What To Do About ISIS

TL;DR

Experts debate U.S. strategies for dealing with ISIS and regional dynamics.

Transcript

MODERATOR: Today's meeting is one is a series of meetings called the "What to Do About," in this case�in today's case ISIS. This meeting is designed to be a little different from our usual Council on Foreign Relations meetings, in that we are loosely simulating a National Security Council meeting. As the national security advisor, I will try and in... Read More

Key Insights

• The current U.S. policy on ISIS emphasizes military airstrikes and supporting Iraqi forces, but lacks a comprehensive strategy for Syria.
• The air campaign against ISIS is necessary but insufficient; ground operations are crucial for long-term success.
• Iran's influence in Iraq raises concerns about U.S. policy inadvertently strengthening Iranian control.
• A comprehensive Middle East strategy should counter both Iranian influence and Sunni extremism.
• The U.S. should consider a strategy for empowering Sunni forces to oppose ISIS, rather than solely relying on Shiite militias.
• The situation in Syria is complex, with Assad's regime and ISIS both posing challenges to U.S. interests.
• A long-term solution requires addressing political dynamics in Iraq and Syria, including Sunni-Shiite relations.
• Diplomatic efforts should be enhanced alongside military strategies to address regional stability and U.S. interests.

Questions & Answers

Q: What is the current U.S. policy on ISIS?

The U.S. policy on ISIS primarily focuses on military airstrikes to support Iraqi forces and the Kurdish Peshmerga. However, it lacks a comprehensive strategy for Syria, where the policy is to arm moderate rebels to force a stalemate and eventually peace talks. The panelists discussed the need for a broader strategy that addresses both military and political dimensions.

Q: Is the air campaign against ISIS effective?

The air campaign against ISIS is considered necessary but not sufficient. While it has contained ISIS's territorial expansion, it cannot achieve long-term success without ground operations. The panelists emphasized that airstrikes are a short-term solution and that ground forces are needed to reclaim cities and provide security.

Q: How does Iran's influence impact U.S. strategy in Iraq?

Iran's influence in Iraq is a significant concern, as it may undermine U.S. efforts to stabilize the region. The panelists argued that U.S. actions could inadvertently strengthen Iranian control, especially if Shiite militias, backed by Iran, are seen as the primary forces fighting ISIS. A comprehensive strategy should counter both Iranian influence and Sunni extremism.

Q: What are the U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East?

The U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East include protecting the homeland and citizens, safeguarding allies, ensuring regional stability, and maintaining global access to energy sources. The panelists emphasized that a comprehensive strategy should address these interests while countering both Iranian influence and Sunni extremism.

Q: Is Assad's removal necessary for defeating ISIS?

The panelists were divided on this issue. Some argued that Assad's removal is necessary because his regime's actions drive Sunnis to support ISIS. Others cautioned against toppling Assad without a clear plan for post-regime stability, as this could create a power vacuum and further chaos.

Q: What role should the U.S. play in arming Syrian rebels?

The panelists agreed that arming Syrian rebels is a long-term goal, but emphasized the challenges in finding and supporting moderate opposition. Some suggested creating safe havens and no-fly zones to protect rebels and civilians, while others highlighted the need for a broader diplomatic strategy.

Q: How should the U.S. address the humanitarian crisis in Syria?

The panelists stressed the importance of increasing humanitarian aid for refugees in neighboring countries like Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey. They argued that addressing the humanitarian crisis is crucial for regional stability and should be a key component of U.S. strategy.

Q: What impact would a nuclear deal with Iran have on regional dynamics?

The panelists had differing views on this issue. Some argued that a nuclear deal could embolden Iran and legitimize its regional influence, while others believed that a deal could create space for diplomatic solutions and reduce the risk of military escalation. The overall impact would depend on the terms of the deal and its implementation.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The discussion highlighted the complexity of U.S. strategies in dealing with ISIS and broader Middle East dynamics. Panelists emphasized that while airstrikes are necessary, they are not sufficient to defeat ISIS. Ground operations and political solutions are crucial.

• Iran's influence in Iraq is a significant concern, with some panelists arguing that U.S. actions may inadvertently strengthen Iranian control. A comprehensive strategy should counter both Iranian influence and Sunni extremism.

• The situation in Syria remains challenging, with Assad's regime and ISIS both posing threats. A long-term solution requires addressing political dynamics, including Sunni-Shiite relations, and enhancing diplomatic efforts alongside military strategies.