After more than 10 years of the War on Terror, the US and its allies have not yet wiped out terrorism, even they have made it more powerful. As a result, the White House had to release a strategy against the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” (IS). Which paved the way for the US to return to the volatile Middle East; and obviously, had significant impacts on regional and global security.

Kobani town after IS large-scale attacks (source: internet)

After more than 3 months of attacking and occupying large swaths in Iraq and Syria, the IS has shocked the world by its strength and brutality. Under domestic, regional, and global pressure, the US President Barack Obama, on September 10, 2014 declared a comprehensive strategy to combat IS. That was the second time a statement on such an ambitious counter-terrorism strategy has been delivered by a US president. The first time was the global war on terror launched by former President G.W. Bush after 9/11 attacks.

Basic contents of the comprehensive strategy against IS

To eliminate IS - a powerful and well-organized self-proclaimed state, President Obama, in his strategy, mapped out comprehensive measures in various areas, with a focus on objectives, contents, and methods of operations. The Strategy’s objective is to hunt down terrorists that threaten the U.S. wherever they are.

Regarding contents and methods, the U.S. would be joined by a broad international coalition to counter terrorism with a comprehensive and continuous strategy. First, the U.S. would hunt down and destroy IS forces in Iraq and Syria. In Iraq, apart from air strikes on IS, the US would send a large number of servicemembers to help Iraq security force evaluate the situation, train and carry out operations so as to stop and defeat IS. In Syria, the US would not lean on Syrian government to fight against the IS, because Obama administration considered that Bashar al-Assad’s regime is no longer legitimate due to its acts of terror against its own people. In coordination with it allies, the US would launch airstrikes on IS targets to weaken and defeat this organization, helping ‘moderate opposition forces’ gain advantages in the front lines so as to both put pressure on the Syrian Government and counterbalance IS. The US would also speed up other necessary measures to completely resolve the crisis in Syria. In addition, along Syria’s border, the US would bolster military support for the opposition forces with activities as: training, providing weapons, and coordinating with partners to cut the flow of money to IS. At the same time, it would enhance intelligence activity, consolidate forces, and stop foreign militants from joining IS or prevent IS militants from leaving the Middle East. President Obama committed not to deploying ground forces for any operations in Iraq and Syria, and pledged to provide humanitarian aids to people who were forced to leave their home due to IS attacks.

To implement the strategy, in NATO Summit on September 5^th, 2014, the US urged for a coalition against IS, then assembled a “coalition of stalwarts” consisting of 10 countries. On September 15^th, 2014, the first International Anti-IS Conference held in Paris, with the participation of foreign ministers from 20 countries, agreed on an America-led International Coalition to counter IS. To this end, different countries would perform different roles, i.e. providing air planes and ammunition to launch airstrikes against IS, sharing intelligence. Countries from the Arab League also offered to work with the International Coalition to fight IS, particularly in cooperation to set up flight corridor and cut the flow of money and arms to IS. Notably, on September 23th, the US officially launched an air campaign against IS in Syria using Tawmahawk and guided missiles from its destroyers and cruisers in Persian Gulf. It is worth noting that the Arabic countries, namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Benin, and Jordan engaged in the campaign and caused severe damage to IS.

According to international experts, the US strategy to counter IS is highly ambitious. The quick establishment of a large international coalition led by the US to fight IS illustrated the serious threat of IS and the fact that it is a menace to regional and global peace and security. It also posed the posibility of being entirely destroyed to this radical Islamic organization. However, the ongoing combats prove that the Strategy has faced dozens of challenges. There is a deep concern in the international community when the US allows itself to hunt down IS jihadists all over the world. Moreover, IS has been in the Middle East for many years, so it is proficient at the topography and countermeasures, and the US would hardly destroy it with only airstrikes. What is more, the anti-IS Strategy was designed in passive condition; American politicians admitted that the US intelligence agencies did not grasp IS real strength. Meanwhile, the International Coalition against IS, which consists of various participant countries, does not include Iran and Syria whose geopolitical positions are important to IS.

Addressing the press after a meeting with the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the UN special envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura on September 11^th, 2014 said that President Obama’s anti-IS Strategy is not enough to defeat IS forces in Syria, and that the US should have a more comprehensive strategy. Accordingly, to effectively counter IS, in parallel with security measures, it requires a comprehensive and effective political process in order to soon end the Syrian civil war, isolate IS and help Syrian people avoid terrorist threats. To summarize, the statement on an all-round Strategy against IS by President Barack Obama marked the US challenging return to a volatile region.

Anti-IS Strategy’s impacts on regional and global security

Today, IS has surpassed al-Qaeda to be the most dangerous and powerful terrorist organization in the world. Therefore, on September 24^th, 2014, the UN Security Council unanimously passed the Resolution 2178 on countering terrorism in general, including of the fight against IS. However, the method to implement the US Strategy against IS causes negative impacts on global security, manifested as follows:

First, the announcement of the US comprehensive Strategy against IS has set a dangerous precedent that threatens the role of the UN Security Council. On September 10^th, 2014, the Strategy was publicized by President Barack Obama, but it was not until 2 weeks later, on September 24^th, 2014 did the US ask the UN Security Council to approve the Resolution 2178 on countering terrorism. To start a global war on terror, in the UN Charter, it ought to be the UN Security Council who is the first to adopt a resolution, then basing on the resolution, countries have suitable actions. However, the US President followed a reverse procedure. For the UN Security Council, his statement on the Strategy against IS was seen as “shoot first and ask question later”.

Sencond, the US Strategy against IS seriously violated the UN Charter on respect for territorial integrity of member states. Using the trick of fighting IS, disregarding Syria’s permission, the U.S. and its allies carried out airstrikes on IS targets in Syria, which is considered the violation of Syria’s national independence and sovereignty. This violation sets a dangerous precedent in international relations. Accordingly, “countering terrorism” could be used as a pretext for the US interference in any sovereign nation. Many countries, with Russia and Iran first, declared that combating IS is a necessity, but fighting in Syria’s territory without the country’s permission is an “act of invasion”.

Third, the exclusion of the President Bashar al-Assad and Iran from the International Coalition against IS has led to disunity within the international community; the former has been spearheading the war against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levante (ISIL)- the old name of IS over the past three years; the latter has backed Syria in that war. Russia were also left outside the coalition, though over the past years it has warned the world of IS terrorist threat and been the vanguard in the war on terror; however it is regarded as a “threat to global security” by the US. Hence, even in America, there are opinions that Syria, Iran, and Russia play indispensable role in the war against IS in Iraq and Syria.

Colonel Le The Mau