July 4, 2014
Mark Landler, Michael R. Gordon and Mark Mazzetti
New York Times
WASHINGTON — Speaking at West Point in May, President Obama laid out a blueprint for fighting terrorism that relies less on American soldiers, like the cadets in his audience that day, and more on training troops in countries where those threats had taken root.
But this indirect approach, intended to avoid costly, bloody wars like the one the United States waged in Iraq, immediately collided with reality when a lethal jihadi insurgency swept across the same Iraqi battlefields where thousands of Americans had lost their lives.
The seizing of large parts of Iraq by Sunni militants — an offensive hastened by the collapse of the American-trained Iraqi Army — stunned the White House and has laid bare the limitations of a policy that depends on the cooperation of often balky and overmatched partners.
While the militants from ISIS have moved swiftly to establish a caliphate from eastern Syria to central Iraq, the White House is struggling to repel them with measures that administration officials concede will take months or longer to be effective.
Image CreditGabriella Demczuk/The New York Times
At West Point, Mr. Obama spoke hopefully of a “network of partnerships from South Asia to the Sahel.” The reality, on chaotic display in Iraq, is likely to be far messier. The United States, constrained by a war-weary public, will have to rely on a constantly shifting cast of surrogates to confront the threats it once took on largely by itself — a trade-off that will require patience as well as a new determination at the White House to arm and train local forces.
Last week, Mr. Obama announced a plan to spend $500 million to train and equip rebels in Syria. But the Pentagon has only begun detailed planning for the program, and officials said it would be months, or even more than a year, before the fighters would be battle-ready.
“The Islamic State’s resources are increasing faster than the appropriations process back in Washington,” said Robert S. Ford, a former American ambassador to Syria who is now a resident scholar at the Middle East Institute. “The administration is going to have to think of some things to do in the short term.”
In Iraq, the Pentagon faces months of work to rebuild the shattered Iraqi security forces, which it trained over a decade at a cost of $25 billion. And the administration’s efforts to press the Iraqis to fend off the militants by forming an inclusive national government have been bogged down by the country’s deep-rooted sectarian feuds.
White House officials acknowledged it would take time to execute Mr. Obama’s policy, but pointed to other parts of the Middle East where they said the United States had deployed a rapid-response force of drones, special forces and intelligence assets.
“Building capable partners is clearly the long-term solution,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser. “But as we’ve shown in places like Yemen and Somalia, if we have to fill gaps with U. S. direct action against a specific terrorist threat, we are prepared to do so.”
Mr. Obama has not ruled out targeted airstrikes on militant positions in either Iraq or Syria. But that could raise political problems with a skeptical Congress and a wary American public, and the efficacy of strikes is uncertain, given how the fighters of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria have intermingled with other Sunni militants who oppose the government.
“That’s going to be a tough challenge, to separate them, if we were to take a decision to strike,” the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, said at a briefing on Thursday.
Adding to the urgency of the situation are the gains ISIS is making. Having captured Mosul and seized weapons and ammunition, the Sunni militants have stepped up their offensive in Syria, capturing much of the oil-rich province of Deir al-Zour on Thursday.
White House officials say Mr. Obama anticipated threats like ISIS in his May commencement address at West Point, where he spoke of “decentralized Al Qaeda affiliates and extremists, many with agendas focused in the countries where they operate.”
Mr. Obama’s cautious response appears properly calibrated to the nature of the threat, said Steven Simon, who served on the National Security Council during Mr. Obama’s first term. Despite their swift advances, ISIS fighters have been stopped short of Baghdad by Iraqi forces and Shiite militias.
Administration officials said the Iraq crisis had not altered its policy in Syria because the goal was always to equip rebels to fight extremist groups, as well as the forces of President Bashar al-Assad. Nor has the White House set aside its goal of ousting Mr. Assad, they said. But they acknowledge that the threat posed by ISIS is more pressing.
“You obviously need to deal with the urgent threat because otherwise, the other threats are irrelevant,” said a senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
To help the Iraqis repel ISIS, Mr. Obama has flooded Iraq with intelligence and surveillance equipment and said he would deploy up to 300 military advisers to assess the condition of the Iraqi military.
