Error occured during this request! Please try again later.
I write this week’s column just a few minutes after U.S. President Obama’s speech to Americans regarding the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS). Sometimes it is better to put one’s reaction to pen and paper before reading the opinions of others or watching all the talking heads on television pontificate.
First, those of us concerned for the people of Iraq, Syria and the wider Middle East should salute Mr. Obama for now recognizing the threat that ISIS poses and wanting to take more serious action against it. Even after the ISIS takeover of Mosul and most of Western Iraq last June, many of us remained unsure whether or not the U.S. President really “gets it.” Although it took more time than many would have liked, he does seem to get it now. In his speech he stated that “At this moment, the greatest threats come from the Middle East and North Africa.” For a president who wanted to extricate the United States from the Middle East as much as possible, this is an important admission.
The plan Mr. Obama laid out to the American people has several elements. First, America is working with partners in the West and the Middle East to cut off ISIS’ financing, hamper movement of its people and delegitimize the group. Aid to unnamed Syrian opposition groups fighting both ISIS and Assad will be increased. Especially now that “an inclusive Iraqi government in Baghdad has been formed,” Mr. Obama said that the United States will “stand with people who fight for their own freedom.” He might have added at this point “unless they’re affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), in which case we will ignore them no matter how well they fight against ISIS, no matter how secular they are, and no matter how many civilians and minorities they provide shelter to,” but I suppose that goes without saying.
Most importantly, the U.S. President announced an expansion of air strikes against ISIS as well as the likelihood of these air strikes occurring in Syria as well as Iraq. In other words, the American air bombing campaign is entering an offensive phase. Second, he announced that another 475 American military personnel will be heading to Iraq to join those already there. They will take up advisory and support roles rather than combat positions. Mr. Obama again promised that American troops would “not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.” The president cited operations in places like Yemen and Somalia as examples of how much the United States could do without combat forces on the ground. He thus stressed that this effort will be different from previous wars the U.S. waged in Iraq and Afghanistan – the U.S. will rely on air power and working with partners on the ground rather than its own infantry.
The problem is that one can hardly count Yemen and Somalia as examples of American policy success. Both countries are still in dire straits and the al-Qaeda affiliated groups there remain strong and active. ISIS represents a much stronger army in control of more weapons, territory and finances than any al-Qaeda affiliate in the region. In Iraq under U.S. General Petraeus, it was only the combination of U.S. ground troops, air strikes, local allies and political wooing of the Sunni Arab population that defeated the insurgency of 2003-2008. If air strikes, local allies and very uncertain political offers to Sunnis from the new Abadi government in Baghdad prove insufficient to the task, as seems likely, the U.S. President may have to take to the podium again soon. In Syria the problem appears even greater, especially if the U.S. continues to refuse to even contemplate working with the Syrian Kurds.
All the same, it seems quite reasonable for the American president to first attempt more cautious, less costly strategies to roll back ISIS. That includes remaining against Kurdish independence. If it all comes to naught, leaders in Washington may find themselves finally forced to seriously reassess their policy towards ISIS, Iraq, Syria and the Kurds. As Winston Churchill famously said, “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing -- after they’ve tried everything else.”
David Romano has been a Rudaw columnist since 2010. He is the Thomas G. Strong Professor of Middle East Politics at Missouri State University and author of The Kurdish Nationalist Movement (2006, Cambridge University Press) and co-editor (with Mehmet Gurses) of Conflict, Democratization and the Kurds in the Middle East (2014, Palgrave Macmillan).
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment