The ISIS Opposition Objective: An [Un]Balanced Network Against Terrorism
The Islamic State—more formally know as ISIS—is continuing to wage its terroristic offensive against the citizens and municipalities of Iraq and Syria. The group’s use of social media is gaining Muslim radical support across the world, attracting a stronger following by the day. In response, the Obama administration, combined with other international allies, is making a push to combine a militant effort with Sunni Muslim countries to “give legitimacy to the effort.” Countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are a few countries to name among other Arab nations that have committed to waging a war against the extremist group. While it seems like combining forces is a no-brainer, there is long standing political tension that is creating uncertainty between the US and Arab nations.
To exemplify this situation, we can depict a complete graph, which shows a network in which all nodes are connected to one another. The nodes, in this case, represent the political powers involved in the crisis. Heider’s Theory of Structural Balance helps us examine the permutations in which a global coalition against ISIS would or would not work. For a complete network to be balanced, we know that each triangle within the network must be balanced. For this to be the case, each triangle must have either all three positive edges connecting them (which will not be the case in the Middle East), or two negative edges and one positive edge. The balanced network is shown in Figure 1. The graph excludes some allied powers for the purpose of simplification. In this network, green ties represent positive (+) edges while red ties represent negative (-) edges.
Balancing this network of perennial enemies could prove particularly difficult for the United States and its allies. We can use the unstable relationship between the US and Turkish governments to epitomize the challenge of maintaining balance within the allied network. While Turkey has an economic and political incentive to stop the illegal flow of weapons and oil to the ISIS counterparts, the Turkish government has historically been known to support extremist groups that oppose the US. For this triangle to be balanced, Turkey and the US must reconcile their differences to form one positive edge in order to collude against ISIS. If this edge between the US and Turkey turns into a negative one, the entire network is thrown out of balance as shown in Figure 2.
The reason this triangle, and subsequently, the entire network are unbalanced is because it creates a triangle between the US, Turkey and ISIS where all edges are negative. A triangle being unbalanced indicates that the collusion against ISIS would be unsuccessful. In the real world, for instance, if a country like Turkey began to support ISIS, the group would continue to sink its teeth into Middle Eastern territory, prompting even more support from militant groups and Gulf State governments, thus perpetuating the unbalance in the network.
Similarly, the Saudis and other Gulf States such as Qatar and the UAE have begun to harbor training grounds for militant fighters to go up against ISIS. That being said, these nations have a long-standing history of support for Al Qaeda, making the network between them, the US, and ISIS a volatile one. Additionally, while Iran and Syria are known foes of the US, Iranian and Syrian leaders have an incentive to dispel the rebel group from within its borders.
The destruction of ISIS is will undoubtedly have to be a global effort. However, for this coalition to be successful, the network between these countries must be balanced, otherwise the offensive against ISIS will likely fail. The conclusion is that the edges between anti-ISIS powers must remain positive as ISIS is connected to the network solely by negative edges. Even if one edge is negative, the whole network will be unbalanced. For instance, if negotiations between Saudi Arabia and the United States and its allies go sour and the Saudis begin to facilitate ISIS’ presence, the effort against ISIS will be an illegitimate one, which would have staggering consequences for the Middle East.
Source: http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/14/world/meast/isis-coalition-nations/