Heed Petraeus’s Critique of Obama

[Geee]

Commentary Magazine:

For various reasons, David Petraeus has been relatively quiet in public since leaving his CIA post. But now he is starting to speak out more—and boy does he have trenchant comments to make. In an interview with the Washington Post, he said, among other things:

 

“The foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran.”

“The current Iranian regime is not our ally in the Middle East. It is ultimately part of the problem, not the solution. The more the Iranians are seen to be dominating the region, the more it is going to inflame Sunni radicalism and fuel the rise of groups like the Islamic State.”

[Valin]

@Geee

 

Petraeus: The Islamic State isnt our biggest problem in Iraq

Liz Sly

March 20 2015

 

(Snip)

 

What would be (or is, assuming people must be asking) your main advice on how best to prosecute the war against ISIS now?

 

In general terms, what is needed in Iraq at this point is all of the elements of the comprehensive, civil-military counterinsurgency campaign that achieved such significant progress during the Surge, with one huge difference that Iraqis must perform a number of the critical tasks that we had to perform. Iraqis must, for example, provide the "boots on the ground," albeit enabled by advisers and U.S. air assets, with tactical air controllers if necessary.

 

If the Iraqis cannot provide such forces, we should increase efforts to develop them. Iraqis must also be the ones who pursue reconciliation with Sunni leaders and the Sunni Arab community. We may help in various ways, but again, sustainable results can only be achieved by Iraqis who clearly have the ability to do so, even if the will is sometimes not fully evident.

 

In more specific terms, I would offer the following:

 

First, it is critical that Iraqi forces do not clear areas that they are not able or willing to hold. Indeed, the "hold" force should be identified before the clearance operation begins. This underscores the need for capable, anti-Daesh Sunni forces that can go into Sunni-majority areas and be viewed as liberators, not conquerors or oppressors.

 

Second, the Iraqi forces that conduct(s) operations have to demonstrate much greater care in their conduct. I am deeply concerned by reports of sectarian atrocities in particular by the Shiite militias as they move into Sunni areas previously held by the Islamic State. Kidnappings and reprisal killings, mass evictions of civilians from their homes these kinds of abuses are corrosive to what needs to be accomplished. Indeed, they constitute Daeshs best hope for survival pushing Sunnis to feel once again the need to reject the Iraqi forces in their areas. The bottom line is that Daeshs defeat requires not just hammering them on the battlefield, but simultaneously, revived political reconciliation with Sunnis. Iraqs Sunnis need to be brought back into the fold. They need to feel as though they have a stake in the success of Iraq, rather than a stake in its failure.

 

Third, as I explained earlier, we need to recognize that the #1 long term threat to Iraqs equilibrium and the broader regional balance is not the Islamic State, which I think is on the path to being defeated in Iraq and pushed out of its Iraqi sanctuary. The most significant long term threat is that posed by the Iranian-backed Shiite militias. If Daesh is driven from Iraq and the consequence is that Iranian-backed militias emerge as the most powerful force in the country eclipsing the Iraqi Security Forces, much as Hezbollah does in Lebanon that would be a very harmful outcome for Iraqi stability and sovereignty, not to mention our own national interests in the region.

 

Fourth, as long as we are talking about difficult problems, there is Syria. Any acceptable outcome [in Syria] requires the build-up of capable, anti-Daesh opposition forces whom we support on the battlefield. Although it is encouraging to see the administration's support for this initiative, I think there are legitimate questions that can be raised about the sufficiency of the present scale, scope, speed, and resourcing of this effort. It will, for example, be impossible to establish a headquarters inside Syria to provide command and control of the forces we help train and equip as long as barrel bombs are dropped on it on a regular basis.

[Valin]

Petraeus Puts the Icing on Bibi’s Iran Cake

Former general splits with Obama; says Iran, not ISIS, is the real enemy.

Larry Kudlow

Mar. 20 2015

 

Don’t just rely on Benjamin Netanyahu’s passionate advice to Congress on his way to reelection that Iran is our arch enemy. Now we have the counsel of retired general David Petraeus, who gave a remarkable interview this week to the Washington Post. Petraeus agrees with Netanyahu: Iran, not ISIS, is the real enemy.

 

His message: “I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran.”

 

The general adds, “Longer-term, Iranian-backed Shia militia could emerge as the preeminent power in the country, one that is outside the control of the government and instead answerable to Tehran.” (Italics mine.)

 

Netanyahu is arguing against a bad U.S.-Iran deal that might end the economic sanctions and permit Iranian nuclear development after ten years. (Of course, nobody believes Iran will wait for, or permit, true verification.) But the thrust of the Petraeus interview is that unless U.S. military strategy completely changes, Iran is going to take over Iraq.

 

(Snip)