NEWPORT,
Wales — President Obama escalated the American response to the
marauding Islamic State in Iraq and Syria on Friday, recruiting at least
nine allies to help crush the organization and offering the outlines of
a coordinated military strategy that echoes the war on terror developed
by his predecessor, George W. Bush, more than a decade ago.
In
his most expansive comments to date about how the United States and its
friends could defeat ISIS, a once-obscure group of Sunni militants that
has now upended the Middle East and overshadowed Al Qaeda, Mr. Obama
said the effort would rely on American airstrikes against its leaders
and positions, strengthen the moderate Syrian rebel groups to reclaim
ground lost to ISIS, and enlist friendly governments in the region to
join the fight.
While
the president’s aides maintained that he has not yet decided to
authorize airstrikes in Syria — which he has already done on a limited
basis in Iraq — Mr. Obama likened his developing strategy on ISIS to the
American effort against Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal regions, which
has relied heavily on airstrikes.
Mr.
Obama has been under enormous pressure to articulate a way to counter
ISIS, which has proclaimed itself an Islamic caliphate that knows no
borders and has demonstrated ruthless behavior, including the videotaped
beheadings of two Americans. After creating a political tempest by
saying last week that his administration lacked a strategy, Mr. Obama
sought on Friday to portray himself as spearheading the effort.
But
in so doing, the president risks further entangling the American
military in exactly the type of costly foreign conflict he has long
sought to escape. And his administration has been unable to explain how
he can vanquish ISIS without indirectly aiding President Bashar al-Assad
of Syria, regarded by the administration as an odious leader who must
resign.
Nonetheless,
Mr. Obama’s comments, made at the conclusion of a NATO summit meeting
here, were in effect a significant expansion of his earlier assessments
of the ISIS threat — simply by offering a direct comparison to the
strategy against Qaeda militants.
“You
initially push them back, you systematically degrade their
capabilities, you narrow their scope of action, you slowly shrink the
space, the territory that they may control, you take out their
leadership,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference here. “And over time,
they are not able to conduct the same kinds of terrorist attacks as they
once could.”
He
said that “we are going to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL, the same
way that we have gone after Al Qaeda,” using an alternate acronym for
ISIS. He drew the analogy to Pakistan as an example of how the United
States can go to war against militants while limiting the number of
American ground combat troops.
Mr.
Obama spoke after aides had unveiled what Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel
called the “core coalition” to fight the ISIS militants, the outcome of
a hastily organized meeting on the sidelines of the NATO summit talks.
Diplomats and defense officials from the United States, Britain, France,
Australia, Canada, Germany, Turkey, Italy, Poland and Denmark huddled
to devise a two-pronged strategy: strengthening allies on the ground in
Iraq and Syria, while bombing Sunni militants from the air.
“There
is no containment policy for ISIL,” Secretary of State John Kerry said
at the start of the meeting. “They’re an ambitious, avowed, genocidal,
territorial-grabbing, caliphate-desiring quasi state with an irregular
army, and leaving them in some capacity intact anywhere would leave a
cancer in place that will ultimately come back to haunt us.”
But
he and other officials made clear that at the moment, any ground combat
troops would come from either Iraqi security forces and Kurdish pesh
merga fighters in Iraq, or the moderate Syrian rebels opposed to
President Assad in Syria. “Obviously I think that’s a red line for
everybody here: no boots on the ground,” Mr. Kerry said.
For
Mr. Obama, assembling a coalition to fight ISIS is particularly
important to a president whose initial arrival on the global stage was
centered around his opposition to the war in Iraq. He is loath to be
viewed as going it alone now that he has been dragged back into a combat
role in the same country.
“Getting
sucked deeply back into another set of violent conflicts in the Middle
East runs against the grain and the very DNA of this administration,”
said Brian Katulis, a national security expert with the Center for
American Progress, a research organization with close ties to the Obama
administration. “But the stunning actions by ISIS this summer has been a
wake-up call.”
Even
as Mr. Obama is weighing airstrikes in Syria, he and his aides have
been questioning what to do afterward, especially since targeting ISIS
in Syria will help Mr. Assad.
An
administration official said the reasons for assembling a coalition
went beyond any political cover that such an alliance might provide with
a war-weary American public. For one thing, the official said, certain
countries bring expertise, like Britain and Australia in special
operations, Jordan in intelligence and Saudi Arabia in financing.
American
officials are hoping to expand the coalition to many countries,
particularly in the region. Obama administration officials said
privately that in addition to the participants at the meeting Friday,
the United States was hoping to get quiet intelligence help about the
Sunni militants from Jordan. Its leader, King Abdullah II, was attending
the Wales summit meeting.
United
States officials said they also expected Saudi Arabia to contribute to
funding moderate Syrian rebel groups. In addition, Yousef Al Otaiba, the
United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States, said in a
statement this week that the Emirates stood ready to join the fight
against ISIS. “No one has more at stake than the U.A.E. and other
moderate countries in the region that have rejected the regressive
Islamist creed and embraced a different, forward-looking path,” the
ambassador said.
Enlisting support from Sunni populations in Syria and Iraq is crucial, experts said, because airstrikes alone will not suffice.
Matthew
G. Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center in
Washington, sought to define more clearly what destroying ISIS would
actually mean on the ground.
"From
a counterterrorism standpoint, understand that it doesn’t mean
eradicating every single person aligned with the group," Mr. Olsen said.
"We need to be realistic about that."
And
like the comprehensive strategy to combat Al Qaeda that has taken years
to develop and carry out, Mr. Olsen and other counterterrorism
officials said on Friday that destroying the threat from ISIS could
take a long time. Even if successful, they said, such a strategy would
require maintaining pressure on any remnants of the group.
Administration
officials said support for moderate rebels in Syria is critical. This
summer, President Obama set aside $500 million to train and support
vetted members of the moderate opposition to Mr. Assad. Officials say
they expect Congress to approve that request next month.
But
even after that money is approved, American officials will face
obstacles in strengthening the Free Syrian Army, the moderates of choice
for the United States. “This is going to take months,” one Defense
Department official said on Friday.
Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment