Phyllis Bennis (Institute for Policy Studies) has published in The Progressive a six step plan to weaken the influence of ISIS and to work towards diplomatic and financial solutions. There is an absence of words like "crush", "destroy" and "pursue ISIS to the Gates of Hell".
Here is an outline of Ms Bennis suggested plan, along with a few comments:
Step One. Stop the airstrikes.
Advertisement
Revenge is never a justification for military action.
Step Two. Make real the commitment to "No boots on the ground".
Advisers, trainers, CIA personnel and "special forces" also wear "boots".
Step Three. Organize a real diplomatic partnership to deal with ISIS.
The current "coalition" has been cobbled together in an attempt to legitimise the US airstrikes, but most seem to agree that military action is not effective (and probably counter-productive) when used against an ideology. More fulsome and effective national (and citizen) commitments would be forthcoming for a coalition pursuing (only) diplomatic and financial solutions.
Step Four. Initiate a new search for broader diplomatic solutions in the United Nations.
Advertisement
The US and others sometimes seem frustrated at the apparent slowness and even incapacity of the UN to endorse their plans. Perhaps this is because the plans are flawed – and the UN is indeed only complying with its charter. A plan involving diplomatic and financial objectives is more likely to be passed by the Security Council than one based on military action and airstrikes.
Step Five. Push the UN, despite Lakhdar Brahimi's resignation, to restart real negotiations on ending the civil war in Syria.
This means including Russia and all other interested parties in the negotiations. The US should stop being dismissive of Russia based on the West's perceptions of Russia's role in the Ukraine and elsewhere. Russia is always a force to be reckoned with – and all "forces" should be brought together for negotiated diplomatic and financial outcomes for all parties. Russia did play a meaningful diplomatic role in the removal of chemical weapons from Syria – arguably without the need for the airstrikes that the US threatened.
Step Six. Massively increase (US) humanitarian contributions to UN agencies for the now millions of refugees and Internally Displaced Persons in and from both Syria and Iraq.
As Ms Bennis says, a "Coalition for Rebuilding" will be more likely to weaken support for ISIS than a "Coalition of the Killing".
Other comments on Ms Bennis' plan: The West should not supply more arms to those groups who transgress human rights. It is actually against the (Leahy) law in the US – and the law should be enforced and not selectively and cynically bypassed by the US government and its agencies.
Given the uncertainty about who are "the good guys" in this situation, the US and any coalition should work towards an arms embargo on all sides. The West imposes a wide range of other "economic sanctions" in many parts of the world – why cannot armaments be included? The powerful military industrial complex would be the major impediment.
It is worthwhile therefore to re-visit the warning in President Eisenhower's 1961 Exit Speech regarding the "economic, political, even spiritual influence" of the military industrial complex - and its "grave implications… involving… even the very structure of our society". The "unwarranted influence …. and the potential for the disastrous misplaced power of this complex exist and will persist". 50+ years on – how prescient was the warning.
The emerging "inclusive" government in Iraq should continue to be encouraged to share power and become genuinely representative of all major sects/cultures. The government should attempt to hire back the secular Sunni army officers who defected to the rebels and ISIS when Saddam Hussein was ousted – restore their pay, positions, prestige and dignity.
Focus should be brought to swaying support from Sunni tribal leaders away from their support of ISIS. This will be challenging. These tribal leaders and their followers have been relentlessly targeted, oppressed and dispossessed by the West during the US/coalition invasion and throughout the subsequent Shia-dominated government of Nuri al-Maliki. A genuinely inclusive government in Baghdad is critical to this process.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
74 posts so far.