Many of us focused Wednesday on President Obama’s insistence that the United States will provide air power only in the fight against ISIS, and will expect other nations to do the fighting on the ground. We talked a lot about how foolish it is to concede such an important strategic option to the enemy before the fighting even starts, and worse yet, to publicly tell the enemy you’re doing so.
We also talked about the fact that Obama obviously made this concession in an attempt to sell his plan to voters, which means he is putting domestic politics ahead of victory. Hardly a surprise coming from this president, but it’s jarring nonetheless to realize it.
What not many asked, however, is what makes Obama think these other nations will do what he says he wants them to do? We’ve all seen what ISIS does to the people they capture (and they did it again on Saturday to British hostage David Haines). We all know what can happen to anyone who is called to engage in combat.
Why would Middle Eastern allies of the United States just go along with a plan that sees U.S. forces dropping bombs from the air, while their guys have to fight on the ground? Did Obama actually secure the agreement of these nations to do so before he went on TV and told us this is what is going to happen?
I ask this because the Washington Post reported earlier in the week that Middle Eastern nations have noticed the same thing about Obama that many of us here at home have noticed. As Mustafa Alani of the Gulf Research Center in Dubai puts it: “We have reached a low point of trust in this administration. We think in a time of crisis Mr. Obama will walk away from everyone if it means saving his own skin.”
Boy, they know our president pretty well. They were not impressed when Obama drew his infamous “red line” of chemical weapons deployment in Syria and threatened to use force against Bashar Assad, only to turn tail and cut a pathetic deal instead. They were not pleased when Obama continued to back Nouri al-Malaki as Iraq’s prime minister even after other allies tried to warn him that Malaki was alienating the crucial Sunni population.
My guess is that they probably pay attention to what Obama does at home too. They know that he routinely breaks his commitments on everything from ObamaCare implementation to immigration if it suits him politically to do so.
So why would they trust him to keep his promises in the fight against ISIS? It was only eight months ago Obama was referring to ISIS as Al Qaeda’s JV team, and even last week it was obvious to everyone that Obama is announcing this military action only because he feels he has no choice. If ever there was a reluctant warrior, it is this guy, but at the moment he cannot afford to look like the wimp who would do nothing while these monsters march across the region beheading and tormenting people.
What happens, though, in six to nine months when Obama begins to read his self-interest on the matter differently? Can those fighters on the ground still count on the U.S. air support they need? Because it’s not as easy for them to turn tail and run as it is for Obama, who is an expert at it and does it with no sense of embarrassment.
Ultimately they may have no choice, because of the threat ISIS poses, to get in there and fight anyway. But they surely don’t have a lot of confidence in the guy who’s supposedly leading this coalition.
Not that it probably helps much, but we can at least assure those Middle Eastern allies who don’t trust Obama that we feel their pain. We’re even more stuck with him than they are.
