Iraq War legacy haunts White House in wake of militants’ successes
WASHINGTON — The sudden collapse of Iraqi forces in the face of the militant seizure of Iraq’s second-largest city, Mosul, has created a crisis in Washington as the White House struggles to prevent terrorist forces from destroying an American partner state and its American-equipped army.
U. S. President Barack Obama made it clear Thursday that the “emergency situation in Iraq” requires an immediate military response.
“In our conversation with the Iraqis there will be some short-term immediate things that need to be done militarily and our national security team is looking at all the options,” he said in a brief news conference after a meeting with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott.
The exact nature of the response is not clear, but Obama indicated that it could include help from allies.
Eleven years after the U.S. attacked Iraq in Operation Iraqi Freedom, warnings that the invasion would inflame the region and spark an explosion of extremist groups appear to be coming true.
Once again the U.S. appears caught off guard by the sudden retreat of the Iraqi army in the face of the Sunni terrorist group ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) that has blossomed into an efficient, motorized army.
The ISIL successes raise questions about the calibre of Obama’s intelligence, his national security team and whether, for political reasons, he was too eager to pull U.S. troops out of the region.
Questioned by reporters Thursday, Obama appeared slightly strained even as he
“YOU CAN EXPECT THAT WE WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE TO THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT TO COMBAT THE THREAT FROM ISIL.” JEN PSAKI
struggled to maintain his customary composure.
He said the U.S. has, over the last year, provided the Iraqi government with military equipment and intelligence assistance.
“But what we’ve seen over the last couple of days indicates the degree to which Iraq’s going to need more help,” he said. “It’s going to need more help from us and it’s going to need more help from the international community.”
Obama said his national security team is “working around the clock” to identify what kind of assistance would be most effective.
“I don’t rule out anything because we do have a stake in making sure that these jihadists are not getting a permanent foothold in either Iraq or Syria,” he said.
He called the sudden success of ISIL “a wake-up call for the Iraqi government.”
And he blamed the insurgency on Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, claiming his policy of excluding Sunnis from his government inflamed simmering sectarian conflict.
“There has to be a political component to this so that Sunni and Shia who care about building a functioning state that can bring about security and prosperity to all people inside of Iraq come together and work diligently against these extremists,” he said.
The U.S. has sent Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk to Iraq to evaluate the political and military situation.
“The situation is certainly very grave on the ground,” State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters. “We are working with Iraqi leaders from across the country to support a coordinated response. You can expect that we will provide additional assistance to the Iraqi government to combat the threat from ISIL.”
When it was pointed out that the U.S. has had 10 years to train the Iraqi army, she said simply that Iraq “remains a crucial partner in our fight against terrorism.”
One official said the U.S. is reluctant to begin air strikes without ground intelligence from the U.S. military. Former U.S. ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey noted that air strikes could easily stop ISIL’s advance by destroying its mobility and heavy weapons.
Speaking on MSNBC, Jeffrey predicted the ISIL would attempt to encircle Baghdad which could lead the Kurds to split off from Iraq and also bring in Iran to aid the Shias against the ISIL onslaught. “This thing is going to degenerate into a regional cataclysm,” he said.