Aiming before shooting
US President Obama shocked more than just the Republicans by (finally) blaming the rise of Da’ish, or ISIS, on his predecessor’s ill-advised and ill-fated invasion of Iraq. Attributing the caliphate to “unintended consequences” of the war, the president rightly highlighted the importance of aiming before shooting. Of course, those looking seriously into Middle East politics will notice how this statement is not just about Iraq, Syria or even Da’ish, but also clarifies his position on the other hot topic of the region – the Saudi and Israeli rush to derail US-Iran negotiations.
It is strange, to say the least, that the White House’s position on Da’ish, and the wider uprising in the Levant and Iraq, now almost mirrors Iran’s and Syria’s. It was not too long ago that Obama was prepared to bomb the Assad regime – for charges of using chemical weapons that later turned out false. He actively promoted the rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA) as well as the parallel government based in Ankara. And he also turned a blind eye to the Saudis funding and arming extremist groups that reportedly included jabhat al nusra, al Qaeda’s offshoot in Syria.
But things began changing around Obama’s trip to Saudi Arabia last year. The Arab press carried reports of Washington handing Riyadh a dossier about the latter’s involvement in the Syrian uprising, even threatening to call off the visit failing a rollback. This was also around the time when the White House began taking the Iran negotiations more seriously. Fast forward one year and there is unprecedented convergence between Iran and the US. John Kerry has even talked about talking to Assad which, again, plays right into Tehran’s hands. So the Republicans, and Netanyahu (whom they so generously invited to Congress), and even the Saudis are likely to be disappointed as the Obama administration runs its course. For the moment, it seems, Washington has had enough of war, and a rational discourse might just be achieved with Iran. That, of course, will mean more firepower against Da’ish.