The offensive that took Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, shattered the cohesiveness of those forces. “Selected units can be made ready almost immediately,” said James M. Dubik, the retired Army lieutenant general who trained the Iraqi military during the 2007 surge. “These can conduct air and ground counterattacks on specific ISIS-controlled areas.”
But General Dubik said it would take months for the military to acquire the capability to conduct a “sustained counteroffensive.”
Similarly, there are formidable obstacles to fielding a combat-ready Syrian opposition force, American officials said, even though the planning for that by the United States Central Command and the military’s Joint Staff is more extensive and detailed than publicly acknowledged.
A recent Pentagon draft plan called for scores of American and other Western Special Forces troops to train up to 3,000 Syrian opposition fighters over the next 12 months or so. The preliminary plan envisioned training in Jordan, where the C.I.A. now trains small numbers of rebels, but American officials now say the training will take place in several countries, most likely including Turkey and some Persian Gulf states.
The Pentagon-trained Syrian fighters, officials said, would be initially responsible for stabilizing territory in Syria to prevent further erosion by Assad forces or ISIS. C.I.A.-trained Syrians would initially constitute an offensive, paramilitary force against the same two enemies.
There are other hurdles, not least that Jordan is balking at plans to increase training there.
Last Friday, in Saudi Arabia, the president of the Syrian opposition coalition, Ahmad Assi al-Jarba, pleaded with Secretary of State John Kerry to speed up the aid, warning him the rebels were in “dire need.”
The administration is facing different frustrations on the political front, as it presses the Iraqis to establish an inclusive national government.
On Tuesday, Sunni and Kurdish representatives walked out of the opening session of Parliament. Apart from the distrust between Sunnis and Shiites, the Kurds have signaled that they will not take part unless they are granted expanded autonomy.
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki is still insisting on a third term, but Kurdish, Sunni and even some Shiite politicians say a new prime minister must be selected, which also portends more wrangling.
Mark Landler, Michael R. Gordon and Mark Mazzetti
New York Times
WASHINGTON — Speaking at West Point in May, President Obama laid out a blueprint for fighting terrorism that relies less on American soldiers, like the cadets in his audience that day, and more on training troops in countries where those threats had taken root.
But this indirect approach, intended to avoid costly, bloody wars like the one the United States waged in Iraq, immediately collided with reality when a lethal jihadi insurgency swept across the same Iraqi battlefields where thousands of Americans had lost their lives.
The seizing of large parts of Iraq by Sunni militants — an offensive hastened by the collapse of the American-trained Iraqi Army — stunned the White House and has laid bare the limitations of a policy that depends on the cooperation of often balky and overmatched partners.
While the militants from ISIS have moved swiftly to establish a caliphate from eastern Syria to central Iraq, the White House is struggling to repel them with measures that administration officials concede will take months or longer to be effective.
Image CreditGabriella Demczuk/The New York TimesAt West Point, Mr. Obama spoke hopefully of a “network of partnerships from South Asia to the Sahel.” The reality, on chaotic display in Iraq, is likely to be far messier. The United States, constrained by a war-weary public, will have to rely on a constantly shifting cast of surrogates to confront the threats it once took on largely by itself — a trade-off that will require patience as well as a new determination at the White House to arm and train local forces.
Last week, Mr. Obama announced a plan to spend $500 million to train and equip rebels in Syria. But the Pentagon has only begun detailed planning for the program, and officials said it would be months, or even more than a year, before the fighters would be battle-ready.
“The Islamic State’s resources are increasing faster than the appropriations process back in Washington,” said Robert S. Ford, a former American ambassador to Syria who is now a resident scholar at the Middle East Institute. “The administration is going to have to think of some things to do in the short term.”
In Iraq, the Pentagon faces months of work to rebuild the shattered Iraqi security forces, which it trained over a decade at a cost of $25 billion. And the administration’s efforts to press the Iraqis to fend off the militants by forming an inclusive national government have been bogged down by the country’s deep-rooted sectarian feuds.
