Wicker: U.S. Can Defeat ISIL, But President Must Lead

Half-Measures Are Insufficient to Overthrow Terror Group

September 1, 2014

As the situation in Iraq deteriorates, a radical offshoot of al-Qaeda is seeking to expand its influence. Known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the terrorist movement has launched a barbaric campaign of torture, mass executions, crucifixions, and beheadings. Its savagery is broadcast to the world through gruesome propaganda online, including the recently released video documenting the horrific murder of U.S. photojournalist James Foley.

‘Imminent Threat to Every Interest’

Members of the Obama Administration have not minced words when expressing concern and outrage over ISIL’s brutality and rapid spread of extremism. After Foley’s murder, Secretary of State John Kerry said that “the wickedness [ISIL] represents must be destroyed.” According to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, the group is “an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it’s in Iraq or anywhere else.”

If these statements are true, then Americans are right to question why President Obama has only issued half-measures in response. Instead of a bold strategy to defeat ISIL, the United States has so far pursued a modest deployment of military advisers and limited airstrikes, which are insufficient to overthrow this organized, formidable, and sophisticated force. The Administration’s abandonment of Iraq in 2011 and indecisiveness last summer in Syria have created a dangerous void for militant Islamists to exploit. At a news conference about ISIL on August 28, the President conceded, “We don’t have a strategy yet.”

The threats, meanwhile, continue to multiply. The rise of ISIL in northern Iraq and its operations in Syria have put regional stability at risk, jeopardizing the security of our allies in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, and Kuwait. The group’s recruitment of fighters from the United States and Europe also raises the potential for terrorist plots here at home. From a humanitarian perspective, the rampant religious persecution of Christian and Yazidi minorities has displaced tens of thousands, many fleeing into the Sinjar mountains. According to news reports, thousands of civilians have been slaughtered as ISIL expands its control in areas of northwestern Iraq.

Launching a Political, Economic, and Military Response

In a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, Gen. Jack Keane, former vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army, and Danielle Pletka, a senior vice president at the American Enterprise Institute, outline a comprehensive strategy to stop ISIL with political, economic, and military tactics. They argue that the United States must use its clout to forge regional partnerships, dismantle the terror group’s considerable financial network, and support military action that aims for defeat, not just containment.

Keane and Pletka write, “A U.S.-led international coalition can provide the military capability, including air interdiction to deny ISIL freedom of movement, take away its initiative to attack at will in Iraq, and dramatically reduce its sanctuary in Syria.” In other words, we can stop ISIL with minimal ground troops if we engage and assist the Iraqi, Kurdish, and the Free Syrian armies.

Could Afghanistan Become the Next Iraq?

The consequences of half-measures in Iraq should serve as a lesson for U.S. action in Afghanistan now. All but 9,800 U.S. troops are expected to depart at the end of the year, leaving Afghan security forces with little foreign assistance. I am concerned that this limited follow-on force may be insufficient to provide stability and that the President may decide to withdraw from Afghanistan altogether. As Iraq illustrates, the end of war does not preclude a future of chaos and the reversal of more than a decade of hard-fought gains.

As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I have called on Gen. Joseph Dunford, former commander of the International Security Assistance Force and future Marine Corps Commandant, to “speak truth to power” about the drawdown of troops in Afghanistan. I noted in a hearing earlier this year that “had we gotten the correct advice, and been given a more realistic assessment, the disaster in Iraq could have been avoided.”

Congress and the President have an obligation to learn from these mistakes. As we work toward a strategy to eliminate ISIL, we must be mindful of the pitfalls that could make Afghanistan similarly susceptible to radical groups with a malignant intent.