That Islamic State is a menace cannot be contested, and not just to the ruins of Palmyra or the future of the Syrian tourist industry. 

Its destruction of built heritage extends to present-day churches and mosques, and its reign of terror is destroying the lives of human beings, who now as always, are our most important repositories of heritage and culture.

But Islamic State is not the only menace in the region and – as Fairfax correspondent Ruth Pollard's reporting has shown – is far from the most lethal. 

Attempting to view IS in isolation from the mess that surrounds it will not produce effective solutions. What is needed is a practical approach based not on ever-increasing militarisation, but in politics.

Sunni Muslims living in Syria and Iraq have moved to support jihadist groups – IS chief among them – as the Syrian and Iraqi states have become increasingly lethal for dissenting Sunnis.

Should we throw up our hands? Far from it. 

Politics is the art of the possible, and a number of practical steps present themselves which would lay the groundwork for a much more effective approach both to IS and to the refugee crisis gripping Europe.

Stabilising Libya would not involve negotiating between the region's Sunnis and Shiites, because there are no Shiites to speak of in the country.

It would involve the West getting its own bickering allies – Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey – around the table and banging their heads together. 

If this is not possible for the European Union and the United States acting in concert, then frankly the question of forming an international or regional consensus on what is going on in Syria – where Russia and Iran both believe their vital interests are at stake – is like asking monkeys to rebuild Palmyra.

Stabilising Libya alone would not solve the problem of Syria's refugees. But it would certainly free up resources in Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria – supposedly stable countries that border Libya – currently being devoted to military activities. These countries could then become part of a conversation with the EU about handling migration from the Middle East and Africa.

Getting Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey in the room could also allow some other important questions to be addressed. Can the wealthy Gulf nations absorb more of the Syrian refugee burden that is currently resting on Turkey and two much poorer nations, Lebanon and Jordan?

The answer is likely to come that such refugee outflows would politically unsettle the Gulf monarchies. 

And here's the rub. After all the billions of dollars in arms deals the West has done with these countries, after all the coronations and weddings that Prince Charles and Prince Andrew have attended, and all the consulting fees paid to Tony Blair, these countries are still looking over their shoulder in fear at their own populations.

IS advertises itself as a state because it understands that there is a vacuum in the region where just and equitable governance should be. 

Until we understand it too, and do something about it, no amount of online counter-propaganda or fox-hunting is likely to make an ounce of difference.