America's strategy against ISIS takes shape

America's strategy against ISIS takes shape

The US media published a letter of the imprisoned organizer of the terrorist attacks of September 11th  2001, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, addressed to former President Barack Obama, written back in 2015. In the 18-page letter Mohammed calls Obama a ‘head serpent’ and ’president of the tyrant-country and oppressor”. He claims that the United States are to blame for the September 11th  attacks because of its foreign policy, which ‘killed innocent people around the world’. What is the new US strategy in the fight against terrorism? Vestnik Kavkaza offers our readers the article of a senior analyst at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis (INEGMA), Sabahat Khan, published in the Middle East.

In some ways, Trump’s intensity could be said to rival that of George W. Bush following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, but the world is not interested in another crusading global war on terrorism intentionally or otherwise and Trump could be handing propaganda victories to ISIS (banned in Russia) and similar extremist groups.

During his election campaign, US President Donald Trump promised no flip-flopping against the Islamic State (ISIS) and spoke about a secret plan he had to destroy the group. Having taken office on January 20, Trump’s plan against ISIS remains a secret. His strategy, however, is slowly beginning to take shape. On his first day in office, Trump’s new secretary of Defense, James Mattis, authorised 31 strikes in Syria and Iraq against ISIS targets. Since then, the United States has conducted numerous attacks in those countries and also against al-Qaeda in Yemen. Media reports say Trump’s conversations with the leaders of Russia, Turkey, Britain and France have often focused around working together in the fight against ISIS, whose defeat has long been declared Trump’s foreign policy and national security priority. It remains to be seen how he may or may not be restricted by the complexities of contending interests abroad, especially the US relationships with Russia, Turkey and its Arab Gulf partners. These relationships are complex because different stakeholders in the Syrian war cannot reach a consensus on whether it is acceptable for Syrian President Bashar Assad to continue in office as well as for officials in his regime who have allegedly been involved in illegal acts of violence against civilians.

Russian-backed efforts for peace talks have shown promise but progress is fragile. Neither is it clear whether Trump will, or even can, completely disassociate the United States from support for Sunni rebels fighting both Assad and ISIS and to Kurdish militias that are fighting ISIS but have also driven Ankara deep into Moscow’s camp.

Political retreat would complicate how it can influence wider regional developments at a time when other sensitive regional issues are delicately poised. Yet, credibility of a certain kind seems to be of great importance to Trump as he has been demonstrating the extent to which he is not swayed by opposition and resistance.

Trump’s blanket ban on travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries — Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, Somalia and Iran — to the United States and extreme vetting announced for people from Afghanistan and Pakistan will affect almost half a billion people. With its legality in question, critics have interpreted this as a ban on Muslim travellers and immigrants to the United States.

Western European allies of the United States felt compelled to criticise the new White House administration. A petition in Britain to ban Trump from the country only a week after he was issued an invitation for a state visit caused the British government serious embarrassment. During her visit to the United States, British Prime Minister Theresa May, the first foreign leader to meet with Trump at the White House, made various stops around Washington speaking about the need to build partnerships and steer clear of unwinnable wars.

In normal circumstances, tightening immigration and travel from high-risk areas regarding terrorism is a standard practice and the prerogative of sovereign governments. Indeed, many travellers, especially Muslims, have experienced difficulties in obtaining visas and immigration clearance to the United States for many years. For example, the same seven Muslim countries hit with the travel ban by Trump faced targeted measures during the Obama administration when dual nationals were suspended from visa waiver programmes.

At home and abroad, Trump remains a controversial political figure. His boldness and directness brought him to office but it will be political balance that will enable him to accomplish what he intends to and that seems under scrutiny.

Trump may not intend all he says and may not be able to say all he intends despite his self-professed detestation for political correctness but his style has generated an increasingly defiant opposition at home and abroad to the extent that large parts of his secret plan for ISIS may need to be revised before it can even be fully unveiled.