When the top-tier GOP candidates meet in Simi Valley, Calif. at the Reagan Library tonight in the first CNN-sponsored debate, it’s doubtful CNN moderators Jake Tapper and Dana Bash and conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt will raise contradictory parts of U.S. foreign policy. None bedevils the White House more than its approach to the Syrian civil war and rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Only foreign policy wonks like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who won’t sit on the top-tier stage, understand the failure of the Obama policy on Syria and ISIS. It’s doubtful that any of the moderators will raise key questions of what to do in Syria and Iraq with ISIS. Like the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Graham would put U.S. boots back in Iraq and Syria to eradicate ISIS and return sovereignty to Iraq and Syria.
Eliminating ISIS from Iraq and Syria would restore sovereignty and territorial integrity to U.N.-recognized sovereign states. President Barack Obama and his Secretary of State John Kerry just finished negotiating July 14 the torturous two-year-long Iranian nuke deal with the P5+1, including the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany, the composition of the U.N. Security Council. Obama and Kerry ripped opponents in the U.S. and Israel for suggesting the agreement threatened Israeli national security, giving Iran a clear path to the bomb. Obama and Kerry sold the agreement as the best possible international deal to monitor Iran’s nuclear activity. Both emphasize the multinational agreement, showing cooperation by world powers to constrain Iran’s nuclear ambitions. When it comes to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Obama and Kerry find themselves in foreign policy quicksand.
` Warning Russian President Vladimir Putin about sending arms and troops to Syria to defend al-Assad, Kerry showed why the U.S. foreign policy has been disrespected by world powers. While doing nothing in response to al-Assad use chemical weapons in 2013, the White House’s official position has been regime change. It didn’t help matters March 1, 2014 when Putin annexed Ukraine’s Crimea and stationed troops in Donbass region of Southeastern Ukraine backing pro-Russian separatists. When Malaysian Air Flght 17 was shot out the sky July 17, 2014 by a Russian-made surface-to-air missile, the White House soured on cooperating with Russia. Taking Ukraine’s view against Russia, the White House cuts-off-its-nose-to-spite-its-face. No U.S. news outlet attributed the Feb. 22, 2014 pro-Western revolution that evicted Russian-backed Viktor Yanukovich from Kiev to the U.S. CIA.
From his vantage point at the Sochi Games, Putin saw the CIA’s fingerprints all over Kiev’s so-called pro-Western coup led by former heavyweight boxing champion Vitale Klitschko that toppled Yanukovich. Since evicting Yanukovich Feb. 22, 2014, the White House has steered clear of Putin. Russia’s announcement Sept. 14 that it intends to arm, supply troops and back the al-Assad government met stiff resistance. “Continued support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad risks exacerbating and extending the conflict” in Syria, Kerry told Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov by phone. As the words came out, even Kerry could not help but see the hypocrisy. Putin clearly aligns himself with a U.N.-recognized sovereign state to fight the Islamic state. Today’s U.S. foreign policy strangely aligns itself with ISIS, al-Qaeda and other Saudi-backed Islamic radical groups seeking to topple al-Assad.
Blinded by the worst relationship with Russia since the Cold War, Obama and Kerry can’t see beyond their anti-Russian prism, taking the same position as ISIS and al-Qaeda with regard to regime change in Damascus. “Secretary Kerry also reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to fight ISIL, with a coalition of more than 60 countries, of which Assad could never be a credible member, and emphasized the U.S would welcome a constructive Russian role i8n counter-ISIL efforts,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. Touting the Security Council-backed Iran Nuke deal, Obama and Kerry join forces with ISIS, al-Qaeda and other radical groups to topple al-Assad. Welcoming Russia’s help in dealing with ISIS requires the White House to pay attention to what happened in Iraq when the former Bush administration decided to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein April 10, 2003.
Putin wants the White House to acknowledge that getting rid of al-Assad would repeat the same mistake as the Iraq War: Opening up more Islamic terrorism in the region. Since toppling Saddam, Iraq and Syria have been deluged with competing terrorist interests, giving rise to ISIS and turning the region into chaos. Instead of listening to Putin, Kerry should speak to other Security Council members about the best strategy to end ISIS and restore order to the region. “The secretary stressed that there is no military solution to the overall conflict in Syria, which can only be resolved by a political transition away from Assad,” said Earnest, making no sense. GOP hawks, led by McCain and Graham, believe ISIS can be defeated militarily. If Kerry believes there’s no military solution, why does he back the current bombing mission? White House officials need to listen to Putin’s plan.
