Disrupting ISIS Financial Networks in Iraq: A RAND Analysis
This paper reviews political scientist Patrick B. Johnston's RAND essay arguing that defeating ISIS requires targeting its financial infrastructure rather than deploying large-scale U.S. ground forces. Johnston advocates active military operations against ISIS oil assets, cash holdings, and bookkeeping operations within Iraq, while encouraging the Iraqi government to cooperate with local Sunni tribes, Kurdish populations, and sympathetic regional neighbors. The paper evaluates Johnston's strategy of minimizing direct U.S. military commitment while maximizing economic pressure on ISIS, and considers the broader principle that no single counterterrorism financing approach fits all situations.
- Introduction: Overview of ISIS crisis and Johnston's thesis
- Johnston's Core Argument: Financial Disruption Over Ground War: Target ISIS oil, cash, and financial records
- Economic Pressure and Regional Alliances: Iraqi government cooperation with Sunni and regional partners
- Minimizing U.S. Commitment While Maximizing Impact: Tailored low-footprint U.S. strategy for Iraq
- Evaluating Johnston's Philosophy: Assessment of viability and historical support
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Stays closely focused on a single source, summarizing and evaluating its argument without overreaching beyond what the source supports.
- Connects Johnston's specific tactical recommendations to a broader strategic philosophy about U.S. involvement in the Middle East, giving the review analytical depth.
- Concludes with a concise evaluative judgment that acknowledges limitations while affirming the logic of the overall approach.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective source-based argumentation: it identifies a central thesis from Johnston's essay, unpacks its component recommendations in a logical sequence, and then steps back to assess the philosophy underlying those recommendations against historical context. This moves the review beyond mere summary into genuine critical engagement.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by establishing the strategic problem (no appetite for ground war, limited alternatives), then details Johnston's proposed financial targeting strategy, before examining the role of regional alliances and Iraqi government cooperation. It closes by evaluating the feasibility and underlying logic of Johnston's approach, noting both its strengths and potential weaknesses. The progression is clear and well-organized for a short analytical review.
Introduction
As horrific as the situation in Iraq has been, political scientist Patrick B. Johnston argues in his RAND essay "Hitting ISIS Where It Hurts: Disrupt ISIS Cash Flow in Iraq" that there is little appetite in the United States for a wide-scale ground war. Yet a more conservative combination of limited airstrikes and foreign aid is also unlikely to prevent ISIS from thriving. Johnston believes that the defeat of ISIS can only come from within Iraq. Helping the Iraqi government and the ISIS resistance movement plan military options — specifically by targeting ISIS' financial sources of support — is therefore critical.
Johnston's Core Argument: Financial Disruption Over Ground War
Rather than targeting the outside flow of financial revenue to ISIS, Johnston advocates active military operations against the group's oil business, cash holdings, and bookkeeping operations. Traditional methods of stemming the flow of cash will not work, given ISIS' lack of reliance on foreign patrons. Because ISIS funds itself primarily through internal economic activity rather than through external state sponsors, disrupting those internal financial networks becomes the central strategic priority.
Johnston believes that squeezing ISIS economically is critical to its defeat. This includes encouraging the Iraqi government to cooperate with local Sunni tribes and business owners to head off ISIS before it can penetrate new areas. America can also provide non-military assistance in the form of analyzing ISIS' financial information. The Iraqi government should make attacking ISIS oil infrastructure a priority, while also engaging in alliances with sympathetic Muslim neighbors to contain ISIS' broader financial operations.
Economic Pressure and Regional Alliances
Johnston's strategy recognizes that the disparate and diffuse nature of loyalties in Iraq must be carefully taken into account. The Iraqi government must marshal support from a diverse range of regional interests, spanning nations like Turkey, the Kurdish population, and Sunni communities. The United States can provide assistance with these coalition-building efforts but cannot serve as the sole source of support. Encouraging cooperation among these varied factions is essential to building a sustainable internal resistance to ISIS' economic and territorial power.
The Iraqi government's engagement with sympathetic regional neighbors is not merely diplomatic — it is financially strategic. By coordinating to limit ISIS' ability to sell oil, launder money, or access external markets, a regional coalition can impose meaningful economic pressure that no single actor could achieve alone.
References
Johnston, P. (2014). Hitting ISIS where it hurts: Disrupt ISIS cash flow in Iraq. RAND. Retrieved from
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.