DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT DATA: -Formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq -20,000 – 32,000 Fighters (CIA estimate) -2,000 westerners in ranks (10%) -Control large swathes of Iraq and Syria -Strong anti-western sentiments

DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT Competitor Analysis: Goals: -Establish Caliphate -Eliminate western influence in middle east Strategies: -Blitzkrieg warfare -Public executions -Recruit western operatives

DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT Competitor Analysis: Capabilities: -20,000 – 32,000 Fighters -Access to captured Iraqi and Syrian army weapons -Control of oil reserves -Captured and privately funded wealth

DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT Behavioral Analysis: Rational Model Departure: -Terrorism is innately irrational from a western perspective Current Strategy: -Build reputation through fear -Demonstrate disregard for life

DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT Game Theory Application: Analyzing Executions by ISIS Player 1 (Islamic State): Player 2 (Western Allies):

DATA Competitor Analysis Behavior GT Game Theory Application: Analyzing Executions by ISIS Existing Parameters of Game: West is Bombing, Hostage Taken Potential Game 1: IGOUGO Game -Bombing Decision -Execution Decision -Payoffs -Reputation -Strategic and Financial Potential Game 2: Dynamic Game -Similar to a business competition game -More complicated -Need for more analysis at this time.

Move 1: JAMES FOLEY More Air Strikes Cont’d Air Strikes End Air Strikes Kill hostage Hold hostage Kill hostage

ReputationCapabilities Escalation (Air Strikes Increase) Status Quo (Air Strikes Continue) West “Blinks” (Air Strikes End) Increase in recruitment, credibility, media attention Escalated damage to income sources, strategic military installments Maintain credibility and recruitment position Moderate damage to infrastructure and military installments Decrease in recruiting and fundraising opportunities Strengthening of income sources, buildup of armaments

ReputationCapabilities Escalation (Air Strikes Increase) Status Quo (Air Strikes Continue) West “Blinks” (Air Strikes End) Strengthened military credibility and show of force, but risk of civilian casualties & failure Expensive military action, but protect oil reserves from ISIS control Open to criticism for underestimating ISIS threat Moderate military action, steady ISIS expansion and threat to oil, stability Appear weak and vulnerable to future kidnapping/terrorist threats, exposes IRAQ to ISIS advance Saved military cost but rapid expansion by ISIS, major threat to oil, stability

 Rationalities are vastly different › Each side views the other as irrational › Necessary to empathize with other side  Payoffs push both Players to Escalation  Multiple factors at play › Finance › Reputation › Others…?

How does the long term game factor in? What other players are there? What other hostages does ISIL have? Can the West afford to negotiate? FIND OUT NEXT TIME…