Originally Posted by
Stavros
Robert Fisk in the Independent has suggested that negotiations with IS ought not to be ruled out, on the basis that negotiations are often held between people who regard each other as evil incarnate. In the case of IS, which has based a lot of its appeal on being completely uncompromising, any move to negotiate -possibly by factions within IS if not the leadership itself- would probably lead its young radicals to accuse those willing to talk of selling out. There are in Iraq a fair number of ex-Ba'athists and alienated Sunni Arabs from Anbar province in the IS fold right now, but it isn't clear to me if they are in support of this mythical Caliphate that has been pronounced or if they are just using IS as a powerful wedge against the government in Baghdad. What exactly there is to negotiate about is also not clear. It there was a route back into government for the disaffected Sunni in some kind of federal division of the country, and this would run counter to the IS project in Iraq, while a ceasefire and some sort of proposal for a negotiated settlement in Syria would also undermine its support amongst all but those who think that the Caliphate has a realistic future. People are sick and tired of fighting, refugees want to go home. IS just offers them more of what they are exhausted from.