Islamic State spreads like wildfire into Lebanon

With the militant Islamic State, formerly the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, pushing into Lebanon and Kurdish controlled territories in Iraq as they pick up allies on the way, what started out as a crisis for Iraq appears to spreading throughout the region, which is already in flux thanks to the failure of the Arab Spring Revolutions to produce adequate change for the Peoples of the region and suppress militant activities.  Given the complex religious, social, and economic conflicts within all of the countries affected by this expanding militant threat, the situation looks more and more like a fight scene in an old Warner Brother’s cartoons where all the characters disappear into a ball of dust.  Consequently, providing a meaningful analysis of the crisis, versus simply reacting to the events that are unfolding, requires a look at the overall picture instead focusing on the rapidly changing details.

Certainly, there is an emerging conflict between Sunnis and Shia Muslims within countries affected by the Islamic State’s expansion and this common rift throughout the region is likely to widen as the pain of sectarian violence in foreign lands aggravates persistent grievances.  That said, there is a very sharp difference between extremists, who seek war against all other Islamic factions, and those who do not seek to dominate others, only defend their lives.  As individuals like Lebanon’s Sunni Prime Minister Tammam Salam take stances alongside Shiite Lebanese’s leaders in support of Lebanon, it is clear nationality still divides Muslims and breeds loyalties that connect the various religious factions.  That said, Iran backed Shia Hezbollah’s, which favors the Assad regime in Syria as well as Sunni Hamas, pledge to defend Lebanon against the Islamic State muddies the waters even more.  In fact, it creates a situation where a rush to help Hamas by both the Sunni Islamic State militants and Shiite militants could help propagate the spread of violence as all sides struggle for influence across the region, especially  factoring in spreading violence in places like Libya and Afghanistan/Pakistan.

Considering these intertwining interests and more, e.g. those of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, and Egypt, the overall picture looks like a massive tornado about to level the Middle East.  Hindering this catastrophic wave of violence and instability, however, is the militaries and police of these countries as well as the majority of Middle Easterners whose lives are being destroyed.  Anyone who has tried to maintain a way of life or organization of any kind understands building something is radically different that maintaining something.  In many respects, preventing the ruination of something is harder than creating it.  At the time, the Islamic State is rapidly expanding by destroying what other governments and groups are trying to maintain, i.e. peace, stability, and governance, but the Islamic State will have to solidify and maintain its gains at some point.  Consequently, it can only expand so much before it must put itself in the position of defending its gains.  Where the Islamic State fails to address the interests of those living in the areas it conquers, it will be weak, particularly if it’s more extreme members create too many riffs.  This means the Islamic State is going to create a great deal of instability before it discovers its limits, i.e. it will burn a path of destruction like forest fire until it no do longer spread, so future stability in the Middle East will depend upon the ability of opposition factions to overlook their grievances long enough to rebuild some order, very quickly.  Given the Muslim World has many grievances that have gone unresolved for decades to centuries, the best case scenario is a map of the Middle East divided along sectarian and other lines.