WASHINGTON—The future of the Middle East remains on the brink, while fast-paced China emergence continues in East Asia, according to participants at the Capitol Hill National Security Forum on June 21.
In the “Countering ISIS 2.0 and the Future of the Middle East” discussion, panelists noted that though the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) might be almost over, what comes next is a tremendous challenge.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said that the United States should “recognize the origins” of terror as “radical Islam.” Kinzinger was an early advocate for military intervention against ISIS and was one of the first to call for airstrikes against the group. Still, with competing interests from Russia, Iran, terror groups, and others, Kinzinger worries that “there will be an ISIS two.”
He also said the future lies with young people affected by terrorism and war themselves.
“It is the seven- and eight-year-olds that are either going to be the next terrorists we are going to have to fight,” Kinzinger said, “or they are going to be the generation that rises up and rejects radical Islam with in its own religion.”
Joining Kinzinger, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) agreed, saying that it is important to call-out radical Islam’s role in terror groups. She added that it’s also important to make sure diplomacy and military action work hand in hand in “denying the safe heaven” to terror groups.
But others, including former California Democratic Rep. Jane Harman disagreed.
By “demoniz[ing] a whole religion, then you radicalize people in the religion,” said Harman, currently the president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. “You are building the army that you are trying to defeat.”
Ryan Crocker, former ambassador to Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan under both Democrat and Republican administrations offered a broader perspective.
“Is it Islamic terror? Is it radical terror? Look, it is terror,” he said.
Crocker highlighted the need to fill the vacuum left by war with “good governance” and education. He, along with the other panelists, stressed the need to better support the millions of refugees living in and around the Middle East.
Reaching back for historical examples, Crocker listed non-religious movements like Baathism, Arab Nationalism, and Communism as other failed movements that were a response to a lack of governing.
“Islamism is joining the ranks of those failed isms,” Crocker said, “Islamic State is not the problem; it is the symptom of the problem, and that problem is a failure of good governance.”
The panel also addressed those fleeing Mideast hotspots. With war in Syria expected to continue for the foreseeable future, many refugees living in Lebanon, Jordan, and elsewhere have little hope of returning to safety.
Spurred by their discussion of the war in Syria, panelists also debated Iran’s role in the Middle East. While all agreed that Iran is taking steps to destabilize U.S. interests in the region, they again disagreed on ways to counter the country’s efforts.
Cheney commended President Donald Trump for his withdrawal from the Joint Compressive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal.
“It really was false comfort,” Cheney said, adding that that Trump’s tough stance on Iran was the right step to curbing their influence in Yemen, Syria, and beyond.
While Harman agreed with Cheney’s critiques of the deal, she countered, offering that it was a “transaction,” and any deal would have included concessions to Iran. She called for more vigorous inspection and diplomatic means to counter Iran’s behavior in the Middle East, but that the deal should have been kept in place.
Emerging Asian Threats
In the subsequent panel “The Future of Security in East Asia,” talk turned toward China and North Korea, with panelists pinning the biggest regional threat on China.
Kelly Magsamen, vice president of national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress, said that traditionally, the United States has had a strong sphere of influence in East Asia and throughout the Pacific, but China is pushing back. Through their military bases and construction of islands in the South China Sea they, have charted a clear path toward regional dominance.
“These islands are as good as gone,” added Jake Sullivan, former Vice President Joe Biden’s national security advisor. He also noted that China’s two overall strategic goals are military and security power in the East Asian region and global economic power.
German Marshall Fund Senior Fellow Jamie Fly said he has hope in the policy papers the Trump administration has been putting out and the renewed support for Taiwan they have been signaling, but he wants to see more action from the administration.
China’s Belt and Road initiative has given them a foothold to the global economic influence they seek. By investing in infrastructure projects throughout the world, China has used more economic power than military power to gain dominance, the panelists said.
“Globally, it is much more complicated,” Magsamen said, “that is going to be the game for the next century.”
China is more likely to use their newfound economic influence to pressure countries rather than through military might, the panelists agreed. In some places, such as Sri Lanka, China has struck long-term land leases that give them control of ports around the world.
Fly sees Taiwan in a more precarious situation with a higher chance of being invaded by China. And Hong Kong’s democracy is being suppressed with greater pressure from China as well.
“We are seeing this creeping Chinese expansionism that should be very concerning,” Fly said
China also has been growing its online influence by exporting its censored internet, also known as The Great Firewall. Their cyber, military, economic influence concerned all on the panel.
The challenges with North Korea and China are not separate issues either. With China the wayward country’s only ally, Trump has to play a tricky game with his mix of anti-China rhetoric and flattery toward President Xi Jinping, Fly said.
In the wake of the recent summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un, panelists agreed that diplomacy is better than threatening tweets from the president, but Magsamen said she saw little substance in the joint statement.
“A bad deal can be potentially as destabilizing as fire and fury,” Magsamen said, adding that when it comes to North Korea, “don’t trust, but verify.”
Sullivan said that the statement lacked many concrete concessions from North Korea. “Kim Jong-Un was pretty stingy,” he said.
Fly also was skeptical.
“The best defense of Trump’s approach is really where the previous administrations of both parties failed,” Fly said.
The annual forum was an all-day event that covered various aspects of national security. See additional Homeland411 coverage of the event here and here. You may view the entire event here.
Jackson Barnett is a staff writer for Homeland411.
© 2018 Homeland411