The Islamic State statehood and the concept of state in the Middle East

Abstract

On June 29, 2014, the Sunni Salafist jihadist organization known as Islamic State of Iraq and Levant proclaimed Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi its caliph and changed its name in Islamic State - as a new caliphate. In this way, it posed the flag of a State on the conquered territories between Iraq and Syria. The quick - even not unexpected - development of IS and its pragmatical separation from al-Qaida undermined further the precarious equilibrium of the Middle East. Furthermore, this event represents a new issue for the international community. It opens a new debate and puts the concept of state into the spotlight.

The main question is if the Islamic State can be considered a state. Is the Islamic State a formal state? Scholars and experts of geopolitic tried to answer this question using the limited datas in their possession. The relevance of the answer is related to the fact that is important to understand how other subject have to engage with IS. To understand if it is a State or a terroristic group can conditions the international strategy of other states to face this problems. However, to answer this question is necessary to dissemble it, developing a discourse that analyses all the elements subtended by this argument.

First of all, it is indispensable to understand what the concept of state refers to. What is a "State"? (how do you define a state?) This idea can be analyzed from different perspectives that can lead to different conclusions. Indeed, there are various elements that are used to define a state: some territorial other refers to a population, (some conceptual) legitimacy, power, independency. These elements can be found in different degrees in different state. Thus, following the thread of the discourse to the main answer, one is naturally led to wonder if there is a universal kind of state. Turning now to the Middle Eastern context asking the question: How has the state developed in the Middle East? Looking at this area, it can be assumed that the State is characterized by a structural instability that starts at least by the end of the Ottoman Empire, or even before its end. Therefore, we are interested in what are the main causes of this lack of equilibrium. In the Middle East there are some elements that, mixed with each other, converge to give a certain specificity to this region. For example historical elements, like the process of formation of the state and the post-colonial period; economical elements, like the presence of important reinter states; sociological elements, like tribes and minorities, and the strong presence of the religion with its separatism. Authoritarian States, Reinter States, Weak States, Failed States, Political Islam. Many of these elements generate sentiments characterized by trans-national aspects like Pan-Arabism or Pan-Islamism. The knowledge and understanding of this mix of features is a necessary precondition to explain the context in which the new entity of the Islamic State has been developed.

Thus, the debate arrives at the most central question of this analysis: For who is it important to understand if the Islamic State is a state or not? IS wants a territory. The separation from Al-Qaeda is a clear clue of it. Another indication should be on the name itself. They present themselves as the Islamic State and not as an Islamic State like the Islamic Republic of Iran. The concept of Umma is recurring in the public discourse, and the materials provided by IS itself as the magazine Dabiq, can show its politic. However, there are many uncertainties about the statehood of this entity that can possibly be defined as a counter-State.

The importance of this study is due to the necessity to analyze what IS claims to be, how it is actually acting, how the international system is facing it and how all these factors are delimitated in the Middle Eastern context can give a key to understand what is happening in the territories of Iraq and Syria.