This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/12/obama-contemplate-military-action-iraq-crisis

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Obama contemplates military action as US tensions rise over Iraq crisis Obama contemplates military action as US tensions rise over Iraq crisis
(1 day later)
The dilemma the Obama administration faces as Iraq appears to be on the brink of collapse is this: its only achievement there, getting the US out, is now threatened by the military action it is contemplating against the marauding jihadist army advancing toward Baghdad.The dilemma the Obama administration faces as Iraq appears to be on the brink of collapse is this: its only achievement there, getting the US out, is now threatened by the military action it is contemplating against the marauding jihadist army advancing toward Baghdad.
President Obama did not announce a new US military commitment to Iraq on Thursday, befitting the tension within an administration proud of what it used to call a "responsible end" to the war, but he signaled one is forthcoming.President Obama did not announce a new US military commitment to Iraq on Thursday, befitting the tension within an administration proud of what it used to call a "responsible end" to the war, but he signaled one is forthcoming.
Ground troops are not under consideration. Air strikes are. “There will be some short-term, immediate things that need to be done militarily," Obama said.Ground troops are not under consideration. Air strikes are. “There will be some short-term, immediate things that need to be done militarily," Obama said.
If the White House does come to Iraq's aid, it will do so kicking and screaming. Its initial response, right before the Iraqi army evaporated, was to urge the government there to "step up". But the credible fear of a jihadist assault recasting the borders of both Iraq and Syria is tearing up a longstanding post-withdrawal US strategy of keeping Iraq at an arm's length. At this point, US military options under consideration are unlikely to be decisive.If the White House does come to Iraq's aid, it will do so kicking and screaming. Its initial response, right before the Iraqi army evaporated, was to urge the government there to "step up". But the credible fear of a jihadist assault recasting the borders of both Iraq and Syria is tearing up a longstanding post-withdrawal US strategy of keeping Iraq at an arm's length. At this point, US military options under consideration are unlikely to be decisive.
In truth, the path Obama took to ending America's exhausting Iraqi misadventure was less decisive than its endpoint suggested. The Obama administration attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate a residual force of American soldiers and airmen, something the Iraqis rejected, possibly to their current regret. Thousands of security contractors and a few hundred troops at the US embassy are the last remnant of the war.In truth, the path Obama took to ending America's exhausting Iraqi misadventure was less decisive than its endpoint suggested. The Obama administration attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate a residual force of American soldiers and airmen, something the Iraqis rejected, possibly to their current regret. Thousands of security contractors and a few hundred troops at the US embassy are the last remnant of the war.
But once the military left Baghdad in 2011, Obama was eager to wave away those complexities and reap the benefits of ending a war that the American public, and almost all of official Washington, had rejected. "Four years ago, I promised to end the Iraq war. I did," Obama said in his speech at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.But once the military left Baghdad in 2011, Obama was eager to wave away those complexities and reap the benefits of ending a war that the American public, and almost all of official Washington, had rejected. "Four years ago, I promised to end the Iraq war. I did," Obama said in his speech at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.
To call the administration reluctant to re-involve itself in Iraq is a severe understatement. After a lightning-fast movement that left the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis) – a group formally excommunicated from al-Qaida – in control of a substantial amount of Sunni Iraq, Susan Rice, Obama's national security adviser, vaguely said the US would "ramp up" its support for Iraq.To call the administration reluctant to re-involve itself in Iraq is a severe understatement. After a lightning-fast movement that left the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isis) – a group formally excommunicated from al-Qaida – in control of a substantial amount of Sunni Iraq, Susan Rice, Obama's national security adviser, vaguely said the US would "ramp up" its support for Iraq.
Hours later, however, the White House issued a statement saying it wanted to work with Congress to establish a counter-terrorism assistance fund that will "provide flexibility and resources to help Iraq respond to emerging needs as the terrorist threat from [Isis] continues to evolve".Hours later, however, the White House issued a statement saying it wanted to work with Congress to establish a counter-terrorism assistance fund that will "provide flexibility and resources to help Iraq respond to emerging needs as the terrorist threat from [Isis] continues to evolve".
This was the White House's impulse as Iraq tipped on the knife's edge: asking Congress to support a funding mechanism and seeming to accept that Isis will "evolve" rather than be stopped. That still-hypothetical fund would bolster an Iraqi army that ran away from Isis despite an enormous numerical advantage and over a decade of US mentorship.This was the White House's impulse as Iraq tipped on the knife's edge: asking Congress to support a funding mechanism and seeming to accept that Isis will "evolve" rather than be stopped. That still-hypothetical fund would bolster an Iraqi army that ran away from Isis despite an enormous numerical advantage and over a decade of US mentorship.
