Coalition's Plans For IS Fight Look Cowardly

America has succeeded in putting together a 37-nation coalition against the Islamic State (IS). Who does what within it is to be confirmed.

All signatories to the agreement struck in Jeddah, at the Nato summit in Wales, and in phone calls over the last fortnight are agreed on one thing - none of them will send ground troops to fight the insurgency.

This is a mistake rooted in a fetishistic hang-up that the previous US-led interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan have ended in what looks to many like failure, and that there can never be public support for a return to war in the Islamic world.

But this is a coalition that is made up now of a huge number of Sunni Arab states that have most to lose from the spread of the IS and its ideology.

The movement poses a theoretical threat to the West. It poses an immediate danger to its neighbours.

But the Saudis, Egyptians, Jordanians, Gulf States, the Lebanon have all followed the lead set by the West, notably the US and UK, and refused to countenance sending troops to fight on the ground.

This makes the coalition look cowardly. It also means the coalition will have to rely heavily on a disorganised patchwork of militia groups spread across two nations, many of who have very different priorities.

In Syria, moderate rebels can expect more funding, training, and weapons. But their main aim is to depose the regime of Bashar al Assad.

Iraqi security forces look for IS fighters near Haditha

In Iraq, the national army has proven ineffective after tens of billions have been spent on its equipment and training.

The Kurdish pershmerga has lost some of its famed fighting spirit and cannot be relied upon to fight in the interests of an outside coalition rather than for its own territory.

Iraqi's Shia militia are being thrown into the fight - and some have proven as venal as IS - murdering Sunnis and torching their homes.

Sunni militia will be key and need to be turned against IS - but how far their loyalties would lie once they have secured their own local security is impossible to gauge.

If the IS is the threat to its neighbours and beyond that the world's leaders now say it is, it is striking that they are only prepared to fight by remote control to destroy it.

A refusal to even think about ground troops will signal decadence and weakness to the proclaimed enemy.

Over the next few days, former US General John Allen will be drawing up a plan for which states will contribute what.

He will start out a frustrated man. Only last month he issued a call to arms in an article for the website Defence One.

"IS must be destroyed and we must move quickly to pressure its entire 'nervous system,' break it up, and destroy its pieces," he thundered.

Then he added this: "The US military is not war weary and is fully capable of attacking and reducing IS throughout the depth of its holdings, and we should do it now, but supported substantially by our traditional allies and partners."

He's saying the military are not afraid - but the politicians are.

Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang

Coalition's Plans For IS Fight Look Cowardly

Dengan url

http://mukenyerate.blogspot.com/2014/09/coalitions-plans-for-is-fight-look.html

Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya

Coalition's Plans For IS Fight Look Cowardly

namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link

Coalition's Plans For IS Fight Look Cowardly

sebagai sumbernya