ISIS Likely to Pick Battle-Hardened Iraqi as Next Leader, Say Officials, Analysts

A suveillance image shows a compound housing the leader of ISIS Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Quraishi, who had led ISIS since the death in 2019 of its founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in northwest Syria prior to a raid executed by US forces February 2, 2022. Picture taken February 2, 2022. (Reuters)
A suveillance image shows a compound housing the leader of ISIS Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Quraishi, who had led ISIS since the death in 2019 of its founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in northwest Syria prior to a raid executed by US forces February 2, 2022. Picture taken February 2, 2022. (Reuters)
TT

ISIS Likely to Pick Battle-Hardened Iraqi as Next Leader, Say Officials, Analysts

A suveillance image shows a compound housing the leader of ISIS Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Quraishi, who had led ISIS since the death in 2019 of its founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in northwest Syria prior to a raid executed by US forces February 2, 2022. Picture taken February 2, 2022. (Reuters)
A suveillance image shows a compound housing the leader of ISIS Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Quraishi, who had led ISIS since the death in 2019 of its founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in northwest Syria prior to a raid executed by US forces February 2, 2022. Picture taken February 2, 2022. (Reuters)

The next leader of ISIS is likely to be from a close circle of battle-hardened Iraqi extremists who emerged in the aftermath of the 2003 US invasion, two Iraqi security officials and three independent analysts said.

The group of potential successors to Abu Ibrahim al-Quraishi, who blew himself up during a US operation to capture him in Syria last week, includes one commander whom Washington and Baghdad declared killed last year, the Iraqi officials said.

The death of Quraishi, 45, was another crushing blow to ISIS two years after the violent group lost longtime leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a similar raid in 2019, Reuters reported.

Quraishi, an Iraqi, never publicly addressed his fighters or followers, avoided electronic communications, and oversaw a move to fighting in small devolved units in response to intense pressure from Iraqi and US-led forces.

But those following ISIS closely expect it to name a successor in coming weeks, as the group which imposed brutal rule over vast swathes of Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2017 continues a stubborn and deadly insurgency.

Fadhil Abu Rgheef, an Iraqi expert who advises its security services, said there were at least four possible successors.

“These include ... Abu Khadija, whose last known role was Iraq leader for ISIS, Abu Muslim, its leader for Anbar province, and another called Abu Salih, of whom there’s very little information but who was close to Baghdadi and Quraishi,” he said.

“There’s also Abu Yassir al-Issawi, who is suspected to be still alive. He’s valuable to the group as he has long military experience.”

Issawi’s death in an air strike in January 2021 was reported at the time by both Iraqi forces as well as the US-led military coalition fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

But an Iraqi security official confirmed there were strong suspicions Issawi is still alive. “If he’s not dead he’d be a candidate, he’s tried and tested in planning military attacks and has thousands of supporters,” the official said.

The official added that ISIS was likely carrying out a security sweep for potential leaks that led to the death of Quraishi before convening to choose or announce a successor.

Hassan Hassan, editor of New Lines magazine which has published research on Quraishi, said the new leader would be a veteran Iraqi extremist.

“If they choose one in the coming weeks they’ll have to choose someone from among the same circle ... the group that was part of the Anbari group which operated under (the name) ISIS since the early days,” he said.

ISIS emerged from the militants that waged an increasingly sectarian-driven insurgency against US troops and Iraqi forces after 2003.

ISIS in Iraq, also known as al Qaeda in Iraq, was an offshoot of the global al Qaeda organization of Osama Bin Laden and the precursor to ISIS, which took shape in the chaos of Syria’s civil war across the border.

Baghdadi and Quraishi, both members of al Qaeda in Iraq from the start, did time in US detention in the mid-2000s. In contrast, none of the four potential successors to Quraishi had been captured by US forces, one security official and one army colonel told Reuters.

Officials and analysts in various countries agree ISIS is under more pressure than it’s ever been and will never restore its self-styled caliphate. But they are divided on how significant a setback Quraishi’s death is for the group.

Some say the fight against ISIS will suck in the United States and its allies for years to come as it develops into a permanent insurgency with new leaders ready to take the reins.

“In Syria, ISIS units work as a devolved network of individual groups in order to avoid them being targeted. We don’t therefore believe that Quraishi’s death will have an enormous impact,” one of the Iraqi security officials said.

“It’s also become more difficult to follow them because they’ve long stopped using mobile phones for communication.”

Since their territorial defeat in Iraq in 2017 and Syria in 2019, ISIS leaders have found it increasingly easy to move between the two countries, helped by a gap in areas of control between different armed forces, some officials say.

Security and military officials said the 600 km (372 mile) long border with Syria made it very hard for Iraqi forces to prevent militants infiltrating via underground tunnels.

NEW LEADERSHIP STYLE
Lahur Talabany, former counter-terrorism chief for Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region, said some ISIS leaders can travel on a route across the full expanse of Iraq.

