A Third Iraq War: Will President Obama Eradicate Jihadism?

President of the United States, Barack Obama, now faces the possibility of the United States’ third intervention in Iraq. In 1991, the United States united thirty-four nations and compelled Saddam Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait, and in 2003, led by the U.S. a coalition forced Saddam to flee Baghdad after only three weeks. The earlier two wars might have achieved their military goals, but they were political failures, and the third Iraq War will be more deadly. Last week I listened to President Obama’s televised speech during which he unveiled his strategy to “degrade and destroy” the Jihadists Islamic State of Iraq (ISI). Obama’s strategy is to destroy ISI by the development of smart power, which would ensure that American casualties are avoided and that the undertaking would be self-financed with it funded by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab states. He plans to degrade the Jihadists by using systematic air strikes on ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria, increasing the number of U.S. military forces, advising and training the Iraqi military, and employing counterterrorism capabilities of the U.S and its allies to have better intelligence. Further, he plans to prevent foreign fighters from joining ISIS and sustaining humanitarian aid for those who are already under the control of ISIS. Obama failed to understand that the best strategy for the Iraq War was to have listened to the Bush policies in not hastily pulling American troops out of Iraq while Iraq is in a failed state. In this condition the sudden abandonment produced environmental conditions that gave the birth to ISIS, and left the region under the influence of major players such as Russia and Iran, who have become the dominant players in the region. President Obama and the new coalition have no credibility in the region. Now Obama is trying to solve long-standing ethnic wars by dropping bombs and to solve short-term problems by eradicating Jihadists. President Obama should understand that decades of drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen as well as air strikes in Libya and Afghanistan did kill some of the jihadists but did not eliminate the ideology of Jihadism. I don’t believe any military option can provide an enduring solution to sectarian wars in the Middle East. President Obama should admit that the idea of eradicating Jihadism by airstrike is naïve or clueless in terms of the Middle East. More than a decade after the 9/11 incidents, the world still suffers from Jihadism and, in fact, does so more than ever before. Once Al-Qaida was the most dangerous organization, but now we have ISIS, Boko Haram, Al shabaab, Jabhat, and Al- Nusra, among others. I think the Kurds, the Iraqi army, and the Shiites can effectively eradicate ISIS, first, if external power players do not give support to ISIS, and, second, if those three groups build trust among each other. There is considerable mistrust among the Kurds, the Iraqi army, and the Shiites, and to eradicate ISIS, they need to have a mutual trust, but it will take years and maybe decades for them to build the trust; therefore, the problem of sectarianism will continue. Keep in mind that out of those groups, one is the former oppressor trying to get revenge, the other group is oppressed, and the Kurds have already suffered from both groups, that is from the current oppressor groups like the majority Shiites and the oppressed Sunnis. Furthermore, the Kurds are ready to get their independence. All sides already have enough anger and hate toward the other to destroy each other, so it does not matter what the United States or the international community does, it will not eradicate hate and competion for power in the region. The four main groups in Iraq right now all have different interests and demands. The Islamic State of Iraq, the Kurdish peshmerga, and Iraqi army Sunni tribes. They all have issues and problem with each other, and those issues did not start with the former Prime Minister Nouri Al- Maliki’s sectarian policy. Likewise, it will not end with Al Maliki’s removal from power. It is a decades-old struggle. The Sunnis do not want to live in a Shiite controlled area, the Shiites also do not want to live under the control of the Sunnis, and the Kurds will not give up their autonomy because they are looking forward to being independent from the Arabs, Persian, and Turks. Therefore, sooner or later Iraq will be divided into three autonomous regions based on the distinctions of Shiite, Sunni, and Kurd. Using the Kurds and the Shiites as part of the solution will make more hostilities between the Sunni Arabs, the Shiites, and the Kurds. ISIS is not the issue for me. The issue is the energy war. The question is how did this organization suddenly become the most powerful organization of all the terrorists? And where does it get its support? ISIS has begun to control the production marketing and pricing of oil in Syria and Iraq. ISIS has begun to threaten the interests of international oil companies changing the balance of power in the region. ISIS sells oil to Turkish and Jordanian oil smugglers, setting the price of oil per barrel at only $25. As we see, after ISIS took control of the city of Mosul, oil prices declined. The price of oil