 |
| Saul Loeb/Pool via The New York Times |
In his address to the nation, President Obama outlined a multi-phase plan for combating ISIS, saying the United States would lead a “broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat.” He said he was authorizing U.S. air strikes in Syria for the first time, and that the U.S. effort in Iraq would expand. The president repeatedly stressed the move would not be like the long ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” he said. While the U.S. will send 475 service members to Iraq, they will “not have a combat mission,” but rather, provide intelligence, training, and equipment. “We will not be dragged into another ground war,” said Obama. “We cannot do for Iraqis what they must do for themselves.” Already, France has agreed to support airstrikes and Saudi Arabia has agreed to provide a base for training.
The president compared the proposed campaign against ISIS to the counterterrorism strategies used in Yemen and Somalia, saying the U.S. will rely on “our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground.” He said that thus far the U.S. has “conducted more than 150 airstrikes in Iraq.” The U.S. will continue to work with the newly formed Iraqi government, so that “we’re hitting [ISIS] targets as Iraqi forces go on offense.”
Obama noted how broad a threat ISIS posed with its international recruitment. “Our intelligence community believes that thousands of foreigners—including Europeans and some Americans—have joined them in Iraq and Syria,” he said. While the president focused on a strategy for combating ISIS in Iraq, he made it clear that the U.S. “will not hesitate” to go into Syria if need be. “If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven,” he said. A year ago, the president declined to use air strikes against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad; his decision to take such action against ISIS amounts to a change in strategy spurred by the extremist group's growing threat.
Although Obama said he has the “authority to address the threat” posed by ISIS, he said he “welcomes congressional support to show the world that Americans are united in confronting this danger.” Obama has asked Congress to allocate $5 billion for counterrorism funding, which has yet to be approved.
N.Y. TIMES
He warned that “eradicating a cancer” like ISIS was a long-term challenge that would put some American troops at risk.
Unlike Mr. Bush in the Iraq war, Mr. Obama has sought to surround the United States with partners. Earlier on Wednesday, he called King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to enlist his support for the plan to step up training of the Syrian rebels.
Mr. Obama is acting as polls show rapidly shifting public opinion, with a large majority of Americans now favoring military action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, even as they express deep misgivings about the president’s leadership,
Mr. Obama is also facing difficult crosscurrents on Capitol Hill, where Republican lawmakers, initially reluctant to demand congressional authorization of military action, have begun agitating for a vote, even as some Democrats warn of a stampede to war.
On Wednesday, Senate Democratic leaders prepared legislation on the narrow issue of authorizing the American military to train the Syrian rebels. House Republicans appeared ready to follow their lead.
The surge of activity means Congress is likely to weigh in on the military action before the midterm elections in eight weeks.
While Mr. Obama said that Mr. Assad had lost his legitimacy to govern Syria, he did not call again for his ouster. Instead, he spoke of strengthening the moderate rebels to give them a seat at the table in a political settlement with the Assad government.
Administration officials indicated that airstrikes in Syria could still be weeks away, while American surveillance planes continue to gather intelligence on the location of ISIS targets.
They also tried to manage expectations about whether the United States could truly destroy ISIS.
“What we can do is systematically roll back the organization, shrink the territory where they’re operating, decimate its ranks, cut off its sources of support in terms of funding and equipment, and have the threat methodically and relentlessly reduced,” a senior official said in a briefing for reporters, speaking on the condition of anonymity under White House ground rules.