Why the Islamic State Won't Became a Normal State

Posted July 9, 2015

External Article: The Washington Post

Lawrence Rubin, Assistant Professor in the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, wrote an article for the Washington Post as part of the "International Relations and a New Middle East" symposium. Rubin discusses different opinions on the future of the Islamic state before stating his own claim. He argues that the ideological power of the Islamic State has more staying power and serves as more of a threat than the military power.

"An internationally recognized Islamic State would create an ideational security dilemma with its neighbors in which ideological power, not military power, would be the primary trigger of threat perception and policy."

Contrastingly, Rubin believes that a "call for a war of ideas" against the idealogies of the Islamic Nation would likely cause more instability and conflict than less.

"The Islamic State’s effort to project this ideological power will almost certainly trigger defensive reactions from threatened regimes that play out in the religious public space. Neighboring states would likely respond the way they already have but with increased intensity in the ideological sphere through ideational balancing."

In regards to United States foreign policy, Rubin asserts that it is vital for citizens to have a subtle understanding of "threat perception, both who and what drives it, that takes into account the regional players."

All in all, Rubin implies that Middle East relations will always be extremely complicated and it is vital to understand all the nuanced aspects of the dilemma.

Continue to full article...

Lawrence Rubin’s research interests include comparative Middle East politics and international security with a specific focus on Islam and politics, Arab foreign policies, and nuclear proliferation.