per barrel before ISIS took control of production was $116-117, but now it is a little below $99, so ISIS is only a front. The majority of the people in the region believe that ISIS is a project of the West, America and Israel. So gathering the countries and lining them up to eradicate ISIS is not convincing people. Because of a lack of a comprehensive strategy after Kaddafi was gone, now Libya is a failed state. People in the region are concerned about what kind of problem this coalition will cause and what kind of mess this operation will leave behind for the neighbor countries. Will it be like Libya? ISIS is not in a remote part of the world. It is right next door to Turkey. Turkey is worried about getting sucked into the Iraq war and is giving excuses for not supporting it. It claims that its hands are tied due to the 49 Turkish citizens who were kidnapped by the ISIS from the Turkey Consulate General in Mosul. This is going to be another big test for the new government of Turkey. Turkey is saying that if the USA is not putting boots on the ground, why should Turkey engage in a ground war? In addition, Turkey is very cautious about joining a US-led coalition to fight ISIS. A similar crisis occurred on March 1, 2003, when the Turkish Parliament voted against allowing U.S. troops to deploy in Turkey to attack Iraq. Turkey does not trust Washington, especially because both countries have different policies toward Assad and Iraq. Washington was relying too much on Norui al-Maliki in Iraq, Turkey urged the United States to take some kind of military action before the situation got out of hand. The Turkish government is also supporting the radical groups who are against Assad’s regime, further destabilizing Syria, and is speeding up the disintegration of Iraq by signing direct energy contracts with the Kurdish government. The leadership in the U.S. does not understand the Middle East. It still continues to think that the main reason for this problem is Assad or Iran, but the real problem is sectarian wars between Shiite Iran and Wahabi Saudi Arabia, and Sunni countries like Turkey and others, over oil and over who is going to be the Islamic leader. Extremist Sunnis and extremist Shiites are deciding the political will. The solution to this problem is in the hand of extremists, not in the hand of moderates. The main losers here are the Islamic world. How many years will it take for Muslims to convince the rest of the world that Islam is a religious peace, when Muslims are murdering Muslim in the Muslim land? Dr. Aland Mizell is President of the MCI and a regular contributor to Mindanao Times. You may email the author at:aland_mizell2@hotmail.com A Third Iraq War: Will President Obama Eradicate Jihadism? President of the United States, Barack Obama, now faces the possibility of the United States’ third intervention in Iraq. In 1991, the United States united thirty-four nations and compelled Saddam Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait, and in 2003, led by the U.S. a coalition forced Saddam to flee Baghdad after only three weeks. The earlier two wars might have achieved their military goals, but they were political failures, and the third Iraq War will be more deadly. Last week I listened to President Obama’s televised speech during which he unveiled his strategy to “degrade and destroy” the Jihadists Islamic State of Iraq (ISI). Obama’s strategy is to destroy ISI by the development of smart power, which would ensure that American casualties are avoided and that the undertaking would be self-financed with it funded by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab states. He plans to degrade the Jihadists by using systematic air strikes on ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria, increasing the number of U.S. military forces, advising and training the Iraqi military, and employing counterterrorism capabilities of the U.S and its allies to have better intelligence. Further, he plans to prevent foreign fighters from joining ISIS and sustaining humanitarian aid for those who are already under the control of ISIS. Obama failed to understand that the best strategy for the Iraq War was to have listened to the Bush policies in not hastily pulling American troops out of Iraq while Iraq is in a failed state. In this condition the sudden abandonment produced environmental conditions that gave the birth to ISIS, and left the region under the influence of major players such as Russia and Iran, who have become the dominant players in the region. President Obama and the new coalition have no credibility in the region. Now Obama is trying to solve long-standing ethnic wars by dropping bombs and to solve short-term problems by eradicating Jihadists. President Obama should understand that decades of drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen as well as air strikes in Libya and Afghanistan did kill some of the jihadists but did not eliminate the ideology of Jihadism. I don’t believe any military option can provide an enduring solution to sectarian wars in the Middle East. President Obama should admit that the idea of eradicating Jihadism by airstrike is naïve or clueless in terms of the Middle East. More than a decade after the 9/11 incidents, the world still suffers from Jihadism and, in fact, does so more than ever before. Once Al-Qaida was the