Tag: ISIS
Disaster looms
The Middle East Institute discussion today of building support for moderate Syrian rebel forces stirred both mind and blood.With Kate Seelye moderating, the panel offered a multilayered critique of US and coalition policy.
McClatchy’s Roy Gutman launched with a denunciation of US aid cuts to the 8-10,000 vetted fighters, who are losing ground and personnel to the Syrian regime and extremists. While White House favorites like David Ignatius are declaring the moderates don’t exist, in fact they did well fighting extremists for much of this year (after an initial debacle in the north, where their warehouses were raided by ISIS).
The rebels have suffered more recently from having no unified command, lack of coordination among donors, and the need to fight Al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al Nusra as well as ISIS and the regime. The US, which a Syrian opined “walks like a turtle while events race like a rabbit,” punishes the opposition for failures that are due in fact to lack of US support. The situation bears all the hallmarks of impending disaster for the moderates. Somehow the opposition is holding its ground in the center of Aleppo, but it is losing manpower to the extremists.
The Syrian Opposition Coalition’s Oubai Shahbandar agreed the situation is difficult, but he thought not impossible. Despite Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps fighters operating on the regime side, Aleppo has held. The rebels are resilient. They are fighting Assad, a fight that is inextricably linked to the fight against ISIS. Defeating ISIS in Iraq and containing it in Syria, as the Obama administration would like to do, is not a viable option. Rebel forces in southern Syria are making real progress in surrounding Damascus. The moderates are not finished. There are still viable options if they get sufficient support.
Retired US Army General Paul Eaton said the US has no strategy, just an incoherent response. This is partly because there are no vital US interests at stake in Syria, only “conditional” ones. The war against ISIS is the main US effort, which we entered because ISIS threatened our Kurdish friends in Erbil (not because journalists were beheaded). But the war is existential for President Assad, who is therefore unrestrained even as the US pursues the art of the possible. The Administration has a choice of two out of three: good, fast and cheap. It has chosen good and cheap (and therefore also slow). One year will not be enough. In the meanwhile, the opposition is unable to hold and build.
Retired Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford underlined that this is a two-front war, east and west. The Administration has given priority to the east (Iraq). The west (Syria) is not going well. But there is no solution only in Iraq. Nor is there a solution unless we fight both the regime and ISIS. It may be too late, as we have failed to bomb ISIS forces that are challenging the Free Syrian Army (FSA) brigades. Assad and the jihadis are winning in the west. It is unrealistic to expect the FSA to fight only Assad. We need to change the balance on the ground in order to get a political solution in Syria.
Asked about the UN “freeze” proposal for Aleppo, Gutman underlined that past ceasefires have essentially amounted to surrenders of the opposition to the regime. The UN is on its third top-notch special envoy. But he won’t succeed either unless something is done to alter the balance on the ground. Ford noted that of three dozen ceasefires, only one has held up. Eaton said that the US could enforce a freeze, but it has to consider the Iranian and Russian responses if it were to do so.
If we move towards a “no fly” zone, Ford emphasized the need for strict conditions on our friends: we would want the Sunnis to pledge protection for Alawites and other minorities, the Turks to pledge not to push Syrian refugees out of Turkey, the donors to tighten coordination and to push for a political solution. Gutman underlined that it is vital for the opposition to set up shop inside Syria, but doing so will require ground forces (which Turkey does not want to provide) as well as protection from the air. Shahbandar thinks a “no fly” zone would help to change the balance on the ground and win hearts and minds, which are being lost now because of US failure to attack regime forces.
Russia and Iran, the panel agreed, are key international players. Russia has been reluctant to force the regime to fight ISIS or to push Assad out. The Administration has told the Iranians it will not bomb Assad’s forces. But Iran is a key factor in supporting ISIS, which it helped revive after its defeat in Iraq. Tehran is the “turboengine” of terrorism in the Levant, Shahbandar said. The US risks losing all Sunni support if it is seen as allied with Iran.
Bottom line: the US still lacks a coherent strategy against ISIS in Syria, which would require stronger support to the moderate opposition and the fight against Assad, a unified opposition military command and logistics, and more effort to undo Iranian and Russian support for the regime. Otherwise disaster looms.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Yazidi plight
On Tuesday, the Wilson Center hosted a discussion with Vian Dakhil, the only Yazidi member of the Iraqi parliament. Halah Esfandiari, Director of the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Middle East program, moderated.
