Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Obama’s radical honesty about ISIS: they don’t “threaten our national existence”

(Evan Vucci/Pool/Getty Images)
Zack Beauchamp
Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers ideology and challenges to democracy, both at home and abroad. His book on democracy, The Reactionary Spirit, was published 0n July 16. You can purchase it here.

President Obama, in the section of his State of the Union speech discussing ISIS, said something that American politicians don’t usually say: that while ISIS “pose a direct threat to our people,” they “do not threaten our national existence.”

Here’s the full quote, in context:

Priority number one is protecting the American people and going after terrorist networks. Both al Qaeda and now ISIL pose a direct threat to our people, because in today’s world, even a handful of terrorists who place no value on human life, including their own, can do a lot of damage. They use the Internet to poison the minds of individuals inside our country; they undermine our allies.

But as we focus on destroying ISIL, over-the-top claims that this is World War III just play into their hands. Masses of fighters on the back of pickup trucks and twisted souls plotting in apartments or garages pose an enormous danger to civilians and must be stopped. But they do not threaten our national existence. That’s the story ISIL wants to tell; that’s the kind of propaganda they use to recruit. We don’t need to build them up to show that we’re serious, nor do we need to push away vital allies in this fight by echoing the lie that ISIL is representative of one of the world’s largest religions. We just need to call them what they are — killers and fanatics who have to be rooted out, hunted down, and destroyed.

This cuts against the common portrayal of ISIS as a peril to the United States on part with the existential threats of past eras. A phrase you hear all the time in the American media — including from some Republican presidential candidates — is that ISIS poses an “existential threat” to the United States. That the group, or the ideology it stands for, could destroy the United States itself.

Obama is trying to undercut this narrative. While he admits that ISIS “can do a lot of damage,” he’s also correct that ISIS isn’t capable of actually toppling the US; in fact, it’s actually losing control of its own territory in Syria and Iraq. A group that can’t fight off the Iraqi military and various Syrian rebel groups in its backyard simply doesn’t have the firepower to pose a fundamental threat to the United States.

That’s not to say that ISIS poses no danger to Americans — Obama is clear that it does — but rather appears intended to modulate American fears of ISIS that have perhaps, in his view, exceeded their actual threat.

While recent opinion polls show that terrorism is one of the American public’s top issues, the fact is that terrorism actually only kills a tiny number of Americans per year (a number roughly comparable to the amount killed by their own furniture). Of course, such groups would like to kill many more Americans than that, and will continue trying to do that, but their actual toll is thankfully still far short of anything that can existentially threaten the US. ISIS is a danger, sure — but Obama is attempting to put the threat in its proper context.

Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
Podcasts
Did Trump actually help Venezuela?Did Trump actually help Venezuela?
Podcast
Podcasts

Post-Maduro, some Venezuelans are feeling cautiously optimistic.

By Ariana Aspuru and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
5 ways the Iran standoff could end5 ways the Iran standoff could end
Politics

Is the US on the verge of a deal with Iran or a return to war?

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Ukraine’s fight against Russia is going better than you might thinkUkraine’s fight against Russia is going better than you might think
Politics

The war in Iran looked like a gift for Russia. It hasn’t worked out that way.

By Joshua Keating
The Logoff
Why Trump says the US-Iran war is overWhy Trump says the US-Iran war is over
The Logoff

Trump’s plan to evade an Iran deadline, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters