This article is from the source 'nytimes' 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.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/world/middleeast/us-and-allies-form-coalition-against-isis.html

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Obama Offers First Sketch of War Plan for Taking On ISIS Obama Recruits 9 Allied Nations To Combat ISIS
(about 1 hour later)
NEWPORT, Wales — The Obama administration said on Friday it had formed a new international coalition of the willing to fight the marauding Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, as President Obama sketched the outlines of a strategy he said could ultimately defeat that organization and other extremist groups around the world. NEWPORT, Wales — President Obama escalated the American response to the marauding Islamic State in Iraq and Syria on Friday, recruiting at least nine allies to help crush the organization and offering the outlines of a coordinated military strategy that echoes the war on terror developed by his predecessor, George W. Bush, more than a decade ago.
In his most expansive comments to date about how the United States and its allies can destroy ISIS without putting American or other foreign troops on the ground in either Iraq or Syria, the president laid the beginnings of a war plan that replicates what the United States has done in Pakistan. That plan, as described by Mr. Obama, would rely on American airstrikes on ISIS leaders and positions, while strengthening the capacity of moderate Syrian rebel groups to reclaim ground seized by ISIS, which has proclaimed itself a monolithic Islamic caliphate that knows no borders and slays or enslaves its enemies. In his most expansive comments to date about how the United States and its friends could defeat ISIS, a once-obscure group of Sunni militants that has now upended the Middle East and overshadowed Al Qaeda, Mr. Obama said the effort would rely on American airstrikes against its leaders and positions, strengthen the moderate Syrian rebel groups to reclaim ground lost to ISIS, and enlist friendly governments in the region to join the fight.
“You initially push them back, you systematically degrade their capabilities, you narrow their scope of action, you slowly shrink the space, the territory that they may control, you take out their leadership,” Mr. Obama said. “And over time, they are not able to conduct the same kinds of terrorist attacks as they once could.” While the president’s aides maintained that he has not yet decided to authorize airstrikes in Syria — which he has already done on a limited basis in Iraq — Mr. Obama likened his developing strategy on ISIS to the American effort against Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal regions, which has relied heavily on airstrikes.
He added that “we are going to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL, the same way that we have gone after Al Qaeda,” using the acronym for a variant of ISIS’s name, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant. Mr. Obama has been under enormous pressure to articulate a way to counter ISIS, which has proclaimed itself an Islamic caliphate that knows no borders and has demonstrated ruthless behavior, including the videotaped beheadings of two Americans. After creating a political tempest by saying last week that his administration lacked a strategy, Mr. Obama sought on Friday to portray himself as spearheading the effort.
He held up American drone strikes against Qaeda leaders in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan as an example of how the United States can go to war against militants while limiting the number of American ground combat troops. But in so doing, the president risks further entangling the American military in exactly the type of costly foreign conflict he has long sought to escape. And his administration has been unable to explain how he can vanquish ISIS without indirectly aiding President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, regarded by the administration as an odious leader who must resign.
His comments came at a news conference at the end of the NATO summit meeting, during which American officials also unveiled what Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called the “core coalition” to fight the Sunni militants. Nonetheless, Mr. Obama’s comments, made at the conclusion of a NATO summit meeting here, were in effect a significant expansion of his own earlier assessments of the ISIS threat — simply by offering a direct comparison to the strategy against Qaeda militants.
In a hastily organized meeting on the outskirts of the NATO summit talks, diplomats and defense officials from the United States, Britain, France, Australia, Canada, Germany, Turkey, Italy, Poland and Denmark huddled to devise what they described as a two-pronged strategy: bolstering allies on the ground in Iraq and Syria, while bombing Sunni militants from the air. “You initially push them back, you systematically degrade their capabilities, you narrow their scope of action, you slowly shrink the space, the territory that they may control, you take out their leadership,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference here. “And over time, they are not able to conduct the same kinds of terrorist attacks as they once could.”
“There is no containment policy for ISIL,” Secretary of State John Kerry said at the beginning of the meeting. “They’re an ambitious, avowed, genocidal, territorial-grabbing, caliphate-desiring quasi state with an irregular army, and leaving them in some capacity intact anywhere would leave a cancer in place that will ultimately come back to haunt us.” He said that “we are going to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL, the same way that we have gone after Al Qaeda,” using an alternate acronym for ISIS. He drew the analogy to Pakistan as an example of how the United States can go to war against militants while limiting the number of American ground combat troops.
But he and other officials made clear that at the moment, any ground combat troops would come from either Iraqi security forces and Kurdish pesh merga fighters in Iraq, or moderate Syrian rebels opposed to the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. “Obviously I think that’s a red line for everybody here: no boots on the ground,” Mr. Kerry said. Mr. Obama spoke after aides had unveiled what Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called the “core coalition” to fight the ISIS militants, the outcome of a hastily organized meeting on the sidelines of the NATO summit talks. Diplomats and defense officials from the United States, Britain, France, Australia, Canada, Germany, Turkey, Italy, Poland and Denmark huddled to devise a two-pronged strategy: strengthening allies on the ground in Iraq and Syria, while bombing Sunni militants from the air.
For President Obama, assembling a coalition to fight ISIS is critical. The president whose initial arrival on the global stage was centered around his opposition to the war in Iraq is loathe to be viewed as going it alone now that he is becoming drawn into a combat role in the same country. “There is no containment policy for ISIL,” Secretary of State John Kerry said at the start of the meeting. “They’re an ambitious, avowed, genocidal, territorial-grabbing, caliphate-desiring quasi state with an irregular army, and leaving them in some capacity intact anywhere would leave a cancer in place that will ultimately come back to haunt us.”
