|
ISIS Heavy Lifting Falls on the U.S.
by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700
Copyright
August 28, 2014
All Rights Reserved.
Faced with some tough choices on dealing with a
growing threat from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, President Barack Obama
takes the perfunctory steps of putting together a coalition-of-the-willing. When former President George W. Bush
pulled off the same feat before the Iraq War, the international community
trusted Bush’s intel that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein possessed a dangerous
arsenal of nuclear, biologic and chemical weapons. When that proved false, U.S.
credibility took a hit, forcing the coalition into an eight-year long war with a
flimsy justification. Now “the boy
that cried wolf” comes to roost with the U.S.’s closest allies reluctant to join
the fight against a new threat to global security. Today’s reports about ISIS’s
mafia-style executions of 160 Syrian troops captured at the Tabqa military base
in Raqa province raise the prospects of U.S. air strikes in Syria.
White House and Pentagon officials haven’t coordinated any coherent
policy on Syria where Obama—and conservatives on Capitol Hill—continue to
support ousting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. One of the areas that led to the
rift between Russia and the U.S. involved whether or not to back regime change
in Damascus. Considered an ally by
Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russia opposes regime change in Syria—with
good reason. Because the U.S. took
the opposite position, it now presents problems dealing with ISIS in Syria,
since they represent the biggest threat to al-Assad’s regime. Joining the fight against ISIS in
Syria practically guarantees that al-Assad will stay in power. While Syrian Foreign Minister Walid
al-Moallem warned the U.S. against unilateral action in Syria, al-Assad welcomes
all the help he can get to stop the ISIS from threatening Damascus.
Caught in an escalating battle in Ukraine, Putin’s too distracted now to
come the aid of al-Assad, despite leasing the Tartus Mediterranean naval base. Fresh satellite reports of Russian
troops and heavy war materiel inside Ukraine contradict the Kremlin’s narrative. Faced with growing discontent on the
U.N. Security Council with Putin, the international community finds itself
paralyzed on how to stop Moscow’s relentless assault on Eastern Ukraine. Short of threatening to boot Putin
off the U.N. Security Council, U.N. finds itself helpless, other than applying
more ineffectual sanctions. Despite
shaking hands Aug. 26 with newly minted Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko,
Putin’s heavily entrenched in his cryptic, non-official policy of carving a
corridor from Mother Russia to Eastern Ukraine.
U.N. Amb. Samantha Power asked where was the U.N. when it came to ISIS.
U.N. reluctance to get involved stopping ISIS stems from lingering
resentment over the Bush administration’s starting the Iraq War March 20, 2003,
destabilizing the region and opening the floodgates of Islamic extremism. Whether admitted to or not, much of
the Middle East is torn by ethnic and religious divisions, close to the brink of
civil war. Once insurgent groups
started attacking al-Assad in the Arab Spring March 11, 2011, the war became a
Sunni uprising against al-Assad’s Alawite Shiite minority. When Obama ended the Iraq War Dec.
15, 2011, it was more about Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s refusal to
give U.S. troops immunity going forward.
Beating his chest in 2011, al-Maliki insisted his vaunted security
services could handle Iraq’s diverse minority groups without spiraling the
country into civil war. Once the
U.S. military left, a sectarian war erupted.
Following the Iraq example, Putin begged the U.S. to come to its senses
about what went wrong and Iraq and stop the assault on al-Assad in Syria. White House officials still won’t
admit that Putin was right about Syria. Unlike the U.S. admits its mistake in
Iraq, keeping al-Assad in power prevents the current free-for-all that has
multiple Islamist groups competing to topple Damascus. Obama faces the very real prospect
of having to go it alone against ISIS.
If Obama can destroy much of al-Baghdadi’s stolen U.S. weapons, he can
succeed in rolling back what looks like an Islamic juggernaut. Degrading ISIS in Iraq should allow
the Iraqi military and Kurd’s Peshmerga to once again take control of their
territories. Humanitarian airdrops
and hitting ISIS at the Mosul dam has helped save the ancient Zoroastrian
Yazidis, proving the U.S. can be of great help stopping ISIS.
White House officials must confer with conservatives on Capitol Hill and
fashion an ISIS strategy that makes sense.
It makes zero sense to help topple al-Assad when Syria has been in chaos
for over three years. Extremist
Sunni groups, largely funded by Qatar and fundamentalist groups in Saudi Arabia,
can only further destabilize the region.
Arming the Kurds directly in Iraq and hitting ISIS in Syria should help
drive extremists out of Syria.
Whether conservatives or liberals despise al-Assad, he’s still preferred to ISIS
or the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front.
Waiting for approval or backing from the European Union or any other
U.S.-friendly state like Australia, will only help reinforce ISIS positions in
Iraq and Syria. Hititng ISIS sooner-rather-than-later only makes sense.
Allowing ISIS to consolidate power and entrench itself only makes the
current mission more difficult.
|