most dangerous organization, but now we have ISIS, Boko Haram, Al shabaab, Jabhat, and Al- Nusra, among others. I think the Kurds, the Iraqi army, and the Shiites can effectively eradicate ISIS, first, if external power players do not give support to ISIS, and, second, if those three groups build trust among each other. There is considerable mistrust among the Kurds, the Iraqi army, and the Shiites, and to eradicate ISIS, they need to have a mutual trust, but it will take years and maybe decades for them to build the trust; therefore, the problem of sectarianism will continue. Keep in mind that out of those groups, one is the former oppressor trying to get revenge, the other group is oppressed, and the Kurds have already suffered from both groups, that is from the current oppressor groups like the majority Shiites and the oppressed Sunnis. Furthermore, the Kurds are ready to get their independence. All sides already have enough anger and hate toward the other to destroy each other, so it does not matter what the United States or the international community does, it will not eradicate hate and competion for power in the region. The four main groups in Iraq right now all have different interests and demands. The Islamic State of Iraq, the Kurdish peshmerga, and Iraqi army Sunni tribes. They all have issues and problem with each other, and those issues did not start with the former Prime Minister Nouri Al- Maliki’s sectarian policy. Likewise, it will not end with Al Maliki’s removal from power. It is a decades-old struggle. The Sunnis do not want to live in a Shiite controlled area, the Shiites also do not want to live under the control of the Sunnis, and the Kurds will not give up their autonomy because they are looking forward to being independent from the Arabs, Persian, and Turks. Therefore, sooner or later Iraq will be divided into three autonomous regions based on the distinctions of Shiite, Sunni, and Kurd. Using the Kurds and the Shiites as part of the solution will make more hostilities between the Sunni Arabs, the Shiites, and the Kurds. ISIS is not the issue for me. The issue is the energy war. The question is how did this organization suddenly become the most powerful organization of all the terrorists? And where does it get its support? ISIS has begun to control the production marketing and pricing of oil in Syria and Iraq. ISIS has begun to threaten the interests of international oil companies changing the balance of power in the region. ISIS sells oil to Turkish and Jordanian oil smugglers, setting the price of oil per barrel at only $25. As we see, after ISIS took control of the city of Mosul, oil prices declined. The price of oil per barrel before ISIS took control of production was $116-117, but now it is a little below $99, so ISIS is only a front. The majority of the people in the region believe that ISIS is a project of the West, America and Israel. So gathering the countries and lining them up to eradicate ISIS is not convincing people. Because of a lack of a comprehensive strategy after Kaddafi was gone, now Libya is a failed state. People in the region are concerned about what kind of problem this coalition will cause and what kind of mess this operation will leave behind for the neighbor countries. Will it be like Libya? ISIS is not in a remote part of the world. It is right next door to Turkey. Turkey is worried about getting sucked into the Iraq war and is giving excuses for not supporting it. It claims that its hands are tied due to the 49 Turkish citizens who were kidnapped by the ISIS from the Turkey Consulate General in Mosul. This is going to be another big test for the new government of Turkey. Turkey is saying that if the USA is not putting boots on the ground, why should Turkey engage in a ground war? In addition, Turkey is very cautious about joining a US-led coalition to fight ISIS. A similar crisis occurred on March 1, 2003, when the Turkish Parliament voted against allowing U.S. troops to deploy in Turkey to attack Iraq. Turkey does not trust Washington, especially because both countries have different policies toward Assad and Iraq. Washington was relying too much on Norui al-Maliki in Iraq, Turkey urged the United States to take some kind of military action before the situation got out of hand. The Turkish government is also supporting the radical groups who are against Assad’s regime, further destabilizing Syria, and is speeding up the disintegration of Iraq by signing direct energy contracts with the Kurdish government. The leadership in the U.S. does not understand the Middle East. It still continues to think that the main reason for this problem is Assad or Iran, but the real problem is sectarian wars between Shiite Iran and Wahabi Saudi Arabia, and Sunni countries like Turkey and others, over oil and over who is going to be the Islamic leader. Extremist Sunnis and extremist Shiites are deciding the political will. The solution to this problem is in the hand of extremists, not in the hand of moderates. The main losers here are the Islamic world. How many years will it take for Muslims to convince the rest of the world that Islam is a religious peace, when Muslims are murdering Muslim in the Muslim land? Dr. Aland Mizell is President of the MCI and a regular contributor to Mindanao Times. You may email the author at:aland_mizell2@hotmail.com