Eilig versucht US-Präsident Obama nach dem Vorbild seines wenig
geliebten Vorgängers George Bush eine internationale Koalition für
einen Krieg gegen die barbarische Terrororganisation „Islamischer Staat“
(IS) zu schmieden. Stolz verkündet Washington, dass Außenminister Kerry
bei einer Blitzreise in die Region bereits zehn Regionalstaaten an Bord
gezogen hätte. Doch trotz der Ängste, die IS vor allem bei den
Nachbarn, aber sogar auch im entfernteren Ägypten auslöst, fehlt das für
einen Erfolg eines derartigen Einsatzes nötige Engagement. Tiefe
Skepsis und schweres Misstrauen prägen die Reaktionen im Nahen Osten auf
Obamas Pläne. Die Gründe dafür erläutert Rami G. Khouri eindrucksvoll
im libanesischen „The Daily Star“. Rami Khouri ist ein Palästinenser mit
jordanischer Staatsbürgerschaft, dessen Familie in Nazareth und derzeit
auch in Beirut lebt. Der angesehene, teilweise in den USA ausgebildete
Politologe ist Autor mehrer Bücher, Kolumnist im „Daily Star“ und
derzeit Direktor des „Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and
International Affairs“ der „American University in Beirut“.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sep. 13, 2014 | 12:17 AM
The U.S. plan leaves lingering doubts
Rami G. Khouri| The Daily Star
Washington is correct to say that a combination of effective local
military action and inclusive domestic political systems are required
for progress in destroying ISIS, in Iraq especially. I lack confidence
in this aspect of the American approach because it is foolhardy to
expect that such important requirements can be forged quickly and in the
heat of battle – after the U.S. has just spent a full decade and
trillions of dollars in Iraq trying but failing to achieve precisely
those two important goals. We can even see some counterproductive
consequences of the U.S. legacy, such as rampaging ISIS troops taking
from the retreating Iraqi security forces the fine arms and equipment
that Washington had provided.
My confidence in the success of the coalition being assembled to
fight ISIS drops sharply when I hear President Barack Obama cite Yemen
and Somalia as examples of how this war will be waged. Yemen and Somalia
are modern catastrophes of state-building and foreign intervention,
including most recently the U.S. assassination campaigns carried out by
drones that are supposed to diminish and degrade Al-Qaeda-related groups
there. Yet somehow those groups keep expanding and they have spread
into half a dozen other countries in the region. No wonder, then, that
resolve among regional players to do this Washington’s way is erratic at
best. Someone should tell the American president that Yemen and Somalia
are political nightmares to be avoided at all costs, not replicate or
tout.
Naming retired Marine General John Allen to coordinate the anti-
ISIS coalition also raises questions anchored in real experiences. My
concerns are that the areas of Allen’s expertise and experience in
recent years raise many doubts about American efficacy in the Arab-Asian
region, instead of inspiring confidence. He oversaw the war in
Afghanistan, worked closely with Iraqis in Anbar Province, was deputy
commander of all U.S. military operations in the Central Command region,
and worked with Secretary of State John Kerry on the security training
and coordination side of the recently failed, American-mediated
Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
It’s hard to think of a more depressing combination of American
failures in the military-political realm in this region than those four
episodes in which Allen was a central actor. I hope he was only
following orders. His playbook today is to do exactly the opposite of
everything he did during the past 10 years, which would inspire some
confidence in chances of success.
The Americans’ mixing of emotional remembrances of the 9/11 attacks
this week with the current mission to defeat ISIS in Syria- Iraq is
factually incorrect and unnecessary, and probably will be
counterproductive. It will detract from an accurate analysis of what
ISIS represents and how it came to be, and therefore will induce
exaggerated emotional reactions, ideologically charged jingoism, and
mostly military-based counterterrorism policies that are not suited to
the real threat.
American foreign policy since 2001 has helped to expand the threat
of Al-Qaeda, ISIS and dozens of similar groups, rather than defeat them.
Framing the attack on ISIS in Syria- Iraq through the lens of 9/11 will
only perpetuate this problem.
The Arab and Turkish allies being herded into the coalition do not
inspire a great deal of enthusiasm or confidence, I am sad to say –
genuinely sad, because only dynamic and effective local action will
defeat ISIS and other dangerous dimensions of our societies. Kerry looks
less like the maestro of a united orchestra and more like a
strong-willed sheriff assembling a halfhearted posse of scared locals to
chase a dangerous bad guy.Finally, Syria and its challenges is at the
heart of the ISIS phenomenon. However, the coalition being assembled
seems unclear about what to do about Syria. We can only hope that this
will change.
Rami G. Khouri is published twice weekly by THE DAILY STAR. He can be followed on Twitter @RamiKhouri.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen