AMU Homeland Security Intelligence Middle East Opinion Terrorism

ISIS, Syria and Common Sense

By Dr. Robert “Smitty” Smith
Special Guest Contributor, American Military University

The essence of any foreign policy is to achieve national and policy objectives. Syria is a perfect example of what happens when policies are muddled or fail to have any discernible concrete or realistic goals.

Otto Von Bismarck, the First Chancellor in the Kingdom of Prussia (from 1871 to 1890), was a master of setting realistic foreign-policy goals; perhaps the current administration could liberally borrow from that master.

Realpolitik is defined as “politics or diplomacy based primarily on power and on practical and material factors and considerations, rather than ideological notions or moralistic or ethical premises.” Realpolitik is basically the use of politics to achieve modest and more realistic goals in opposition to overzealous (unrealistic) politics, although it is associated with the nationalism of the 19th century. Realpolitik policies are as a tool to strengthen states, set in the Westphalian model, which is still the current world order.

The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 offered the United States and perhaps the Middle East the best opportunity to break out of its cycle of reactionary regimes and hatred. The Bush administration boldly used 9/11 to remake the Middle East if not in a democratic fashion, then in terms of enforcing a Pax Americana. Instead though, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s poor strategic and tactical choices which emasculated the U.S. forces’ boots on the ground, and a lack of corresponding vision, led to a missed opportunity.

A series of missteps nearly led to an early post-Operation Iraqi Freedom debacle, starting with Paul Bremmer’s incredible blunder of disbanding the Iraqi Army—perhaps one of the five worst decisions in this century. However the emergence of ISIS puts us at a new crossroad and beckons a new opportunity for U.S. Foreign Policy.

The first policy option is using a combination of either U.S. troops—singularly or in partnership with the United Nations—to regulate the current Iraqi Army. The fantasy of both the Bush and Obama administrations that one can create functioning shake and bake armies was left in the dust by the ISIS blitzkrieg. If we send any U.S. boots on the ground, we make it clear that we retain the right to offensively defend ourselves in any possible blue on green incident.

If we are to defeat ISIS, it will require more than airpower alone. Perhaps it’s time to utilize the venerable workhorse of the U.S. Air Force, the A-10, (which the Air Force unwisely keeps trying to kill), to provide the ground support needed by the Iraqi Army. Those are some of the easier avenues to consider – and despite so much American treasure already spent, this is not simply a case of throwing good money after bad but instead a more nuanced investment.

However, all of this is really a tactical means to get to a long-term “hold” rather than what has become the USW foreign policy of “fold.” We must rationally and intelligently deal with Bashar Hafez al-Assad, the Butcher of Damascus. Assad’s current position affords the United States and the world a new opportunity to help the Syrian people, bring the Assad regime back into the international fold, smash ISIS, change the dynamics of HAMAS powerbase, allow us a new avenue to Iran and protect the regime in Iraq. With a well-conceived policy, all of those goals are achievable with a realization the world isn’t a place where we simply wish and hope it will be the way we want it to be. However, this requires vision, some hard strategic thinking and a plan that lasts longer than the next polling cycle. Colin Powell’s comments of “if you break it, you’re responsible” is on point—even more so now—given that we greatly upset the strategic balance of security in the Levant, which since overflowed into adjacent areas.

None of this is impossible, because diplomacy is the art of the possible. In 1990, we treated the Assad regime in as a partner of sorts against Saddam Hussein—therefore we have an established precedent. Syria and the U.S. have a commonality of interests—the destruction of ISIS. The failure to deal now with ISIS and the Caliphate could result in the largest foreign policy disaster in recent memory. Now is the time for President Barack Obama to step outside political ideology and boldly seize this opportunity.

If Obama succeeds, history may praise him for cutting through the Gordian knot of the Middle East mess like Alexander the Great. If he fails, he’ll be seen as the sulking, petulant child who doesn’t understand why the world is so mean to him and why it doesn’t conform to his flight of fantasy.

About the Author: LTC Robert G. Smith has served in the capacity of an armor officer, logistician, military intelligence and engineer officer. He is a graduate of the Armor Basic Course, the Armor Advanced Course, Command and General Staff College and Army Combined Arms Staff College and the Advanced Joint Professional Military Course in Joint Warfare.

After 9/11 he was recalled to active duty, serving as the lead Army military historian at the U.S. Army Center of Military History for the attack on the Pentagon. He has subsequently served as the Vth Corps historian for the initial invasion of Iraq and in the Deputy Directorate of Special Operation (DDSO) on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. While on the DDSO he wrote a highly classified study on SOF in the Global War on Terror. He was the CoS of the Army one man GWOT record collector, tasked to collect all the lost records. In three years he collected 7.5 TB of records. In addition, he served as the Deputy Command Historian at CENTCOM. He was appointed as a Kentucky Colonel by the Governor of Kentucky in 2010. He currently is in the Army Wounded Warrior Program.

Among his awards are the Bronze Star, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Medal and Combat Action Badge. He is currently a faculty member at American Military University, teaching courses in intelligence, national security and military science studies. He recently received the university’s 2014 Faculty Excellence in Teaching and Learning Award.

Comments are closed.