Since it first began fighting Islamic State (IS) in 2014, Washington has been conducting its campaign based on a series of assumptions: that IS poses the region’s most serious threat to the U.S.; that IS can be defeated by dislodging it from the key cities of Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria; that the U.S. must cooperate with Russia and Iran in fighting IS; and that al-Qaeda in Syria is a secondary threat that can be contained by airstrikes. In a detailed report, Jennifer Cafarella, Kimberly Kagan, and Frederick W. Kagan argue that every one of these assumptions is false. Furthermore, they contend, although the Trump administration, by removing excessive restraints on attacking the enemy, has improved tactically on the approach of the Obama administration, it is maintaining the same flawed strategy.

Had the U.S. helped Iraqis and Syrians retake Raqqa and Mosul quickly in 2014, IS might well have collapsed. Retaking those cities three years later without a viable plan for what comes next will not have the same result. . . . IS holds other terrain in both [Iraq and Syria]. It will retain, most importantly, the ability to penetrate a Sunni Arab community that remains under siege even after its largest bases fall. IS is also actively exporting its vision and capabilities to external branches and transforming its idea of a caliphate from a physical one to a virtual, organized community that carries forward [its] objectives independent of the [central] organization. Defeating IS in Iraq and Syria may no longer be sufficient to defeat the global organization. . . .

Al-Qaeda, however, is more dangerous than IS. . . . Al-Qaeda has amassed an army in northern Syria, exploits vulnerable Sunni populations, and is poised to capitalize on IS setbacks on the battlefield. . . .

[Furthermore], the Obama administration’s actions amounted to a partnership with Moscow and Tehran. The blatant war crimes those regimes have committed in Syria have radicalized the Sunni Arab communities that IS and al-Qaeda prey on and control. The Sunni Arab community—the population critical to defeating Salafist jihadists decisively—now perceives the United States as complicit in a Russo-Iranian campaign to destroy it.

The Russo-Iranian coalition empowered by the previous administration has proved damaging in other ways. . . . Russia and Iran are building a regional order based on their shared near-term interests, which will not diverge any time soon. This developing system denies America the freedom to protect its own interests. The Russo-Iranian coalition will make it more difficult for the U.S. to respond to terror threats against it, defend key allies such as Israel, and ensure unfettered access to trade routes the U.S. economy depends on.

The report goes on to lay out a strategy for defeating Islamic State and al-Qaeda while reducing Russian and Iranian influence, through a gradual campaign based on building alliances with the local Sunni populations.

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.