A Policy to Defeat Both ISIS and Iran

[mendelssohn]

A Policy to Defeat Both ISIS and Iran [Politico - Samuel Berger, Stephen Hadley, James Jeffrey, Dennis Ross and Robert Satloff]

There are two main external threats to the Middle East state system. The Islamic State has declared a caliphate designed to replace existing states. The Islamic Republic of Iran uses its militia proxies to undermine states and deny them authority throughout their territory, a process that has already given Tehran leverage over four Arab capitals - Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa.

On ISIS, U.S. strategy ultimately depends on building a broad coalition of partners in support of Arab-based efforts to defeat it. Iran will surely fight to prevent ISIS' domination in Syria and Iraq, an arena in which our objectives converge. But the Iranian strategic view of the region is fundamentally at odds with ours.

We need to judge Iran on how it acts. The most powerful elements in Iran today still see the U.S. as their enemy because they see America as the main impediment to their domination of the region.

Ultimately, if the U.S. hopes to mobilize Sunni Arab populations of Iraq and Syria in opposition to ISIS - an essential element to marginalizing it - Iran cannot be seen as a presumed ally.

A comprehensive nuclear agreement with Iran could make sense if it allows Iran a peaceful nuclear energy program but denies it the capability of becoming a nuclear weapons state. Every conflict that Iran touches today would be much more difficult and more dangerous in the future should Iran acquire a nuclear weapons capability.

 

[joG]

A Policy to Defeat Both ISIS and Iran [Politico - Samuel Berger, Stephen Hadley, James Jeffrey, Dennis Ross and Robert Satloff]

Nice article.

 

[MMC]

With vanishing borders, a tangled web of transitory alliances and transnational groups — both Sunni and Shiite — operating outside the constraints of state power, the Middle East state system is under relentless pressure. A strategy to preserve it requires a long-term vision for shoring up U.S. allies, rolling back ISIL and countering the Iranians. The United States will not define the future for the region, but it has a distinct national interest in preventing the collapse of its state system.....snip~

Read more: A Policy to Defeat Both ISIL and Iran - Samuel Berger and Stephen Hadley and James Jeffrey and Dennis Ross and Robert Satloff - POLITICO Magazine

The enemy is the Global Jihad Movement. And it is inspired, guided, and enabled by the Islamic supremacist doctrine its adherents call shariah.

For much of this period, the U.S. government has pursued various approaches to the threats posed by that enemy – including selective military engagements, benign neglect, willful blindness, and outright appeasement. They have all shared one common denominator: They ignore the aforementioned realities and, as a practical matter, have exacerbated them.

Yet, no one has advanced a more reality-based, more practical and more effective way to counter, let alone defeat, this ideologically driven enemy.....Until now.


Center for Security Policy | It’s Time For The ‘Secure Freedom’ Strategy

 

[MMC]

A Policy to Defeat Both ISIS and Iran [Politico - Samuel Berger, Stephen Hadley, James Jeffrey, Dennis Ross and Robert Satloff]

Ultimately, if the U.S. hopes to mobilize Sunni Arab populations of Iraq and Syria in opposition to ISIS - an essential element to marginalizing it - Iran cannot be seen as a presumed ally

.



Mornin MS. :2wave: I would say they need to do some more thinking. Here is something the Sunni said last year.

Oh, and btw.....its a bit late.




Iraq's Sunnis won't fight ISIS for the U.S. says NIQASH, a non-profit media organization operating out of Berlin. Without Sunni support, America's war in Iraq cannot succeed. Here's why.

According to NIQASH, a source at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad said there have been secret negotiations between various Sunni Muslim armed factions, via Arab and Iraqi Kurdish intermediaries, for the past three months. At the request of U.S. diplomats and military personnel, Shia officials from the Iraqi government have also been meeting with the leaders of these groups in Erbil, Kurdistan and Amman, Jordan.

The Sunnis seem to be choosing a middle ground, one which does not serve America's interests. According to a 1920s Revolution Brigades (Sunni militia) leader, various militias came to the decision "not to support the international coalition against ISIS. They also decided not to cooperate with ISIS either. If the [Iraqi] army or the [Shia] militias attack [Sunni] areas they control though, they will fight both groups."....snip~

Iraq's Sunnis Won't Fight ISIS for U.S. | Peter Van Buren

 

[mendelssohn]

.



Mornin MS. :2wave: I would say they need to do some more thinking. Here is something the Sunni said last year.

Oh, and btw.....its a bit late.




Iraq's Sunnis won't fight ISIS for the U.S. says NIQASH, a non-profit media organization operating out of Berlin. Without Sunni support, America's war in Iraq cannot succeed. Here's why.

According to NIQASH, a source at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad said there have been secret negotiations between various Sunni Muslim armed factions, via Arab and Iraqi Kurdish intermediaries, for the past three months. At the request of U.S. diplomats and military personnel, Shia officials from the Iraqi government have also been meeting with the leaders of these groups in Erbil, Kurdistan and Amman, Jordan.

The Sunnis seem to be choosing a middle ground, one which does not serve America's interests. According to a 1920s Revolution Brigades (Sunni militia) leader, various militias came to the decision "not to support the international coalition against ISIS. They also decided not to cooperate with ISIS either. If the [Iraqi] army or the [Shia] militias attack [Sunni] areas they control though, they will fight both groups."....snip~

Iraq's Sunnis Won't Fight ISIS for U.S.*|*Peter Van Buren

Greetings MMC!

I hear what you're saying and I do agree on many points. My guess is that the authors are trying to put forward something workable in the current conditions and political environment. What you're saying may contain a lot of truth, but the political leaders of today are nowhere near such a strategy. Meanwhile, something needs to be done, and what they presented may well be the most practicle solution at hand.

 

[MMC]

Greetings MMC!

I hear what you're saying and I do agree on many points. My guess is that the authors are trying to put forward something workable in the current conditions and political environment. What you're saying may contain a lot of truth, but the political leaders of today are nowhere near such a strategy. Meanwhile, something needs to be done, and what they presented may well be the most practicle solution at hand.

Well there is no doubt it is everyones problem. Their violence does need to be checked. The Ground needs to be taken away from them. Syria being the problem that it is. Still Assad appears to be following thru with what Iran has suggested due to our Involvement. That is what now needs to be considered.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/224759-syria-regime-accept-facto-partition-country.html