When US
President Barack Obama spoke to America about the threat of the Islamic state
(ISIS) on September 10, 2014, he spoke of forming a broad coalition. But the
only states he mentioned fighting with were not exactly presented as eager
participants. He mentioned Iraq. But he did that by way of announcing that Iraq was going to have to step up to
fight (ISIS is heavily involved in Iraq). He also mentioned Syria. But he
wasn’t talking about the nation-state. He was talking about Syrian rebels who,
in many ways, are as brutal as ISIS.
That was it:
his coalition.
Now, two
days later, we know more about that coalition. For example, the US has
announced that Middle Eastern countries are ‘on board’ (“10 Arab Countries Back
U.S. Campaign Against IS”, Arutz Sheva, September 12, 2014). The US has also
said that nine additional countries have joined the coalition: U.K., Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, Poland,
Canada, Turkey and Australia (“Every Support Against ISIS short of Armed
Engagement”, The Daily Sabah, September 12, 2014).
But the
coalition isn’t what it seems. It’s isn’t the kind of coalition we saw in the
First Gulf War, for example, where the US pulled together close to 500,000
soldiers from all across the globe. This is a different kind of coalition.
It’s a
coalition of, ‘count me in but don’t ask me for anything’.
Britain
won’t participate in air strikes (“Britain Rules Out Taking Part in Airstrikes
in Syria”, Arutz Sheva, September 12, 2014). Germany won’t do air
strikes, either (ibid).
France will
do air strikes in Iraq, but maybe not in Syria (ibid). Turkey won’t take part
in any military action at all against ISIS (The Sabah, above). Jordan,
while ‘on board’, faces Members of its own Parliament who don’t want to fight
ISIS (“Jordanian MPs Demand: Let's Stay Out of Fight with IS”, Arutz Sheva,
September 4, 2014).
It’s
certainly nice that ten Arab countries have signed on with President Obama.
After all, ISIS threatens the Arab world more than anyone else in the world
right now. But the Arab League—which represents the Arab world—has 22 Member
(not including Syria, which was ‘suspended’ in 2011). Where are the other 12?
Why aren’t
they ‘on board’? More important still, where is Qatar? Qatar is, arguably, the
world’s biggest funding engine for terrorism. Qatar maintains the US’s largest
military base in the Middle East (“Qatar’s Support of Islamists Alienates
Allies Near and Far,” The New York Times, September 7, 2014). But it
openly supports Jihadists by “providing safe haven, diplomatic mediation,
financial aid and, in certain instances, weapons” (ibid). In one of the world’s
most unusual alignment of nations, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Egypt and Israel have all sought to label Qatar as “the godfather to terrorists
everywhere” (ibid).
The issue of
Qatar and terrorism is so delicate that anyone who accuses Qatar of supporting
ISIS is immediately condemned by Arab diplomats and others for bringing
political rhetoric and blind opinion-making to a difficult situation (ibid).
Qatar hasn’t
joined Obama’s coalition.
Others also haven’t
joined yet. Iran won’t join because, it said, it doubts the “seriousness and
sincerity” of the members of the coalition (“Iran criticizes Obama’s anti-ISIS
coalition plans”, Iraqi News, September 11, 2014). Iran claims (perhaps
correctly) that some members of the coalition openly support the terrorists in
Iraq and Syria (ibid).
Saudi Arabia’s
commitment may not be as strong as the US makes it appear (“Obama’s Coalition
to Fight ISIS Is No Sure Thing”, The Fiscal Times, September 9, 2014).
The Saudis may not entirely trust Obama’s willingness to fight ISIS (ibid).
They may not be entirely happy that the one message that the US keeps repeating
is that President Obama was willing to go “wherever is necessary to strike those
who are threatening Americans" (“Broad coalition of nations will help
fight ISIS, John Kerry says in Iraq”, CNBC, September 10, 2014). The
Saudis might want some assurances that Obama has a concern for them, too.
In fact, few
members of the Arab League gave the US open support for military action against
ISIS (“Can Obama build a real anti-ISIS coalition?” cbsnews, September
9, 2014). Don’t they trust Obama?
The early
betting is, US President Obama is going to hear a lot of strongly-worded
anti-ISIS talk. Everyone will support him. Everyone will agree with him: ISIS
is a scourge that must be blotted out.
But it’s
altogether possible that that’s all Obama is going to get--lip-service. Few may
actually join his fight. He could end up with few allies (“The Anti-ISIS
Coalition And Obama’s Strategy”, The Dish, September 5, 2014). He could end
up in Iraq with allies who are more enemy than friend.
He could
fail. His failure could bring ISIS to the US. His failure could change America
forever.
The G-d of
Israel waits.
No comments:
Post a Comment