White House officials acknowledged it would take time to execute Mr. Obama’s policy, but pointed to other parts of the Middle East where they said the United States had deployed a rapid-response force of drones, special forces and intelligence assets.
“Building capable partners is clearly the long-term solution,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser. “But as we’ve shown in places like Yemen and Somalia, if we have to fill gaps with U. S. direct action against a specific terrorist threat, we are prepared to do so.”
Mr. Obama has not ruled out targeted airstrikes on militant positions in either Iraq or Syria. But that could raise political problems with a skeptical Congress and a wary American public, and the efficacy of strikes is uncertain, given how the fighters of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria have intermingled with other Sunni militants who oppose the government.
“That’s going to be a tough challenge, to separate them, if we were to take a decision to strike,” the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, said at a briefing on Thursday.
Adding to the urgency of the situation are the gains ISIS is making. Having captured Mosul and seized weapons and ammunition, the Sunni militants have stepped up their offensive in Syria, capturing much of the oil-rich province of Deir al-Zour on Thursday.
White House officials say Mr. Obama anticipated threats like ISIS in his May commencement address at West Point, where he spoke of “decentralized Al Qaeda affiliates and extremists, many with agendas focused in the countries where they operate.”
Mr. Obama’s cautious response appears properly calibrated to the nature of the threat, said Steven Simon, who served on the National Security Council during Mr. Obama’s first term. Despite their swift advances, ISIS fighters have been stopped short of Baghdad by Iraqi forces and Shiite militias.
Administration officials said the Iraq crisis had not altered its policy in Syria because the goal was always to equip rebels to fight extremist groups, as well as the forces of President Bashar al-Assad. Nor has the White House set aside its goal of ousting Mr. Assad, they said. But they acknowledge that the threat posed by ISIS is more pressing.
“You obviously need to deal with the urgent threat because otherwise, the other threats are irrelevant,” said a senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
To help the Iraqis repel ISIS, Mr. Obama has flooded Iraq with intelligence and surveillance equipment and said he would deploy up to 300 military advisers to assess the condition of the Iraqi military.
The offensive that took Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, shattered the cohesiveness of those forces. “Selected units can be made ready almost immediately,” said James M. Dubik, the retired Army lieutenant general who trained the Iraqi military during the 2007 surge. “These can conduct air and ground counterattacks on specific ISIS-controlled areas.”
But General Dubik said it would take months for the military to acquire the capability to conduct a “sustained counteroffensive.”
Similarly, there are formidable obstacles to fielding a combat-ready Syrian opposition force, American officials said, even though the planning for that by the United States Central Command and the military’s Joint Staff is more extensive and detailed than publicly acknowledged.
A recent Pentagon draft plan called for scores of American and other Western Special Forces troops to train up to 3,000 Syrian opposition fighters over the next 12 months or so. The preliminary plan envisioned training in Jordan, where the C.I.A. now trains small numbers of rebels, but American officials now say the training will take place in several countries, most likely including Turkey and some Persian Gulf states.
The Pentagon-trained Syrian fighters, officials said, would be initially responsible for stabilizing territory in Syria to prevent further erosion by Assad forces or ISIS. C.I.A.-trained Syrians would initially constitute an offensive, paramilitary force against the same two enemies.
There are other hurdles, not least that Jordan is balking at plans to increase training there.
Last Friday, in Saudi Arabia, the president of the Syrian opposition coalition, Ahmad Assi al-Jarba, pleaded with Secretary of State John Kerry to speed up the aid, warning him the rebels were in “dire need.”
The administration is facing different frustrations on the political front, as it presses the Iraqis to establish an inclusive national government.
On Tuesday, Sunni and Kurdish representatives walked out of the opening session of Parliament. Apart from the distrust between Sunnis and Shiites, the Kurds have signaled that they will not take part unless they are granted expanded autonomy.
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki is still insisting on a third term, but Kurdish, Sunni and even some Shiite politicians say a new prime minister must be selected, which also portends more wrangling.
No comments:
Post a Comment