Obama Rethinks Strategy on ISIS

Daily News Article   —   Posted on May 27, 2015

(by Carol E. Lee, The Wall Street Journal) WASHINGTON–President Barack Obama’s strategy against Islamic State is under increasing scrutiny after setbacks this week in Iraq and Syria, and the White House acknowledges the problem will be inherited by his successor.

The administration scaled back its near-term ambitions by dropping plans for an offensive to retake the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, and agreed to expand and speed shipments of military equipment to Iraqi security forces and step up training for fighters from Sunni tribes.

Administration officials now suggest the fight against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria could last longer than three years, a pessimistic projection which would push the conflict well into the first term of the next president.

“Two years from now, the situation on the ground may have changed and it may require some change in the way that strategy is carried out,” said Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary. “But that’s something that we’ll leave to the next president.”

The terrorists captured the key Iraqi city of Ramadi this week while also expanding their reach in Syria. Iraqi security forces showed continued weaknesses despite months of U.S. military training and assistance.

Islamic State also claimed responsibility on Friday for a suicide bombing of a Shiite mosque in eastern Saudi Arabia. The attack, killing 21, was the first one claimed by the group on Saudi soil….

In Iraq, momentum still appeared to be solidly with the Sunni radical group by the end of the week. It marked gains east of Ramadi – the capital of Anbar province – after federal police withdrew from two districts, according to local leaders. In western Anbar province, where Iraq abuts Syria, [terrorist fighters] seized the last border crossing not under their control. The Syrian border is a gateway for Islamic State fighters and supplies into Iraq.

President Obama’s response was to adjust his strategy, rather than make the sweeping changes his critics demanded. The White House also shifted its emphasis in its description of the fight, casting it as a long and difficult battle, shelving the optimism voiced in recent weeks.

But the debate over how to steer a new and expanding conflict in the Middle East is to figure prominently Mr. Obama’s remaining 18 months in office and the 2016 presidential campaigns. It is also reigniting old differences over Iraq war. …

Many of President Obama’s critics, including some who are campaigning to succeed him, are pushing for a more robust U.S. troop involvement.

Administration officials, however, argue the only long-term solution is for Iraqis and Syrians to fight their own fights, while conceding Mr. Obama’s refusal to deploy American combat troops means this will be a longer campaign.

“When we put this together, it was a three-year campaign to degrade the organization,” Brett McGurk, the State Department’s deputy special envoy to the coalition fighting Islamic State, told NPR. “That was based upon recognizing how strong it was and also recognizing, as the president said, we don’t want to put American troops in combat again in Iraq.”

U.S. officials previously have spoken of a three-year commitment in Islamic State fight since it began in August, but more in terms of a limit on U.S. involvement.

Mr. Obama, in submitting an authorization for the use of military force against Islamic State last February, presented a resolution that “will give our armed forces and our coalition the continuity we need for the next three years.”

Now, officials are describing the time frame more as a sign of the fight’s difficulty.

“This is going to be a long fight. This is going to be at least three years, [as] we’ve said from the very beginning,” said Col. Steve Warren, the Pentagon spokesman.

The White House has cast critics of the president’s strategy as advocates of another U.S. invasion of Iraq although no lawmaker or presidential candidate has suggested that option.

…[Some] lawmakers have argued the fight, given its scope and duration, simply requires Mr. Obama to outline a more detailed strategy that has buy-in from Congress and the public.   …..

–Nour Malas in Baghdad and Gordon Lubold and Rebecca Ballhaus in Washington contributed to this article.

Copyright 2015 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reprinted here for educational purposes only. May not be reproduced on other websites without permission from The Wall Street Journal. Visit the website at wsj .com.