Did you serve in Iraq? We want to hear from you.
The increasingly dictatorial Iraqi president, Nouri al-Maliki, reportedly asked the US to conduct air strikes on militant positions in May and was rebuffed. Iraq has no real air power to bolster its cowed army; US Apache helicopters and F-16 fighter jets sold to Iraq are not slated to arrive for months. The result is that the US is stuck with the worst of both worlds in Maliki: a sectarian authoritarian whose military weakness is on display.The increasingly dictatorial Iraqi president, Nouri al-Maliki, reportedly asked the US to conduct air strikes on militant positions in May and was rebuffed. Iraq has no real air power to bolster its cowed army; US Apache helicopters and F-16 fighter jets sold to Iraq are not slated to arrive for months. The result is that the US is stuck with the worst of both worlds in Maliki: a sectarian authoritarian whose military weakness is on display.
A far more decisive response has come from Iran, which is said to be streaming Revolutionary Guard forces into Iraq to bolster their existing, substantial networks there and help its ally Maliki survive. Among Iraq's ironies is that US air power, should it return to Iraq, may end up supporting Iranian ground troops. Carney on Thursday declined to urge Iran to stay out of the crisis.A far more decisive response has come from Iran, which is said to be streaming Revolutionary Guard forces into Iraq to bolster their existing, substantial networks there and help its ally Maliki survive. Among Iraq's ironies is that US air power, should it return to Iraq, may end up supporting Iranian ground troops. Carney on Thursday declined to urge Iran to stay out of the crisis.
A closed-door Senate armed services committee briefing Thursday by Pentagon and intelligence officials left several senators frightened that the deterioration of Iraq has only begun. Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, Republican Iraq hawks who have consistently and vehemently criticized the withdrawal from Iraq, called for US air attacks on Isis and the rapid deployment of US military advisers. McCain, for good measure, called on Obama to fire "his entire national security team", particularly Army General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.A closed-door Senate armed services committee briefing Thursday by Pentagon and intelligence officials left several senators frightened that the deterioration of Iraq has only begun. Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, Republican Iraq hawks who have consistently and vehemently criticized the withdrawal from Iraq, called for US air attacks on Isis and the rapid deployment of US military advisers. McCain, for good measure, called on Obama to fire "his entire national security team", particularly Army General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.
The only note of caution came from the panel's Democratic chairman, Carl Levin, who has become less of an Obama proxy on national security since announcing his retirement. "It’s unclear how air strikes on our part can succeed unless the Iraqi army is willing to fight, and that’s uncertain given the fact that several Iraqi army divisions have melted away," Levin said.The only note of caution came from the panel's Democratic chairman, Carl Levin, who has become less of an Obama proxy on national security since announcing his retirement. "It’s unclear how air strikes on our part can succeed unless the Iraqi army is willing to fight, and that’s uncertain given the fact that several Iraqi army divisions have melted away," Levin said.
All this comes as the Obama administration plans a summer series of speeches to better advocate for its foreign policy and rebut criticism of its light-touch approach to the Russian conquest of Crimea and the Syrian war that turned Isis into a potent force. A theme already running through those speeches is that "military action cannot be the only, or even primary, component" of US responses to crises, as Obama said at West Point last month.All this comes as the Obama administration plans a summer series of speeches to better advocate for its foreign policy and rebut criticism of its light-touch approach to the Russian conquest of Crimea and the Syrian war that turned Isis into a potent force. A theme already running through those speeches is that "military action cannot be the only, or even primary, component" of US responses to crises, as Obama said at West Point last month.
For the Obama administration to recommit air power to Iraq will represent an embarrassing concession that its desire to leave Iraq – bolstered by the Iraqi government's decision to effectively kick the US out – has come at a cost. It will be certain to spark a new round of attacks on the administration's fundamental approach to foreign policy and make it even more difficult for Obama to end the Afghanistan war in 2016. And it would particularly distress many in the administration who correctly identify the basic US policy mistake in Iraq as the decision to invade in the first place. Iraq now looks to be the graveyard not just of hawkish US ambitions, but dovish ones as well.For the Obama administration to recommit air power to Iraq will represent an embarrassing concession that its desire to leave Iraq – bolstered by the Iraqi government's decision to effectively kick the US out – has come at a cost. It will be certain to spark a new round of attacks on the administration's fundamental approach to foreign policy and make it even more difficult for Obama to end the Afghanistan war in 2016. And it would particularly distress many in the administration who correctly identify the basic US policy mistake in Iraq as the decision to invade in the first place. Iraq now looks to be the graveyard not just of hawkish US ambitions, but dovish ones as well.