Dakhil received international attention in August, when she delivered a speech highlighting the plight of the Yazidis at the hands of Da’ish in the Sinjar area of Nineveh Province. The high profile siege of thousands of refugees sheltering on Mount Sinjar was ultimately broken by Kurdish forces from Syria (YPG) and Turkey (PKK). However, less well reported has been the fate of the Yazidis in the months since.
Dakhil was quick to note that there are still Yazidi refugees on the mountain. She estimates that there are as many as 1,200 families (6,000-7,000 individuals) encamped there. Though Da’ish was driven back, its forces make the surrounding lands too dangerous for land-based evacuation. Throughout the fall, the Iraqi armed forces have worked to airlift families off the mountain. Though Dakhil was quick to praise these efforts as well intended, she notes they are still woefully inadequate: only four helicopters have been spared for the operation. On any given evacuation mission, only around 25 individuals can be flown out.
Though Dakhil made no mention of it during the discussion, she has had first-hand experience of the shortcomings of the airlift mission. In August, she was on board a rescue helicopter when it crashed after being overloaded with refugees.
Meanwhile, for those thousands of Yazidis still on the mountain, the situation is desperate. As winter closes in, temperatures will plummet and several inches of freezing rain will fall. While grateful to the international community for what aid and supplies it has provided, Dakhil does not believe enough has been done to relieve the refugees. She is particularly critical of the quality of tents provided by UNHCR. Last month, three children died when a tent caught fire. Tragedies such as this are not isolated incidents. More supplies, of better quality, are needed.
The plight of Yazidi women is also of the utmost importance. Dakhil estimates that upwards of 5,000 kidnapped women and girls are still held by Da’ish. Yazidi women are especially targeted for kidnap and sale, as the jihadists see Yazidis as kuffar (infidels) on account of their reverence for the angel Melek Taus (whose perceived similarities to the Islamic and Christian devil has contributed to centuries of persecution). Dakhil‘s trips around the world have in part been to raise awareness for these women.
Off the mountain and away from Da’ish, half a million Yazidis (a majority of the Yazidi population) are in refugee camps in and around Iraqi Kurdistan. More help is needed, desperately. In the camps, there is one bathroom for 18 families; one shower for 50 families. And Yazidi families are large. With winter closing in, and hundreds of thousands living in unsanitary conditions, the humanitarian crisis will worsen. Dakhil wishes to do all she can to avert such a crisis, and hopes that the international coalition will direct as much energy into helping the victims of Da’ish as they do when bombing it.
For the US, Dakhil‘s request for help is specific. Earlier this year she formally requested US assistance at the American Embassy in Baghdad, but she also wants the US to use its global influence – especially in the UN and the UN Security Council – to try to bring about more international commitment to providing humanitarian aid. She has seen first hand that the Iraqi and Kurdish governments, though sympathetic, are lacking resources and are at risk of being overwhelmed by the scale of the crisis.
Earlier this year, Da’ish attempted genocide of the Yazidis. Though they failed, the plight of this tiny people remains dire. Dakhil‘s work to protect and save her constituents, despite personal setbacks and injuries, shows her devotion as an MP at a time politicians around the world have been widely criticized.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks December 8-12
- The Crisis in Jerusalem | Monday, December 8th | 12:00 – 1:45 | Carnegie Endowment for Peace | Even before the Gaza war and its related demonstrations in Jerusalem and the West Bank in summer 2014, tensions were building in Jerusalem. These tensions were a result of the Israeli policies that are gradually transforming the territorial, demographic, and religious character of the city, as well as its connection to the West Bank. Violent attacks and counterattacks have escalated as access to the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount has changed, raising the profile of the religious aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict alongside its nationalist and territorial dimensions. The panel will discuss the roots and implications of the crisis in Jerusalem. Renowned Palestinian expert Khalil Toufakji will review the changing map of Jerusalem, including Israeli policies and the implications for Palestinian life in the city. Israeli national security expert Shlomo Brom will discuss Israeli policies surrounding Muslim, Christian, and Jewish holy sites in the city, as well as how Israeli/Palestinian issues will affect upcoming Knesset elections. Carnegie’s Michele Dunne will moderate.
