1.The coordinated terrorist strikes Friday in
Paris belong to a specific kind of terror, part of a global Islamic jihadi
movement (however atomized and decentralized that network may be). They were
not merely heinous acts by extremists, as President Barack Obama and Secretary
of State John Kerry have said. In the wake of the jihadi attack on the Charlie
Hebdo offices in Paris, the White House convened a summit on countering violent
extremism. Let’s be clear: The West is being confronted by an international
movement led by radical Islamists, drawing on Muslim texts and perversions of
Islamic doctrines and practices, and seeking to inspire and recruit others in
the Middle East, Europe, and elsewhere to inflict grievous harm not just on
those of other faiths but also on Muslims they consider apostates. In the case
of Islamic State, the perpetrators and the majority of their victims are Muslim
2. President Obama’s point that ISIS has
been contained in Syria and Iraq still rings true (even if it looks terribly
untimely in the wake of the murderous assault on Paris). But containment in
Syria and Iraq–that is, checking the expansion of its Caliphate and reversing
some gains, as this week’s U.S.-backed Kurdish offensive in Sinjar
demonstrates–misses the point. ISIS has the capacity to cross borders; inspire
individuals and affiliates; and dispatch operatives into Ankara, Beirut, and
elsewhere to carry out suicide attacks.
As ISIS loses ground in Syria and Iraq, the
need to demonstrate its reach and range may take on greater importance. Perhaps
more terrifying is the prospect of independent action by ISIS affiliates,
returning foreign fighters, or unhappy and alienated Muslims, some of whom may
have grown up in countries such as France or Belgium, as was the case with
Charlie Hebdo attackers. An Egyptian group loyal to ISIS claimed credit for
downing a Russian airliner last month. In short: There is an ample pool of
terrorists for further attacks.
3. The global character of this threat
requires a more effective and coordinated response—involving more cooperation
in sharing intelligence, counterterrorism efforts, and border controls to
prevent foreign fighters from traveling to the ISIS Caliphate and tracking
those that return. Jihadi destruction in recent weeks includes suicide attacks
in Turkey, Friday’s coordinated attacks in Paris, and probably the bombing of a
Russian jet over Egypt. Now, consider: Turkey’s agenda in Syria seems to be
more focused on hitting Kurds than stopping ISIS. Egypt still hasn’t formally
conceded that the downing of that Russian jet was an act of terror and, worried
about the potential impact on tourism, has been hesitant until recent days to
share information about the Oct. 31 crash and ask for technical help. At a
meeting of international diplomats in Vienna this weekend to discuss Syria’s
civil war, Mr. Kerry announced Saturday that members of the Syrian opposition
would convene in January to discuss a political transition. Already more than
four years into Syria’s conflict, that process is likely to remain bogged down
over differences between Russia and Iran on one side and the U.S. and Saudi
Arabia on the other over Bashar al-Assad and which Syrian groups are terrorists
(and which are not).
4. Jihadi terror is the product of an
angry, broken, dysfunctional Middle East where large ungoverned spaces in
Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya; and widespread bad governance, or no governance
at all, combine with a growing sectarian divide between Sunni and Shiites to
feed extremism and violence. By killing
Syrian Sunnis, Mr. Assad creates recruits for ISIS faster than the U.S. and its
allies can train Syrians to oppose the regime. Other Arab states, such as Saudi
Arabia, have been exporting and supporting extremist and fundamentalist Islamic
ideology for years; they continue to do it by backing some extremist groups
opposed to the Assad regime.
5. A massive and perhaps coordinated U.S.,
French, European, and Russian military response against ISIS in Syria is both
necessary and inevitable. Maybe the Paris attacks will create the urgency
required to deal with ISIS and global. The Obama administration may ramp up
airstrikes, supply local forces with better weapons, and deploy more special forces.
If ISIS succeeds in striking the U.S. there will certainly be calls for
Washington to do much more. But we should be under no illusions. The fight
against ISIS and global jihad is the long war. It may well be the greatest
foreign policy challenge of this generation. Whether the spate of recent jihadi
attacks, including those in Paris, prove to be a transformational moment or
just another horrific twist in this long war remains to be seen.
No comments:
Post a Comment