|
ISIS Over-runs Iraq Hampering U.S. Response
by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700
Copyright
June 22, 2014
All Rights Reserved.
Over-running Iraq’s Western Anbar province, the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant has made any U.S. intervention next to
impossible without massive U.S. boots on the ground. Reluctant to honor Iraqi Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s call for air-strikes, President Barack Obama finds
himself caught behind a rock-and-a-hard-place deciding an appropriate and
measured response to what looks like a far-reaching, well-organized and deeply
funded Sunni insurgency. With ISIS
taking over towns and villages in the Sunni-controlled Western provinces
bordering Syria, Obama must pick his battles wisely, like ejecting ISIS from
oil-rich Mosul in unofficial Kurdish territory.
Air strikes would be worthless in Iraq’s Western provinces, doing little
to stop ISIS’s march toward Baghdad.
Dispatching 300 “advisors” to help evacuate the U.S. embassy in Baghdad
doesn’t bode well for Iraq..
Complicating the picture are the anti-American rhetoric of Iran’s Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wanting massive U.S. intervention to save Iraq
from a growing Sunni revolt. “The
United State is trying to portray this as a sectarian war. But what is happening in Iraq is not
a war between Shiites and Sunnis,” said Khaemenei in a statement on Iran’s
state-run news agency IRNA.
Khamenei’s hatred for the U.S. is so extreme that it prevents him from any logic
as a Saudi-funded Sunni insurgency seeks to establish Wahhabi Islamic law in
Iraq. Secretary of State John Kerry
toyed with the idea of collaborating with Iran before realizing the Ayatollah
has no plans of working with the U.S. on anything, including a nuclear arms
deal. “This is about [ISIS] designs
on the state of Iraq,” said Kerry.
“The United States is prepared to help Iraq stand up against that,” referring to
the paltry 300 advisors.
Given the extent of the ISIS insurgency, it’s going to be difficult for
the U.S. to plug all the leaks in Iraq’s security. Obama and Kerry are kidding
themselves talking about more “training” or assistance the Iraq military. Obama and Kerry have lectured
al-Maliki on being more inclusive of bringing more Sunnis into his Shiite-led
government. Al-Malki brought so
many Sunnis into his security services that its been entirely infiltrated by the
insurgents that seek to topple al-Maliki’s Baghdad regime. To stop the ISIS insurgency, the
U.S. would have to re-litigate the Iraq War, something Obama isn’t prepared to
do. ISIS infiltration has taken
place at all levels of al-Maliki’s government making the Shiite government
unsalvageable. Like the Ukrainian
military, al-Maliki’s army has largely defected, thrown in the towel on stopping
ISIS from marching toward the coveted Baghdad.
White House and Congressional
officials are getting briefed on just how far gone al-Maliki’s government. After U.S. cash and military
resources for over eight years, there’s little the White House can do to stop
the ISIS insurgency short of restarting the Iraq War. Working hard to topple al-Maliki’s
government, ISIS is composed of former Saddam loyalists, including his Baathist
friends that seek to reinstate a Sunni-led government in Baghdad. Pentagon officials can’t stop a
radical Sunni insurgency with its sights on Baghdad without putting more U.S.
soldiers in harm’s way. With around
70% of Anbar province already in ISIS hands, the U.S. can’t fight multiple
fronts by bombing targets all over Iraq.
Taking over the Tal Afar air base, Tal Afar town, Qaim on the Syrian
border and Haditha some 270 kilometers [168 miles] from Baghdad, show the scope
of the ISIS insurgency.
Conservativea on Capitol Hill ripped Obama for ending the Iraq War
prematurely Dec. 15, 2011, blaming the White House for current mess. After spending over $1 trillion U.S.
tax dollars and losing $4,800 soldiers, the American public wanted out of Iraq. Spending over eight years in Iraq taught the U.S. a bitter lesson: That the U.S. can’t play world
policeman or impose democracy in the Mideast.
Whatever the merits of the Iraq War, toppling Saddam April 12, 2003
opened up the floodgates of Islamic radicals kept out of Iraq by Saddam’s iron
fist. U.S. officials must face the
music that Iraq’s military can’t fight the ISIS insurgency because al-Maliki’s
military is heavily infiltrated with Sunni sympathizers. U.S. officials can’t overhaul
al-Maliki’s army any more than they can beat back the ISIS insurgency all over
Iraq. White House and Pentagon
officials must figure out what’s realistic.
With the ISIS insurgency spreading over Iraq like wildfire, the U.S. can
only put out so many fires. Since
it looks like the ISIS march on Baghdad looks imminent, the White House must
decide what it’s prepared to sacrifice to save the al-Maliki regime. Sending 300 U.S. advisors to
evacuate the U.S. embassy points strongly at the U.S. giving up on Baghdad. While Baghdad doesn’t yet look like
Saigon in 1975, it’s getting closer.
If the U.S. isn’t willing to stop ISIS in Baghdad, they can at least help
the Kurds in Mosul take back control.
Beating back the insurgency in oil-rich Mosul is a more realistic goal
where the U.S. can hand over security to Kurd’s Peshmerga fighters. Helping the Kurds establish and
independent Kurdistan would go a long way in protecting U.S. interests,
regardless of what happens in Baghdad. If Iraq’s already lost, at least the U.S.
could help the long-struggling Kurds.
|
