US policy towards the Islamic State after its seizure of Ramadi and Palmyra

[Valin]

American Enterprise Institute
Testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa
Michael Rubin
June 3, 2015

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen, Ranking Member Deutch, Honorable Members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on an issue so important to U.S. national security.

On September 10, 2014, against the backdrop of the Islamic State (ISIL, ISIS, Daesh)’s murder of American journalists, President Barack Obama addressed the nation. “Our objective is clear,” he declared, “We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy.”

Recent Islamic State victories in Ramadi, the capital of the al-Anbar province, and in Palmyra, a central Syria town straddling strategic crossroads and home to ancient ruins, show that almost nine months later, the U.S. objective is not on track to being met. Talk of an offensive against Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, common just a few weeks ago, now seems fantastic. Indeed, it seems more likely that the Islamic State will move this summer against Kirkuk, an oil-rich and multi-ethnic city in northern Iraq or try to strike at pilgrims or shrines in the Shi’ite holy city of Karbala, than retreat from Iraq as American policymakers hoped just a few weeks ago.

Clearly, the President’s stated strategy is not working. Questions to consider are why, and what policies could strengthen the fight against the Islamic State.

(Snip)

[Valin]

Related