Leading the ongoing battle to free the Iraqi city of Fallujah from the clutches of Islamic State (IS) is a group of Iran-backed Shiite militias who have the support of Baghdad and are working in cooperation with the U.S.-led coalition. These militias have been executing locals Sunnis, and some 600 men are now reported missing. Max Boot writes:

This is not how the Iraqi forces should behave if they are interested in winning “hearts and minds” among members of the Sunni community. But that’s not what the militias are interested in—they want revenge for various wrongs done to Shiites by groups such as IS and they see all Sunnis, no matter how innocent, as equally guilty. Such behavior will make it impossible for the government in Baghdad to pacify the country. Sunnis will resist this kind of oppression long after IS is defeated.

This type of sectarian violence does not serve Iraq’s interests, but it is very much in the interests of Iran, which has become America’s de-facto partner in the anti-IS campaign. . . .

[L]ike Syria, Iraq may be consigned to a semi-permanent state of civil war [between Sunnis and Shiites, or among the various Shiite militias once IS is defeated]. That is terrible news for that country’s interests and our own, but it will suit Iran just fine. It will also be just fine for Sunni extremists, whether aligned with IS, Nusra Front, or some other organization. Extremists thrive on turmoil. . . .

[W]e shouldn’t make the mistake of defeating one Islamic state simply to make way for another one.

While it is commendable that administrators of several universities finally called upon police to crack down on violent and disruptive anti-Israel protests, the actions they have taken may be insufficient. At Columbia, demonstrators reestablished their encampment on the main quad after it had been cleared by the police, and the university seems reluctant to use force again. The school also decided to hold classes remotely until the end of the semester. Such moves, whatever their merits, do nothing to fix the factors that allowed campuses to become hotbeds of pro-Hamas activism in the first place. The editors of National Review examine how things go to this point:

Since the 10/7 massacre, Columbia’s Jewish students have been forced to endure routine calls for their execution. It shouldn’t have taken the slaughter, rape, and brutalization of Israeli Jews to expose chants like “Globalize the intifada” and “Death to the Zionist state” as calls for violence, but the university refused to intervene on behalf of its besieged students. When an Israeli student was beaten with a stick outside Columbia’s library, it occasioned little soul-searching from faculty. Indeed, it served only as the impetus to establish an “Anti-Semitism Task Force,” which subsequently expressed “serious concerns” about the university’s commitment to enforcing its codes of conduct against anti-Semitic violators.

But little was done. Indeed, as late as last month the school served as host to speakers who praised the 10/7 attacks and even “hijacking airplanes” as “important tactics that the Palestinian resistance have engaged in.”

The school’s lackadaisical approach created a permission structure to menace and harass Jewish students, and that’s what happened. . . . Now is the time finally to do something about this kind of harassment and associated acts of trespass and disorder. Yale did the right thing when police cleared out an encampment [on Monday]. But Columbia remains a daily reminder of what happens when freaks and haters are allowed to impose their will on campus.