By Joe Carbonari
We have a strong national interest in helping settle things down in Iraq. A full-blown civil war is not to our advantage. The Jihadist momentum developing, with Syria and now much of Iraq as its manifestational core, is a serious threat to U.S. and world security, both physical and economic.
There is a line of thought existent in the Muslim world that leads many of their dissatisfied and intellectually vulnerable to the call for beating back modernity and returning to an earlier, more rigid form of Islam – one better suited to the technologies and lifestyles of years, perhaps centuries, gone by. When pursued with the aid of modern weapons, it is unacceptable.
The militant group called the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, was formed at least in part by the remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq and has been fighting in Syria with the intention of forming a religiously centered Islamic state stretching over much of both Syria and Iraq. Militarily they are allied with, and provide the spear point for a coalition of ex-Baathists and disenfranchised Sunnis who have more local, secular concerns.
We must stop the Jihadists without unduly alienating the more secular Sunnis. Perhaps a loose federation of Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish states better suits the peoples of Iraq overall. We need to help facilitate that.
By Tim Baldwin
President Barack Obama has called for Iraqis to form a more inclusive government because “the insurgency has been fueled largely by a sense of marginalization and persecution among Iraq’s Sunnis.” Secretary of State John Kerry agreed with Obama stating that if Iraq does create a more inclusive government, the United States’ “support will be intense and sustained.”
Khamenei, leader of Iran, has opposed U.S. involvement, stating, “We don’t approve of it as we believe the Iraqi government, nation and religious authorities are capable of ending the sedition.” Yet, Dick Cheney states that “we’re in for big trouble … because of [Obama’s] refusal to recognize reality and because of his continual emphasis upon getting the US basically to withdraw from that part of the world.”
Sen. Rand Paul stated that he doesn’t blame Obama for the current turmoil in Iraq, pointing the finger partly at those who originally supported the war. A Yahoo! report shows the logic of Paul’s statement, showing that “the need to battle the Sunni insurgency has put the United States on the same side as its enemy of 35 years, Iran, which has close ties to the Shi’ite parties that came to power in Baghdad after U.S. forces toppled Saddam.”
Rand Paul and President Obama seem to agree on this: America does not need to intermeddle needlessly here. As Paul says, “maybe there is no solution.” Why get more Americans killed in the process?