As in Iraq, new Arab Spring governments have to apportion power, build or reform key institutions, establish political legitimacy for those institutions, and accommodate the expectations of their publics in a post-revolutionary environment. A great deal can go wrong, and any lessons that can be gleaned will be of value to those nations facing these problems, as well as to regional and extra-regional allies seeking to help them. (Originally published by SSI)