AMU Homeland Security Intelligence Legislation Terrorism

Islamic State: Existential Threat versus Terrorism

By Diane L. Maye
American Military University

On July 9, both Marine General Joseph Dunford and U.S. Air Force General Paul Silva testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee that they place Russia as the number one threat to the United States. As President Barack Obama’s nominees for Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Senate must confirm their capability to act as military advisors to the executive branch.

During the hearing, the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator John McCain, disagreed with the generals and countered with this own opinion, putting the rampage of the Islamic State’s “terrorist army” at the top of his list.

John McCain
Sen. John McCain puts Islamic State above Russia on his list of threats to the United States.

Why did the generals place Russia at the top of their list, whereas Senator McCain put the Islamic State at number one?

General Dunford and General Silva likely perceive the Russian military to be much more serious existential threat than the Islamic State. Existential threats have the capability to impact survival, where as other threats can cause damage, but do not threaten existence. The Russian military’s recent incursions into Crimea and Ukraine indicate that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin intends on implementing a revisionist agenda. Given that Russia is a nuclear superpower, and the proximity of Ukraine to the NATO countries, the generals are concerned that Russia could make a miscalculation that could lead to U.S. intervention.

The Islamic State’s Threat Level

For both generals, the Islamic State places low as a threat. The Islamic State neither has the resources nor the capability to achieve the hegemony that comes with nuclear power and projection. Therefore, in their view, the primary issue for U.S. policy makers is not from the chaos surrounding terrorist organizations like the Islamic State; its from nations with nuclear weapons, conventional armies and a desire to expand.

Senator McCain could be looking at the issue in terms of what is most likely to happen. While a revisionist Russia certainly presents the most existential threat to the United States, simply because of their nuclear power and projection, the probability of global nuclear war is quite low. To the contrary, a random act of violence against Americans or their allies, perpetuated by the Islamic State or its sympathizers, is quite high. Therefore, Senator McCain’s list is not ranked by the threats that are most destructive, but instead by which are the most probable.

What would move the Islamic State to the top of the generals’ list?

The generals would likely move the Islamic State to the top of the list only if the group were to acquire a nuclear weapon. Both Congress and the CJCS would likely agree, the most dramatic and uncertain threat to U.S. security would be if a non-state actor, like the Islamic State, were to acquire a nuclear weapon. U.S. policy makers would suddenly be dealing an existential threat from a group that cannot be controlled with traditional policymaking techniques.

About the Author
Diane Maye is a Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science at George Mason University and an adjunct faculty member at American Military University (AMU). She is an associate member of the Military Writers Guild and tweets using the handle @dianeleighmaye.

Comments are closed.