8/24/14, "A Necessary Response to ISIS," NY Times Editorial Board, 8/25 print ed.
"The
United States cannot go it alone in the fight against the Islamic State
in Iraq and Syria, the extremist group known as ISIS whose ruthlessness
and killing has dumbfounded and horrified the civilized world.
American
airstrikes and other assistance from the United States have brought
some measure of relief to religious minorities and others that ISIS has
threatened. But defeating ISIS will require an organized, longer-term
response involving a broad coalition of nations, including other Muslim
countries, and addressing not only the military threat but political and
religious issues.
The
recent persecution of Christians and Yazidis and the murder of James
Foley, an American journalist, has brought ISIS’s savagery into full
view. On Thursday, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, said ISIS posed an “immediate threat” to the West, in
addition to Iraq, because thousands of Europeans and other foreigners
who have joined the group and have the passports to travel freely could
carry the fight back to their home countries — including the United
States.
Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel was equally emphatic. ISIS, he warned, is “beyond
anything that we’ve seen” because it is extremely well-financed and has
demonstrated sophistication and tactical skill in its campaign to
impose an Islamic caliphate by brute force. Other analysts have gone so
far as to describe ISIS as one of the most successful extremist groups
in history because of its ability to seize and hold large sections of
two countries — Iraq and Syria — with what seems like blinding speed.
While the risk to the United States and the West is real, those paying the biggest price are Muslims. That’s why President Obama
was correct to argue that “from governments and peoples across the
Middle East, there has to be a common effort to extract this cancer so
that it does not spread.”
Making this happen will take American
leadership, but, so far, neither he nor America’s allies have laid out a
coherent vision of how to bring that about.
The
response to the immediate crisis has been prudent. The United States
has insisted that Iraq’s government and army set aside longstanding
rivalries and work with the pesh merga militia of Kurdistan to back up
American airstrikes by fighting ISIS on the ground. Germany, Italy,
Britain and France have promised weapons.
The
politics of Iraq, however, remain dangerously unsettled. The United
States successfully pressed for a change from Nuri Kamal al-Maliki as
prime minister in Iraq because only a more inclusive leader would have
any chance of unifying the country against the ISIS threat. And, in a
rare convergence of interests, Iran also withdrew its support from Mr.
Maliki, resulting in the appointment of a new leader, Haider al-Abadi.
But Parliament has yet to give final approval to the new government,
thus prolonging political uncertainties that undermine the fight against
ISIS.
The
prospects of defeating ISIS would be greatly improved if other Muslim
nations could see ISIS for the threat it is. But, like Iraq, they are
mired in petty competitions and Sunni-Shiite religious divisions and
many have their own relations with extremists of one kind or another.
ISIS has received financing from donors in Kuwait and Qatar. Saudi
Arabia funneled weapons to Syrian rebels and didn’t care if they went to
ISIS. Turkey allowed ISIS fighters and weapons to flow across porous
borders. All of that has to stop.
Creating
a regional military force may be required, including assistance from
the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and Turkey. It certainly will
require money, intelligence-sharing, diplomatic cooperation and a
determined plan to cut off financing to ISIS and the flow of ISIS
fighters between states. France’s suggestion for an international conference deserves consideration.
No matter how many American airstrikes are carried out — Mr. Obama is also considering strikes against ISIS in Syria
— such extremists will never be defeated if Muslims themselves don’t
make it a priority. To their credit, some leaders are speaking out.
Among them is Saudi Arabia’s highest religious authority, the grand mufti, who called ISIS and Al Qaeda the “enemy No. 1 of Islam.”
But
they must go further and begin a serious discussion about the dangers
of radical Islam and how ISIS’s perversion of one of the world’s great
religions can be reversed."
========================
NY Times commenter:
========================
==========================
Comment: Iraq isn't going to get a stable government in the foreseeable future. Sunni and Shia or factions thereof will continue to murder each other. If weapons are sent to Baghdad they won't get to the Kurds. These are givens. Many of the excellent weapons ISIS uses came from the defunct and highly corrupt Iraq army. Courtesy of US taxpayers and their highly corrupt elected representatives.
The new PM was Maliki's right hand man, who performed for Maliki the actions about which we complained most.
This version of what happened just does not make sense. We are being conned, again, about Iraq."