Skip to main content

Man Without an ISIS Plan

On the campaign trail, no foreign policy issue seized Donald Trump more than the fight against the Islamic State. Once president, he signed an executive order giving his generals 30 days to produce a plan to defeat the terrorist group, and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis gave him options on Feb. 27. Yet if Mr. Trump has decided on a new plan for defeating ISIS, it isn’t obvious. The missions underway in Iraq and Syria were set in motion by President Barack Obama. While they have achieved some tactical successes, they point to a deepening American military involvement in both countries. The question now is whether Mr. Trump will continue, or accelerate, that trend. Last week, American officials announced plans to nearly double their forces in Syria with 400 more troops and the Pentagon is reportedly considering sending 1,000 extra troops to Kuwait as a reserve force. They are also weighing more troops for Iraq, where about 5,000 Americans are training and assisting Iraqi security forces. Though the Americans are not expected to be involved in ground combat, they are moving closer to the front lines. As a candidate, Mr. Trump derided Mr. Obama’s anti-ISIS strategy as a disaster, though offering none of his own. Now, in office, he shouldn’t ignore the progress that has been made. Local forces backed by American airstrikes have retaken large areas of Syria and Iraq that ISIS captured in 2014. The eastern part of Mosul, once Iraq’s second-largest city, was recently liberated from ISIS. On Feb. 19, Iraqi forces launched a battle for the western part of the city, where a million people are trapped in desperate conditions. Last week, an American-backed militia in Syria captured the main road connecting Raqqa to territory the group holds in Deir al-Zour Province, severing the last supply and escape route for its fighters. The group’s claim to legitimacy has rested mainly on holding territory, so losing those strongholds would be a devastating blow. Meanwhile, many terrorist fighters have been killed and fewer replacements are arriving from other countries. ISIS’ finances — from oil revenues and the taxes it extracts from people under its control — have fallen from about $1.9 billion in 2014 to no more than $870 million in 2016, according to a study by the research organization RAND. One of the tough questions facing Mr. Trump is whether to arm the Syrian Kurds for the fight against ISIS. American military commanders consider them crucial partners in any campaign to retake Raqqa, where some 4,000 ISIS fighters are dug in. The problem is that Turkey, a NATO ally, opposes arming the Syrian Kurds because it considers them terrorists in league with the Kurds who are waging a separatist war in Turkey. If they are not armed, the battle for Raqqa would be delayed, and momentum lost. If the decision goes against Turkey, it could retaliate by banning the United States from Incirlik Air Base. On the diplomatic front, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has wisely chosen to retain the top Obama administration official in charge of the global anti-ISIS coalition and has scheduled a meeting of its members this month in Washington. There is much to discuss, including how to meet the basic needs of civilians displaced by ISIS and ways to govern and secure war-ravaged communities. This is critical, because ISIS, even if it is beaten militarily, can be expected to recruit new members and pose a threat for years to come. Sadly, Mr. Trump isn’t helping by reissuing his anti-Muslim visa ban, which only reinforces ISIS’ anti-West message.

Source: http://terror-alert.com/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

India-Malaysia ties and the future

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is on his first official visit to India. The main aim of this visit is to seek support for Malaysia’s application to join Brics and to fortify bilateral ties, as the country is keen to improve its connections with one of the rapidly expanding economies in Asia. In light of the increasing crumbling of the global order, particularly stemming from trade disputes between the United States and China, as well as the proxy conflict involving the United States and Russia, Malaysia is encouraged to reassess its foreign policy to uphold its neutral stance. Given India’s status as the largest democracy and the fifth-largest economy globally, along with its notable advancements in indigenous space and defence technologies, it is proposed that India emerge as Malaysia’s key partner in the years ahead. Why India is important for Malaysia The historical ties between India and Malaysia extend back several centuries, with significant Indian cultural, religious, and administ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ties that bind religion, state: Beneficial or detrimental?

Malaysia is characterised as a secular state, a principle reflecting its founding fathers’ vision. However, over the years, certain politicians from various factions have exploited religion as a potent tool to garner public support and to suppress or eliminate their political adversaries. The slogan “untuk agama, bangsa dan negara,” which translates to “for religion, race, and nation,” suggests a troubling prioritisation of religious matters over state affairs. This shift in focus by the past and present governments, which places religious issues above national interests, poses significant risks to the future stability and unity of the nation. Furthermore, the investigation into Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings, which is accused of child sexual abuse and forced labour, highlights the potential dangers of intertwining religious motivations with operational practices. Also, an examination of the present state of our government reveals a trajectory similar to that of Pakistan,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Understanding terrorism and attacks in Lebanon

Terrorism is characterised as the illegal application of force and intimidation, particularly targeting civilians, to attain political objectives. The overarching definition of terrorism encompasses the strategic deployment of violence to instil widespread fear within a population, thus facilitating the realisation of political goals. Furthermore, the FBI differentiates between international terrorism, which involves violent actions perpetrated by individuals or groups motivated by foreign terrorist entities, and domestic terrorism, which refers to violent acts carried out by individuals or groups aiming to promote ideological objectives rooted in domestic factors. Additionally, it entails the employment of violence against non-combatants to fulfil political or ideological aspirations, frequently occurring during periods of peace or amid warfare. The 9/11 attacks The recent commemoration of the 9/11 attacks in the United States marked the anniversary of what is widely regarded as the m...
Post a Comment
Read more