Telling the press in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia that terrorists “cannot strike a mortal blow” to the U.S, 54-year-old President Barack Obama tried to reassure a weary nation not to “overreact” to the Nov. 13 Paris massacre, killing 130, injuring hundreds more. Since terrorists with loyalty to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria [ISIS] unloaded six separate terrorist attacks in Paris, Obama’s been on his heels defending the U.S. counter-terrorism strategy. Since ending the Iraq War Dec. 15, 2011, Obama’s been reluctant to commit U.S. forces to anything in the Mideast other than withdrawing troops. When the 2014 ISIS blitzkrieg hijacked some 30% of Iraq and Syria’s sovereign territory, Barack offered a toe-back-in-the-water, starting air strikes against ISIS in Iraq Aug. 8, 2014, following up in Syria Sept. 29, 2014. Obama said the U.S. had “contained” ISIS Nov. 12, one day before the Paris massacre.
Busy de-escalating U.S. military involvement in the Middle East, Obama tossed the baby-out-with-the-bathwater, namely, forgetting he had the war on terror to fight. Allowing ISIS to run wild for years in Iraq and Syria led to the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, called an “act of war” by 61-year-old French President Francois Hollande. Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy in Syria, essentially ceded power of toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to various Saudi-backed Wahhabi Sunni groups, including ISIS and al-Qaedas’ al-Nusra’s Front. Barack and his Secretary of State John Kerry rubber-stamped the Saudi policy that al-Assad’s Alawite Shiite government lacked popular sovereignty and must go. Without any due process through the U.N. Security Council or General Assembly, Obama decided to back the Saudi-funded Sunni insurgency to topple al-Assad’s Shiite government.
No one at the White House or State Department can explain their authority to decide regime change for a U.N. recognized government. Syria’s been under the Saudi-backed Sunni siege since March 11, 2011, during the peak of the Arab Spring. Battling the insurgency, the U.S. contends that al-Assad crossed a red line, using chemical weapons. Finding that al-Assad used Sarin nerve gas March 19, 2013 battling insurgents, the U.N. High Commission on Refugees [UNHRC] concluded al-Assad’s regime did, in fact, use chemical weapons. Other than that finding, the White House decided the official U.S. position is regime change in Damascus. Joining ISIS and al-Qaeda, and a host of Saudi-backed Wahhabi groups, the White House position ran afoul with Russia’s attempt to preserve al-Assad’s regime. Russian President Vladimir Putin believes regime change would lead to more chaos.
Whatever the shortcomings of Obama’s Syrian policy, including fighting on the side of ISIS and al-Qaeda, the White Houae was forced to flip-flop once Putin launched air-strikes Oct. 30 against Saudi-backed terrorist groups seeking to topple al-Assad. White House officials complained that Putin, and his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, targeted various U.S.-backed opposition groups. When ISIS blew up a Russian Metroject airliner Oct. 31, Putin turned his air force on ISIS, doing more damage in the past week than the U.S. in 18 months. Instead of admitting to a feckless counter-terrorism strategy, Obama chose to ramble to the press. “We do not succumb to fear,” said Barack. The most powerful tool we have to fight ISIL [ISIS] is to say that we’re not afraid, to not elevate them, to somehow buy into their fantasy that they’re doing something important,” making more feeble excuses.
Now that Putin’s leading the fight against ISIS, the White House has been caught flat-footed in the war on terror. More important than platitudes about resisting fear is a coherent military strategy to deprive ISIS of save havens in Iraqi and Syrian, villages, towns and cities. Instead of joining a Russian and French effort against ISIS, Obama quibbles about regime change in Damascus. If Obama really wanted al-Assad out, they should have a U.N. Security Council resolution giving him that authority. Joining the Saudi’s sectarian war against Shiites is no counter-terrorism policy. Putin pointed out what happened in Iraq and Libya, once Saddam and Gaddafi were ousted: Anarchy in Iraq, Syria and Libya. U.S. allies see through Obama’s rhetoric about resisting “fear,” knowing the U.S. has let ISIS run wild for years with impunity, destabilizing the region and leading to chaos.
Calling ISIS a “bunch of killers with good social media,” Obama tries to rehab a feckless counter-terrorism policy that let ISIS run wild until it decimated Paris Nov. 13. Calling ISIS names is no substitute of an effective counter-terrorism strategy that robs ISIS of its safe havens in Iraq and Syria. With Putin now leading charge against ISIS, Obama must figure out how to reclaim an effective counter-terrorism strategy. Most counter-terrorism experts at the Pentagon and in NATO acknowledge that air strikes won’t root ISIS out of its entrenched positions in Iraq and Syria. Watching France hit Nov. 13 is reminiscent of Sept. 11, when the U.S. was blindsided by Osama bin Laden. Former President George W. Bush, while making mistakes, launched a pre-emptive counter-terrorism strategy, taking the battle to the enemy in safe havens to prevent terrorists from plotting another attack on U.S. soil.
A
