President
Obama, while not going to Congress for a declaration thereof—as required by the
U.S. Constitution—has, in effect, declared war on the Islamic State (IS, aka
ISIS or ISIL). He has announced that the U.S. military will be making war
against IS in both Iraq and Syria, the latter intervention being clearly in
violation of international law.
Peaceworks,
while appalled by the crimes of IS, recognizes that the administration’s
approach is likely to fail at achieving its stated goals, and, in fact, likely
to do more harm than good. As has been the case with every American military
intervention in the region, Obama’s war on IS will bring more death and
destruction. Its likely outcome will be more, not fewer, enemies and greater
regional instability. It is also likely to be very costly in every sense of the
word.
Our
opposition to the use of violence to address IS is based in part on upon
practical concerns. Our government has repeatedly intervened or taken sides in
civil wars and internal conflicts with consistently negative outcomes. From
Central America (El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala) to Southeast Asia (Vietnam,
Cambodia, Laos), to Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen, proponents of intervention
have a hard time coming up with a success story they can point to.
Mr.
Obama embraces the pursuit of military victory primarily via aerial bombing and
drone strikes. But, this approach has repeatedly failed, and for good reason. It
is extremely difficult to wipe out an enemy by bombing, and, inevitably, many innocent
civilians are killed while trying. Fallen combatants are made into martyrs, and
are portrayed as making the ultimate sacrifice fighting the powerful and evil
foreigners. With the U.S. taking sides in a civil war, there is greater
polarization and less opportunity for reconciliation between warring factions.
This
does not mean we reject taking action. We simply call for action that is
consistent in means and ends and more likely to succeed. We must start, first
and foremost, with diplomacy and work with other states in the region, not to
make war together, but to seek a just and inclusive peace. Here is a list of
actions that we think would be more effective, borrowed from our friends at
Veterans for Peace:
1)
Stop the airstrikes because the Sunni leaders and militia, who President
Obama acknowledges must be persuaded to break with ISIL, see the U.S. as acting
as the air force for the Kurds and Shia against Sunnis. The driving force for
the Sunni-ISIL alliance is the alienation of Sunnis from Baghdad by the
previous Iraqi administration. Bombing Sunnis will not help mend this
relationship.
2)
Stop the slippery slope of sending troops to Iraq and stop sending more
weapons that fuel the conflict killing more civilians and ignoring human rights
violations committed by “allies” This includes pressuring countries to stop
supporting and selling arms to ISIL and stopping all black market weapons
sales.
3)
Make diplomacy the number one priority. Since it is clear there is no
military solution, seriously engage with everyone in the region, including Iran,
which is needed to force the Iraqi government to be more inclusive with Sunni
leaders. Without an inclusive government in Iraq there is no way to effectively
confront ISIL.
4)
Initiate a new effort at building a broad diplomatic solution in the
United Nations to use diplomatic and financial pressure to stop countries from
financing and arming ISIL and other fighters in Syria. An arms embargo on all
sides should be on the long-term agenda.
5)
Make a real effort to restart UN negotiations to end the civil war in
Syria. Set aside preconceived demands and work to end the violence. Once that
is achieved the people of Syria can begin to chart their destiny.
6)
Massively increase humanitarian efforts through the UN and any other
means. Real and effective efforts to relieve suffering will go a long way in
convincing people to break with ISIL. More U.S. bombings and killings will only
confirm that the U.S. is the enemy of Islam.