- Reflections on Ukraine’s Crisis | Monday, December 8th | 1:45 – 2:45 | Atlantic Council | REGISTER TO ATTEND | An event featuring United States Ambassador to Ukraine Geoff Pyatt. Ambassador Pyatt, the eighth US ambassador to Ukraine, arrived in Kyiv on August 3, 2013. Three months after his arrival, the Ukrainian capital witnessed eruption of massive civil protests against Yanukovych government’s decision not to enact the Association Agreement with the European Union. A year and a half later, amidst Ukraine’s economic crisis, Russia’s violation of territorial integrity of Ukraine in the East and militarization of Crimea, the ambassador remains firm in supporting Ukrainian people’s pro-European and pro-democratic choice. Ambassador Pyatt will share his insights into the ongoing crisis in Ukraine and will delineate future prospects for US-Ukraine relations going forward.
- The Future of the Middle East: Regional Scenarios Beyond the Obama Years | Monday, December 8th | 12:30 – 2:00 | Hudson Institute | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The Middle East is undergoing profound transformations. As borders shift, alliances form and dissolve, and Iran pursues its nuclear program, policymakers must look beyond the final two years of the Obama administration.What happens if the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State fails, and IS continues to spread its tentacles across the Levant? How long will the Syrian civil war last? What if the Jordanian regime, a longtime U.S. and Israeli ally, is toppled? When will Israel again find itself at war against Hezbollah, Hamas, or directly with Iran? Hudson Institute will host a panel featuring Hudson Institute’s fellows Shmuel Bar, Michael Doran, Hillel Fradkin, and Lee Smith to explore U.S. policy in the Middle East with respect to regional strategy for the next two, five, ten, and twenty-five years.
- At the Center of the Storm: Turkey between Europe & the Middle East | Tuesday, December 9th | 6:00 – 7:30 | German Marshall Fund | A Conversation with Ambassador Marc Grossman, Vice Chairman of The Cohen Group, and former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. After eleven years under the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey finds itself at a major crossroads. With European Union membership negotiations ongoing and a bid for regional influence rejected by large swaths of the Middle East, Turkey is increasingly isolated. Its latest dispute with the United States over a proper response to the war in Syria has strained Turkey’s relations with NATO. In addition to regional concerns, the domestic situation in Turkey has also significantly deteriorated in the last year. What brought Turkish influence in Europe and the Middle East to its current low point? What is at stake for Turkey in the war in Syria and other parts of the Middle East? Where do we stand on potential Turkish membership in the European Union and what is the future of Turkish domestic politics?
- The U.S., Israel and the Regional Dimensions of an Iran Nuclear Deal | Wednesday, December 10th | 3:00 – 4:30 | New America Foundation | REGISTER TO ATTEND | Reaching an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program that ensures Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon has been a top priority on President Obama’s foreign policy agenda. Despite deep and regular consultations with the Israeli government on this ongoing diplomatic effort, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has consistently objected to any agreement that leaves any Iranian nuclear program in place. The panelists are Shlomo Brom, Suzanne DiMaggio, Matthew Duss, and Ilan Goldenberg and they will discuss regional security dimensions of a nuclear deal, the extent of U.S.-Israel cooperation on the Iran issue, Israel’s concerns with the current negotiations, and whether and how those concerns can be fully addressed in any comprehensive deal between Iran and the U.S. and its partners.
- Can We Ultimately Defeat ISIL? | Thursday, December 11th | 10:00 – 11:00 | Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars | REGISTER TO ATTEND | General Allen’s first public discussion of the threat posed by the Islamic State. General John Allen, recently appointed Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, was selected by President Obama to coordinate the international effort against the Islamic State militant group. Allen, who had been serving as a security adviser to Secretary of State John Kerry, and was the former top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is working with the nearly 60 nations around the world who have agreed to join the fight and respond to the ISIL threat. Moderated by Jane Harman, Director, President and CEO, of The Wilson Center.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Dealing with Sisi
Those of us who believed that Egypt in 2011 and 2012 underwent an irreversible change were wrong. President Sisi has succeeded in restoring the military autocracy–albeit clothed in a business suit–and marginalizing once again the Muslim Brotherhood. The media are cowed, demonstrations are brutally repressed, civil society is walking the straight and narrow, courts have condemned hundreds to death after cursory show trials, Mubarak and his sons are acquitted, and counter-terrorism decrees are used to inhibit political dissent. Most Egyptians, tired of disorder and insecurity, have abandoned the streets and returned to earning their meager livelihoods.
