Claiming to have an effective Syrian policy, President Barack Obama refused to accept reality of a failed policy that’s driven thousands of Syrians to flee the war zone for safer ground in Europe. Obama’s lack of a coherent policy, other than insisting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must go, has created the largest exodus of refugees since WWII.. With nearly 300,000 killed and over 2 million displaced to neighboring countries now making their way to Europe since March 2011, Obama’s Sept. 2014 bombing campaign hasn’t stopped the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria from seizing more territory and driving more Syrians out of the region. Russian President Vladimir Putin told U.N. delegates Sept. 28 the truth about the Syrian crisis, namely, that getting rid of al-Assad would do exactly what the U.S. did in Iraq: Open up the floodgates to more Saudi-backed Islamic terrorism.
Now that Russia has committed its air force to protecting al-Assad, the White House has been embarrassed. Obama’s current Syrian policy mirrors that of Capitol Hill hawks with one exception: They want to deploy U.S. ground troops. Neither Obama nor Capitol Hill hawks acknowledge that former President George W. Bush’s Iraq War caused the dreaded Mideast power vacuum that gave rise to ISIS. While Obama wants to re-litigate the 2008 campaign in which he blamed Bush for the U.S. domestic and foreign policy mess, it’s not a productive fix. Obama rejected Russia’s military intervention in Syria designed to strengthen al-Assad’s reign of power. Obama insists he backs moderate Syrian faction that seek to topple al-Assad, much like Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee. Neither Obama nor McCain know much about Syrian opposition groups.
Since pouring money and resources, at McCain’s request, into the Free Syrian Army, the U.S. has watched its resources fall into ISIS’s hands. Most Saudi-backed Sunni groups seeking to topple al-Assad share the vision to replace Damascus’s Alwaite Shiite government with strict Sharia law. Instead of going to the Security Council to fashion a coherent Syrian policy, Obama has operated unilaterally, insisting, like al-Qaeda’s al-Nusra Front and ISIS, that al-Assad must go. White House advisors can’t see they’re backing the same folks that attacked the World Trade Center and Pentagon Sept. 1, 2001. Since Moscow began bombing missions in Sept. 30, the White House has insisted they’re hitting insurgent groups seeking to oust al-Assad, not ISIS. Whether that’s true of not, the White House refuses to acknowledge that Moscow has a better plan to end the Syrian civil war.
Security Council officials agree that Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite Shiite regime is the legitimate government under international law. White House policy to topple al-Assad is not supported by the U.N. or any other international body, other that a handful of Saudi-backed governments that want al-Assad out. “This is not a smart strategic move on Russia’s part,” said Obama, not admitting that his bombing campaign has failed to end the Syrian civil war that now threatens the European Union. “It’s only strengthening ISIL [ISIS], and that’s not good for anybody,” insisted Barack, supplying no proof. Putin’s stated strategy at the U.N. lends support to Damascus, while, simultaneously, going after groups seeking regime change. Beating back ISIS, ending the Syrian civil war and stemming the flow of Syrian refugees should be U.S.’s highest priority, not toppling the al-Assad government.
Only GOP front-runner 69-year-old real estate mogul Donald Trump has acknowledged how the Iraq War caused the current Mideast crisis, giving rise to ISIS and other Saudi-backed terror groups. Trump said he had no problem with Putin going after ISIS, whether or not it preserved al-Assad’s reign of power. Obama’s Syrian policy mirrors Capitol Hill hawks, including GOP presidential candidate Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who, like McCain, wants U.S. boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria. Graham and McCain only differ with Obama on U.S. troop deployment, all agree on toppling al-Assad. Given that Moscow has committed military resources to beating back ISIS, the White House should shift gears, joining a coalition to defeat ISIS and stop the Syrian civil war. Continuing the war threatens to plunge the EU into recession, harming the global economy.
Russia’s military intervention in Syria forces the White House to take inventory of its Syrian policy. Asked to join a coalition with Moscow to battle ISIS, the White House stubbornly holds onto to its single-minded focus of toppling al-Assad. If the U.S. learned anything from the Iraq War, it’s that toppling Mideast dictators create dangerous power vacuums. “As a consequence of these brilliant moves, their economy is contracting 4 percent this year. They’re so isolated in the world community,” said Obama, noting International sanctions for seizing Crimea from Ukraine March 1, 2014. Obama’s sarcasm needs to be tempered with a coherent Syrian policy that beats back ISIS and stops the Syrian civil war. Joining a broad coalition with Russia to defeat ISIS would be a positive step to end the Syrian refugee crisis now threatening to plunge the EU, and maybe the U.S., into recession.
