Timeline: Islamic State’s attempts to regain power after being pushed out of Syria – WBFF

Report on the Resurgence of the Islamic State in Syria and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary: Current Security Situation and Impact on SDG 16

A significant increase in attacks by the Islamic State (IS) has been reported in Syria. This resurgence is attributed to a power vacuum created by the collapse of the Assad regime and a concurrent reduction in international military presence. This instability directly undermines the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by fostering violence, weakening governance, and preventing the establishment of the rule of law. The group is exploiting the chaotic transition to recruit members and rearm by raiding unsecured arms depots, further jeopardizing regional peace and security.

• IS militants conducted 117 attacks in northeast Syria through August, a substantial increase from 73 attacks in the entirety of the previous year.
• The interim government’s struggle to assert control has created opportunities for IS to plan numerous attacks, threatening the safety of communities and hindering progress towards SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Chronological Analysis of Islamic State Activities and Setbacks to Sustainable Development

The period from 2019 to 2025 illustrates the fluctuating capacity of the Islamic State and the persistent threat it poses to global and regional stability, directly impacting the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals.

1. March 2019: The territorial defeat of IS marked a significant step towards restoring peace, a key target of SDG 16. However, its transition to a decentralized insurgency demonstrated the enduring nature of the threat to peaceful societies.
2. October 2019: The death of leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was a counter-terrorism success, yet subsequent inspired attacks globally highlighted the ongoing challenge to SDG 16.1 (Significantly reduce all forms of violence).
3. January 2022: A large-scale prison attack and escape of IS-linked prisoners underscored the fragility of security institutions, a core component of SDG 16.
4. February 2022 – August 2023: The successive killings of three IS leaders demonstrated operational successes against the group but also its organizational resilience.
5. August 2024: A United Nations warning that large parts of Africa could fall under IS control signaled a geographic expansion of the threat, jeopardizing development progress and stability across the continent, impacting not only SDG 16 but also SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
6. December 2024: The ousting of Syrian President Bashar Assad created a critical power vacuum. While removing an authoritarian regime, the subsequent instability created a fertile ground for extremist groups to thrive, posing a severe risk to the objectives of SDG 16.
7. March 2025: The merger of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with the new national government represented a positive step towards building inclusive and strong institutions as envisioned by SDG 16.
8. April 2025: The withdrawal of approximately 600 U.S. troops from Syria altered the security landscape, raising concerns about the capacity of local forces to contain the IS threat independently.
9. July 2025: A UN report confirmed that threats from IS were heightened, indicating a regression in international peace and security efforts.
10. October 2025: The U.S. military drawdown in Iraq, reflecting perceived success against IS, marked a strategic shift with long-term implications for regional stability and the sustained effort required to achieve SDG 16.

Conclusion: Terrorism as a Fundamental Barrier to the 2030 Agenda

The resurgence of the Islamic State in Syria and its expanding influence in Africa represent a fundamental barrier to achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The group’s activities not only cause immediate human suffering but also systematically dismantle the foundations required for sustainable progress.

• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The conflict is the most direct affront to this goal, perpetuating violence and undermining the formation of accountable and effective governance.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): Terrorist attacks render cities and human settlements unsafe, forcing displacement and destroying critical infrastructure.
• SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): Endemic instability prevents investment, destroys livelihoods, and makes sustainable economic growth impossible.
• SDG 1 (No Poverty): Conflict is a primary driver of poverty, reversing development gains and trapping populations in cycles of destitution.

Achieving lasting peace and establishing strong, legitimate institutions in conflict-affected regions like Syria is a prerequisite for making any meaningful progress on the interconnected goals of the 2030 Agenda.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The primary Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) addressed in the article is:

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Explanation: The article’s central theme is the resurgence of violence and terrorism by the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria and other regions. It discusses the collapse of a government, the resulting power vacuum, ongoing military conflicts, international cooperation to combat terrorism, and the general state of instability and insecurity. These issues directly align with the core mission of SDG 16, which aims to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.” The rise in attacks, the struggle for governmental control, and the efforts to counter terrorism are all facets of the challenges SDG 16 seeks to address.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article, the following specific targets under SDG 16 are relevant:

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   Explanation: The article is replete with examples of violence. It explicitly states that “Attacks by the Islamic State are on the rise in Syria” and provides figures: “ISIS militants have staged 117 attacks in northeast Syria through August, well above the pace of 73 attacks in all of last year.” It also mentions various forms of violence, including “suicide bombings, shootings and other attacks” carried out globally, and “a rush of terrorist attacks that killed civilians” in Africa. The killing of several ISIS leaders is also a direct reference to violence and related deaths.

2. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   Explanation: The article highlights a severe breakdown in the rule of law in Syria. The “collapse of Assad’s government” led to “a power vacuum that could devolve into chaos.” The “interim government’s struggles to gain control of the country and get a handle on multiple militia forces” demonstrates the absence of a strong, functioning state capable of enforcing laws and maintaining order, which is a core component of this target.

3. Target 16.4: By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime.

   Explanation: The article directly addresses illicit arms flows. It notes that ISIS has been able to “rearm itself through raids on arms depots left without sufficient security after rebels overthrew the Syrian government.” This points to a failure to control the flow of weapons, allowing a terrorist group to expand its capacity for violence.

4. Target 16.a: Strengthen relevant national institutions, including through international cooperation, to build capacity at all levels, in particular in developing countries, to prevent violence and combat terrorism and crime.

   Explanation: This target is demonstrated through the various partnerships described in the article. The text mentions “U.S. cooperation with other powers in the region to target camps,” the U.S. working with “Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces to target ISIS camps and operations,” and the SDF agreeing “to merge with the country’s new government… to help bolster security.” These are clear examples of international cooperation and institution-building aimed at combating terrorism.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article contains several explicit and implied indicators that can measure progress (or lack thereof) towards the identified targets:

• For Target 16.1 (Reduce violence):
  • Number of terrorist attacks: The article provides a direct quantitative indicator: “ISIS militants have staged 117 attacks in northeast Syria through August, well above the pace of 73 attacks in all of last year.” This trend analysis serves as a clear measure of the level of violence.
  • Conflict-related deaths: The article mentions the killing of four successive ISIS leaders and “terrorist attacks that killed civilians” in Africa. These events serve as qualitative and, in some cases, quantifiable indicators of conflict-related death rates.
• For Target 16.3 (Promote rule of law):
  • Governmental stability and control: The article implies this indicator through its description of a “power vacuum,” “chaos,” and an “interim government’s struggles to gain control.” The ability of a government to establish and maintain control is a fundamental indicator of the presence of the rule of law.
• For Target 16.4 (Reduce illicit arms flows):
  • Access to unsecured arms by non-state actors: The article implies this indicator by stating that ISIS was able to “rearm itself through raids on arms depots.” The frequency and success of such raids would be a measure of the failure to control illicit arms flows.
• For Target 16.a (Strengthen institutions):
  • Level of international military and security cooperation: The article provides data on the number of U.S. troops in Syria and Iraq (“withdraw about 600 troops from Syria, leaving fewer than 1,000,” “reduce the number of troops in the country to counter the Islamic State”). These numbers serve as an indicator of the scale of international cooperation to build security capacity.
  • Formation of security alliances: The report of the “SDF agreed to merge with the country’s new government” is an indicator of national institution-building aimed at strengthening security and combating terrorism.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foxbaltimore.com