The one area of substantial reform is the economy. Sisi has cut food and fuel subsidies and raised taxes. This has gotten him a good report card from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), presumably laying the basis for an eventual multi-billioin dollar loan if need be. In the meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are picking up the tab, to the tune of tens of billions. Sisi has also initiated a major enlargement of the Suez Canal, said to be financed domestically, that is supposed to be completed in a year and more than double Canal revenue. Egyptians, not surprisingly, are enthusiastic about big public works projects.
Egyptian politics are another story. Sisi has postponed parliamentary elections to late March 2015. In the meanwhile he rules by decree. The parliamentary electoral law, drafted after the coup of July 2013 but before Sisi took over the presidency, provides for the overwhelming majority (80%) of parliamentary seats to be awarded to individual candidates rather than party lists. This is similar to the system in use during the Mubarak dictatorship. It is expected to limit party-based opposition and ensure election of relatively well-known and well-off government supporters and patronage bosses.
Two important things remain in limbo:
- about half of US military assistance;
- most of those arrested, both liberals and Islamists since the coup.
The two things are related. The still-suspended US military assistance for FY2014 is conditional on “taking steps to govern democratically.” There is no presidential waiver provided from this requirement, but there are exemptions for existing contracts, specific security purposes (counterterrorism, border security, nonproliferation, and Sinai development programs) and items that do not require delivery in Egypt (that’s to make sure the US contractors get paid for things they produce but can’t deliver).
Some will claim that parliamentary elections, on top of the constitutional referendum and presidential election already held, should be sufficient to meet the democracy standard. Others, including me, think a much broader focus is necessary. The managers of the legislation suggested this:
steps taken by the newly elected Government to protect human rights and the rule of law, including the rights of women and religious minorities.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks November 24-28
- The Future of the Kurds in the Middle East | Monday November 24th | 12:00 – 2:00 | Rethink Institute | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The threat of ISIS and the Kobane crisis have led to interesting developments in the region. Turkish government declared that it gives Peshmerga forces a passage to Kobane as a response to Washington’s approval of arms transfers to PYD. For the first time, White House publicly stated that PYD is different from PKK, and thus, not considered as a terrorist group by the United States. Recently, PYD and Syrian Kurdish parties reached a settlement in Dohuk in the presence of KRG President Massoud Barzani, reminiscent of the Erbil agreement two years ago. Will the United States support an autonomous Kurdish region in Syria? Is Dohuk agreement going to be effective under the pressure of ISIS threat? What is the stance of Turkish government toward PYD’s future? The speakers are Michael Gunter, a professor of political science at Tennessee Technological University and has authored 11 books on Kurds in the Middle East, Vera Eccarius-Kelly, a professor of Comparative Politics and Associate Dean at Siena College and is the author of The Militant Kurds: A Dual Strategy for Freedom, and Sezin Oney, a columnist for Taraf daily in Turkey. The moderator is Mustafa Gurbuz, a fellow at Rethink Institute and a policy fellow at Center for Global Policy at George Mason University.
- Jihadist Movements in Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq: Inevitable Rise or Policy Failure? | Monday November 24th | 3:30 – 5:00 | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The growth of jihadist movements in the Middle East has fueled regional instability and captured global attention. Adam Baczko, Gilles Dorronsoro, and Arthur Quesnay will address their emergence in Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq. Based on extensive fieldwork, they will assess the failure of U.S. policy to anticipate current developments and suggest new orientations. They will analyze the similarities and differences between the Taliban and the Islamic State regarding military strategy, governance, and engagement with Western countries, as well as compare the respective levels of sectarian violence in Iraq and Syria with Afghanistan. Frederic Wehrey will serve as a discussant, and Frederic Grare will moderate.
- Iran-P5+1 Nuclear Negotiations: the Road Ahead | Tuesday November 25th | 10:30 – 12:00 | Brookings Institution | REGISTER TO ATTEND | A year of negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 partners based on the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA), adopted in Geneva in November 2013, has produced significant progress, but a comprehensive deal has so far proved elusive. With important differences reportedly remaining but with the parties actively engaged in the run-up to the JPOA’s current deadline of November 24, the outcome of the current phase of negotiations is uncertain—although the parties may well be headed for another extension. Brookings will host a panel discussion to evaluate where the negotiations stand, to consider prospects for the period ahead and to discuss how the U.S. Congress, key Iranian audiences and other interested parties may react in the current situation. The speakers are Gary Samore, Executive Director of Research at The Belfer Center, Harvard University, David Albright, Founder and President of the Institute for Science and International Security and Edward Levine, National Advisory Board Member at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. The moderator is Robert Einhorn, Senior Fellow at Brookings.
