Coalition of the Unwilling

But Turkey and Israel take the prize for countries playing on both sides. Turkey planned and staged its shootdown of a Russian warplane to disrupt development of a genuine coalition against ISIS, preferring instead to press ahead with its war against the Kurds and Assad. The Turks have been allowing militants to cross their border from Syria with relatively little impediment, a point raised by Obama in recent discussions. More to the point, they have been exchanging weapons and cash for oil, which ISIS is pumping out of the fields that it has occupied in Syria and Iraq. Turkish President Erdogan’s son Bilal is behind the syndicate that exports and sells the oil, transactions that might well amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. An attempt to investigate Bilal in 2013 was derailed when his father intervened to fire all the prosecutors and policemen involved. Turkey will not be joining the fray against ISIS at any time soon.

And then there is Israel, which has made clear that it prefers terrorists to Assad.

NATO should invade ISIS-held territory

The only way to deny ISIS control of any territory is an invasion and occupation by a coalition of outside powers.

.. Unfortunately, these gains did not last, because the Shia-dominated government in Baghdad did not reach political accommodation with the Sunnis of the Awakening movement. Many Iraqi Sunni Arabs, fearing persecution from a sectarian Iraqi government, accepted ISIS as the less bad alternative.

.. To prevent something similar from happening, NATO should aim to create semiautonomous regions controlled by Sunni tribal leaders under restored Syrian and Iraqi sovereignty, using Iraqi Kurdistan as a model.

.. Though difficult, this plan could succeed because, in addition to weakening ISIS, all parties get something they want.

  • Vienna conference participants would increase the chances of a diplomatic solution to the Syrian civil war, since ISIS is the largest potential spoiler.
  • The EU, Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan would all get relief from the flood of refugees, as civilians would no longer need to flee ISIS, and some could even return home to stabilized areas of Iraq and Syria.
  • Russia would retain its military bases and influence in Syria.
  • Iran would ensure the survival of the Syrian and Iraqi governments.
  • The Kurds would maintain their autonomy, perhaps with slightly expanded territorial control.
  • Iraqi Sunni Arabs would get some autonomy from the central government in Baghdad.
  • The Shia-dominated Iraqi government would regain sovereignty over all of Iraq.
  • Finally, the United States and France would ensure a multilateral, legally recognized campaign to eliminate ISIS, rather than the half measures both have pursued thus far.

Lessons of the Past Hint at Hurdles in Fight to Stop ISIS

In 2006, Israel, wielding the region’s most powerful military and solid American support, leveled whole city blocks and village centers along with Hezbollah bunkers and offices. But Hezbollah remained standing, and soon it accumulated more political and military power than ever.

.. The region, and indeed the world, is littered with evidence that in asymmetrical conflicts, even the most powerful military responses can end up stoking the violence and opposition they seek to quell, especially without solutions to underlying conflicts.

If overwhelming firepower alone could guarantee success, the United States would have won the Vietnam War and emerged victorious from Afghanistan and Iraq. And 14 years after 9/11, the threat from Al Qaeda might have disappeared, rather than persisting, morphing and re-emerging as the Islamic State.

.. Mr. Bacevich says “the lessons of these failures” are too rapidly forgotten as many Americans succumb to what he calls a form of militarism, “clinging to the illusion that because we have a splendid military, putting it to work will make things come out all right in the end.”

.. With the group claiming to defend Sunnis, even though they make up the majority of its victims, the campaigns by predominantly Christian and Shiite powers “may strengthen ISIS rather than the contrary,” said Imad Salamey, an associate professor of political science at the Lebanese American University in Beirut.

.. Militarily denying territory to the Islamic State — deflating its claims to build a so-called caliphate — is a precondition for progress against it, he said.

But real inroads against the group, Professor Salamey said, will require a comprehensive political solution with “a satisfactory regional Sunni share of power.”

That, he said, would allay the insecurity among both Sunni leaders and populations, which have festered with the deposing of Saddam Hussein and the rise of a Shiite-dominated Iran, and with the crushing of popular uprisings in Sunni-majority countries.