“Getting sucked deeply back into another set of violent conflicts in the Middle East runs against the grain and the very DNA of this administration,” said Brian Katulis, a national security expert with the Center for American Progress, a research group with close ties to the Obama administration. “But the stunning actions by ISIS this summer has been a wake-up call.” But he and other officials made clear that at the moment, any ground combat troops would come from either Iraqi security forces and Kurdish pesh merga fighters in Iraq, or the moderate Syrian rebels opposed to President Assad in Syria. “Obviously I think that’s a red line for everybody here: no boots on the ground,” Mr. Kerry said.
Even as Mr. Obama is weighing airstrikes in Syria, he and his aides have been questioning what to do after launching those strikes, especially as targeting ISIS in Syria will help the government of Mr. Assad, regarded by the Obama administration as an odious leader who must resign. For Mr. Obama, assembling a coalition to fight ISIS is particularly important to a president whose initial arrival on the global stage was centered around his opposition to the war in Iraq, He is loath to be viewed as going it alone now that he has been dragged back into a combat role in the same country.
An administration official on Friday said that there were concrete reasons for assembling a coalition that go beyond any political cover that such an alliance might provide to a war-weary American public. For one thing, the official said, certain countries bring expertise, like Britain and Australia in special operations, Jordan in intelligence, Turkey in border control and Saudi Arabia in financing. “Getting sucked deeply back into another set of violent conflicts in the Middle East runs against the grain and the very DNA of this administration,” said Brian Katulis, a national security expert with the Center for American Progress, a research organization with close ties to the Obama administration. “But the stunning actions by ISIS this summer has been a wake-up call.”
“Sure, the American military can handle airstrikes,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity about delicate policy matters. “But it’s always nice to have help from your friends.” Even as Mr. Obama is weighing airstrikes in Syria, he and his aides have been questioning what to do afterward, especially as targeting ISIS in Syria will help Mr. Assad.
American officials are hoping to expand the coalition against ISIS to include as many countries, particularly in the region, as possible. Obama administration officials said privately that in addition to the countries that attended the meeting Friday morning, the United States is hoping to get quiet intelligence help about the Sunni militants from Jordan. Its leader, King Abdullah II, was attending the Wales summit meeting. An administration official said the reasons for assembling a coalition went beyond any political cover that such an alliance may provide with a war-weary American public. For one thing, the official said, certain countries bring expertise, like Britain and Australia in special operations, Jordan in intelligence and Saudi Arabia in financing.  
United States officials said they also expected Saudi Arabia to contribute to funding moderate Syrian rebel groups. In addition, Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States, said in a statement this week that the Emirates stood ready to join the fight against ISIS. “No one has more at stake than the U.A.E. and other moderate countries in the region that have rejected the regressive Islamist creed and embraced a different, forward-looking path,” the ambassador said. The Emiratis, he said, are “ready to join the international community in an urgent, coordinated and sustained effort to confront a threat that will, if unchecked, have global ramifications for decades to come.” “Sure, the American military can handle airstrikes,” the official said, speaking about administration thinking on condition of anonymity. “But it’s always nice to have help from your friends.”
Enlisting the Sunni neighbors of Syria and Iraq is crucial, experts said, because airstrikes alone will not be enough to push back ISIS. The Obama administration is also seeking to pursue a sequential strategy that begins with gathering intelligence, followed by targeted airstrikes, more robust and better-coordinated support for moderate rebels, and finally, a political reconciliation process. American officials are hoping to expand the coalition to many countries, particularly in the region. Obama administration officials said privately that in addition to the participants at the meeting Friday, the United States was hoping to get quiet intelligence help about the Sunni militants from Jordan. Its leader, King Abdullah II, was attending the Wales summit.
Administration officials said that amassing support for moderate rebels in Syria was particularly critical. This summer, President Obama set aside $500 million to train and support vetted members of the moderate opposition to Mr. Assad of Syria. Officials say they expect that Congress will approve that request at the beginning of October. United States officials said they also expected Saudi Arabia to contribute to funding moderate Syrian rebel groups. In addition, Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States, said in a statement this week that the Emirates stood ready to join the fight against ISIS. “No one has more at stake than the U.A.E. and other moderate countries in the region that have rejected the regressive Islamist creed and embraced a different, forward-looking path,” the ambassador said.
But even after that money is approved, American officials will still face obstacles in strengthening the Free Syrian Army, the moderates of choice for the United States. “This is going to take months,” one Pentagon official said on Friday. Enlisting support from Sunni populations in Syria and Iraq is crucial, experts said, because airstrikes alone will not suffice.
Matthew G. Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center in Washington, sought to define more clearly what destroying ISIS would actually mean on the ground.
"From a counterterrorism standpoint, understand that it doesn’t mean eradicating every single person aligned with the group," Mr. Olsen said. "We need to be realistic about that."
And like the comprehensive strategy to combat Al Qaeda that has taken years to develop and carry out, Mr. Olsen and other counterterrorism officials said on Friday that destroying the threat from ISIS could take a long time. Even if successful, they said, such a strategy would require maintaining pressure on any remnants of the group.
Administration officials said support for moderate rebels in Syria is particularly critical. This summer, President Obama set aside $500 million to train and support vetted members of the moderate opposition to Mr. Assad. Officials say they expect Congress to approve that request next month.
But even after that money is approved, American officials will face obstacles in strengthening the Free Syrian Army, the moderates of choice for the United States. “This is going to take months,” one Defense Department official said on Friday.