- Corruption, Constitutionalism & Control: Implications of the 4th Plenum for China and U.S.-China Relations | Tuesday November 25th | 3:00 – 4:30 | Woodrow Wilson Center | REGISTER TO ATTEND | The recently concluded 4th Plenum of China’s 18th Communist Party Congress focused on “governing the nation in accordance with law.” Reforms described in plenum documents seek to strengthen the institutional bases for economic and social reforms laid out at the 2013 plenum, and to build trust in the Communist Party’s ability to behave righteously and govern justly. Standards of righteousness and justice, however, like the meaning of “in accordance with law” and the status of the constitution, remain vague. The pace and direction of legal reform and the scope and methods of anti-corruption efforts, moreover, remain the sole province of the CCP, within which General Secretary Xi Jinping now exercises a singular influence. How will China’s attempts to rectify the Party and strengthen the legal foundations of its governance shape the nation during Xi’s tenure, and how should American leaders, corporations, and other institutions analyze and respond to Xi’s reform program? The speakers are Donald C. Clarke, Research Professor of Law at The George Washington University Law School and Andrew Wedeman, Professor in the Department of Political Science at Georgia State University.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Punt and rethink
Having failed to reach an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program by today’s deadline, the P5+1 (US, UK, France, Russia, China and Germany) and Tehran have decided to punt. The new deadlines are March 1 for a framework political agreement and July 1 for the definitive agreement. Iran continues to get access to $700 million per month with the current Joint Plan of Action (JPA) extended. That’s a lot of money, but nowhere near enough to compensate for Iran’s loss of oil revenue due to the recent sharp fall in prices.
The interesting question is how this punt will be received politically in the US and in Iran.
With the Republicans taking over control of the Senate, there is a real possibility of new sanctions being passed, whether the Administration wants them or not. My guess is that something along those lines will happen, possibly new sanctions to be triggered if the March 1 deadline is missed. These would likely focus on the Iranian financial system, making transactions with the rest of the world far more difficult than they are today.
In Iran, the JPA restrains the overt nuclear program from dashing towards accumulating the material necessary to build a nuclear weapon, but Tehran has still not clarified the possible military dimensions of some of its past nuclear activity. With the Majlis likely to amplify its belligerence, there will be internal pressures there to accelerate any clandestine activities and to ensure maximum development of enrichment capacity consistent with the JPA. The punt gives Iran time to try to move the goal posts before the game starts again.
Meanwhile, the war against ISIS in Iraq has Iran and the US fighting on the same side, to support the Shia-led government in Baghdad, while it puts them at least nominally at odds in Syria, where Tehran supports Bashar al Asad’s minority Alawite regime while the US supposedly supports the Syrian opposition. But President Obama is doing nothing militarily to harm Assad’s forces and has said that he is not trying now to remove Assad, presumably in order to avoid disrupting the nuclear talks with Iran.
It is high time for Washington to reconsider its position in Syria. Would the nuclear talks go worse if Bashar al Assad were under more immediate threat, or would they go better? If Washington were to accept the Turkish proposal to create a protected area within Syria in which the opposition could govern, would the nuclear talks go worse or better? The answers to these questions are unclear, but it is arguable that a more robust American position in Syria opposing Assad and supporting the opposition would give Tehran something to worry about and increase American leverage on the nuclear issue, not decrease it.
Washington needs also to reconsider whether it is wise to give absolute priority to the nuclear talks in their current configuration. If the JPA is the best the P5+1 are going to get, it might make sense to accept the limited time it puts between Iran and a nuclear weapon (less than six months?) and refocus on possible military dimensions. There really is little precedent for a country using facilities safeguarded by the International Atomic Energy Agency to gain nuclear weapons. Clandestine facilities are the far greater threat.
With the resignation of Secretary of Defense Hagel, President Obama has an opportunity to use the appointment of his replacement as a way of signaling what he plans to do on Iran, the nuclear talks and Syria. Some rethinking is in order. Let’s hope it gets done.
RSS - Posts
