America vs. ISIS: Be Careful What You Wish For
This article was first published on LobeLog.
This article was first published on LobeLog.
This article was co-written by Sarkawt Shamsulddin, co-founder of the Kurdish Policy Foundation. It was first published on CNN.
This op-ed was first published in the New York Daily News.
The United States might not have had a strategy for battling ISIS last week, but it does now. The NATO summit in Wales produced one. It reflects President Obama’s instincts and his ability to corral fractious allies.
It also says nothing about the use of force by the United States.
The crisis in Pakistan is coming to a head. Of course it’s been building since the 15th of August, but now we’re faced with a situation in which this government is either going to survive or, very likely, were going to see a military takeover.
The big question is where does the military stand, because everybody realizes that ultimately the outcome will depend on what the military is willing to accept or, indeed, what the military wants.
Read the full article on CNN.
American airstrikes might be needed in Syria, but that would not be the most important tactic for success, nor would more material aid to the rebels be sufficient to contain the Islamic State over the long term. As in Iraq, there has to be a political angle as well.
The outlines of a US strategy to roll back ISIS, or the ‘Islamic State’ as it styles itself, in Iraq have become relatively clear, even if success is uncertain.
One hundred and sixty-three years before the Islamic State’s band of thugs rolled into the city, terrorizing the city’s minorities, my Protestant missionary ancestor, his wife, and two children settled in Mosul, a long way from the home they left behind in Utica, New York.
Paul Salem, MEI’s vice president for policy and research, examines President Obama’s decision to step up US intervention against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) in Iraq, and what it implies for broader US policy in the region, in this Expert Q&A.
How do you read the import and impact of President Obama’s recent announcements of airstrikes and humanitarian intervention in Iraq?
Read full article on Foreign Affairs.
In this essay, the author argues that the dynamics of contemporary Sunni-Shi‘a relations in Iraq and elsewhere in the Arab world are not fundamentally different from those animating other societal cleavages. The modern Iraqi state’s awkwardness vis-à-vis its Shi‘a population, and indeed other outgroups and minorities, was most directly a product of exclusionary nation-building based on problematic conceptions of “unity” and “pluralism.” Rather than actually fostering unity or respecting and nurturing pluralism (politically or communally), these concepts have often been used to exclude dissenters whose non-conformity was deemed a threat to the body politic.
This article was first published on The National Interest.