“When you see attacks increasing in a particular area I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody important has been through that region,” he told Reuters. “The caliphate was defeated but ISIS was never eradicated. I don’t believe we managed to finish the job.”

ISIS’ possession of land in Iraq and Syria set it apart from other like-minded groups such as al Qaeda and became central to its mission when it declared a caliphate in 2014, claiming sovereignty over all Muslim lands and peoples.

Fiercely anti-Western, the group also draws on Sunni-Shia tensions, saying Shias were infidels who deserve to be killed.

Abu Rgheef said the new leader could have stronger military credentials than Quraishi, who Iraqi officials say was seen by followers as more of an Islamic legal mind than a military man.

“Attacks and operations will change in character depending on the style of the new leader. The new one might believe in big and intensive attacks, bombs or suicide bombers,” he said.

Despite Quraishi’s low profile and operational secrecy, his killing is likely to affect the group’s fighters, analysts say.

Hassan said Quraishi’s removal would reduce morale. “ISIS is also locked into personalities and who’s most trusted,” he said.

Aaron Zelin, senior fellow at the Washington Institute, said a figurehead is very important to ISIS.

“Whenever a leader of the group is killed, your oath is to the (next) leader, the individual themselves, and not to the group.”



UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
TT

UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)

In 2006, after a bruising monthlong war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah armed group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted for a resolution to end the conflict and pave the way for lasting security along the border.

But while relative calm stood for nearly two decades, Resolution 1701’s terms were never fully enforced.

Now, figuring out how to finally enforce it is key to a US-brokered deal that brought a ceasefire Wednesday.

In late September, after nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiraled into all-out war and an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets pound deep inside Lebanon and Hezbollah fires rockets deeper into northern Israel, UN and diplomatic officials again turned to the 2006 resolution in a bid to end the conflict.

Years of deeply divided politics and regionwide geopolitical hostilities have halted substantial progress on its implementation, yet the international community believes Resolution 1701 is still the brightest prospect for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.

Almost two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States led shuttle diplomacy efforts between Lebanon and Israel to agree on a ceasefire proposal that renewed commitment to the resolution, this time with an implementation plan to try to reinvigorate the document.

What is UNSC Resolution 1701? In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon along a UN-demarcated “Blue Line” that separated the two countries and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in Syria. UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeepers increased their presence along the line of withdrawal.

Resolution 1701 was supposed to complete Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure Hezbollah would move north of the Litani River, keeping the area exclusively under the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers.

Up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers would help to maintain calm, return displaced Lebanese and secure the area alongside the Lebanese military.

The goal was long-term security, with land borders eventually demarcated to resolve territorial disputes.

The resolution also reaffirmed previous ones that call for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon — Hezbollah among them.

“It was made for a certain situation and context,” Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Associated Press. “But as time goes on, the essence of the resolution begins to hollow.”

Has Resolution 1701 been implemented? For years, Lebanon and Israel blamed each other for countless violations along the tense frontier. Israel said Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and growing arsenal remained, and accused the group of using a local environmental organization to spy on troops.

Lebanon complained about Israeli military jets and naval ships entering Lebanese territory even when there was no active conflict.

“You had a role of the UNIFIL that slowly eroded like any other peacekeeping with time that has no clear mandate,” said Joseph Bahout, the director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They don’t have permission to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”

UNIFIL for years has urged Israel to withdraw from some territory north of the frontier, but to no avail. In the ongoing war, the peacekeeping mission has accused Israel, as well as Hezbollah, of obstructing and harming its forces and infrastructure.

Hezbollah’s power, meanwhile, has grown, both in its arsenal and as a political influence in the Lebanese state.

The Iran-backed group was essential in keeping Syrian President Bashar Assad in power when armed opposition groups tried to topple him, and it supports Iran-backed groups in Iraq and Yemen. It has an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided missiles pointed at Israel, and has introduced drones into its arsenal.

Hanna says Hezbollah “is something never seen before as a non-state actor” with political and military influence.

How do mediators hope to implement 1701 almost two decades later? Israel's security Cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office. The ceasefire began at 4 am local time Wednesday.

Efforts led by the US and France for the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah underscored that they still view the resolution as key. For almost a year, Washington has promoted various versions of a deal that would gradually lead to its full implementation.

International mediators hope that by boosting financial support for the Lebanese army — which was not a party in the Israel-Hezbollah war — Lebanon can deploy some 6,000 additional troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. Under the deal, an international monitoring committee headed by the United States would oversee implementation to ensure that Hezbollah and Israel’s withdrawals take place.

It is not entirely clear how the committee would work or how potential violations would be reported and dealt with.

The circumstances now are far more complicated than in 2006. Some are still skeptical of the resolution's viability given that the political realities and balance of power both regionally and within Lebanon have dramatically changed since then.

“You’re tying 1701 with a hundred things,” Bahout said. “A resolution is the reflection of a balance of power and political context.”

Now with the ceasefire in place, the hope is that Israel and Lebanon can begin negotiations to demarcate their land border and settle disputes over several points along the Blue Line for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.