http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/opinion/sunday/can-adversaries-become-allies-to-fight-isis.html?rref=opinion&module=Ribbon&version=origin®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&pgtype=articleThe Unlikeliest of Coalitions
Can Adversaries Become Allies to Fight ISIS?
By THE EDITORIAL BOARDSEPT. 20, 2014
The Obama administration needs to bring together a reliable international coalition as the backbone of its campaign to defeat the Islamic State, the Sunni extremist group that controls large parts of Iraq and Syria. So far, more than 40 countries have offered to help, and none are more important than the Sunni Muslim countries that are needed to give legitimacy to the American-led effort.
But even if every would-be ally agreed to play a productive role, political grievances, sectarian tensions and mistrust make organizing the coalition a lot like solving a Rubik’s Cube. Many countries in the region are skeptical about President Obama’s open-ended plan to carry the fight against the Islamic State, known as ISIS, to its strongholds in Syria and fear that it would strengthen President Bashar al-Assad in Syria’s civil war. Two important regional powers — Iran, a Shiite-majority country, and Saudi Arabia, a Sunni Muslim country — have been fighting regional proxy wars, including in Syria, for years, and Saudi Arabia has been at odds with Iraq.
Here are some of the obstacles:
TURKEY More than any other Sunni Muslim state, Turkey, a NATO member with one of the region’s largest armies, should be a strong ally. Yet it ruled out a front-line role, citing concerns for the safety of 49 Turkish diplomats who had been taken hostage by ISIS (they were returned to Turkey on Saturday). It also fears that efforts to arm Kurdish fighters in Iraq to fight ISIS could embolden Kurdish separatist militants in Turkey.
The Turkish government, determined to see Mr. Assad overthrown, has been supporting insurgent groups in Syria since the start of the civil war and allowing them to pass freely across the Turkish border into Syria. But even though ISIS has now proved itself a threat to Turkey and beyond, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s president, has failed to take aggressive measures to stop the cross-border flow of foreign fighters, weapons and oil trade benefiting ISIS. In fact, Turkey’s open-border policy early on in the Syrian war was central to the rise of ISIS, according to a recent report in The Times.
SAUDI ARABIA AND THE GULF STATESSaudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates were among 10 Arab states that recently promised to “do their share” to defeat ISIS. Many of these states have for a long time aided rival Islamist and militant groups, including in Syria. For example, although Qatar hosts the largest American military base in the region, it has supported a range of Islamist groups (including Islamic radicals in Syria) with safe haven, financial aid and weapons. Saudi Arabia has allowed sheikhs linked to Al Qaeda’s Syrian branch to raise funds openly, and the United Arab Emirates backed a faction in Libya against Islamic militias supported by Qatar.
Against this backdrop, however, some productive commitments have been made. Saudi Arabia has agreed to host a major base for training Syrian opposition forces. And Jordan, already a site for rebel training, is expected to provide intelligence.
While American officials say some countries, which they have not identified, want to join American forces in making airstrikes against militants in Iraq, the United States must carefully incorporate participation by Muslim countries so it does not further inflame sectarian tensions and anti-American feeling.
IRAN AND SYRIABoth the United States and Iran, adversaries since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, consider ISIS a threat. But Iranian leaders have ruled out direct cooperation in repelling the extremist group. Iran, one of the Assad regime’s strongest allies, is worried that American airstrikes in Syria and expanded support for Syrian rebel forces could further damage Mr. Assad’s hold on power. American leaders have been cool to cooperating with Iran because that would anger Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Muslim states. Negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program, now at a critical point, are also affecting these calculations.
Whether the Obama administration can bring all of these and other conflicting agendas into a coherent military and political alliance against the Islamic State is far from certain. So far, the focus has mostly been on what military-related assistance such partners can offer.
What is certain is that there can never be real success against ISIS without some kind of political settlement in Syria, an inclusive government in Iraq and some reduction in the Sunni-Shiite tensions that created space for ISIS to grow. In this regard, Saudi Arabia’s decisions to reopen its embassy in Baghdad, invite Iraq to the recent coalition meeting in Jidda and invite an Iranian official for talks in Riyadh were unheralded but potentially important steps toward a united front.
