Small Wars Journal

Dempsey Arrives in Baghdad for Anti-ISIL Campaign Talks

Sat, 11/15/2014 - 10:25pm

Dempsey Arrives in Baghdad for Anti-ISIL Campaign Talks

DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2014 – Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Baghdad, Iraq’s capital city, today in an unannounced visit for talks with U.S. and Iraqi officials on the way ahead in the campaign against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, according to the Voice of America and other news reports.

Dempsey also met with U.S. service members during a town hall meeting in Baghdad.

Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel testified before the House Armed Service Committee Nov. 13 on the progress of the campaign. Dempsey told the House panel that the effort against ISIL is “Iraq first,” not “Iraq only.”

“Broadly, our strategy is to reinforce a credible partner in the Iraqi government and assist regional stakeholders to address the 20 million disenfranchised Sunnis who live between Damascus and Baghdad,” Dempsey told committee. “They have to reject ISIL’s radical ideology from within.”

Dempsey also urged Congress and the American people to develop the strategic patience needed to see the effort through.

The campaign calls on Iraqis and the anti-ISIL coalition to squeeze the extremists from multiple directions, Dempsey told the House committee. The coalition must take on ISIL inside Iraq. It must deny the group safe haven inside Syria.

“We need to take a long view,” the chairman told the House panel.

Many lines of effort must proceed apace including “counter-financing, counter-foreign fighter flow, counter-messaging, humanitarian aid, economic progress, the air campaign, restoring an offensive capability within the Iraqi Security Forces, and a ground campaign managed by the Iraqi Security Forces from the south and the Peshmerga from the north, with contribution from the tribes in particular in al-Anbar and Nineveh,” Dempsey said.

Comments

Outlaw 09

Mon, 11/17/2014 - 6:05am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Bill --what worries me is the attitude or lack thereof of NATO ie in the background the US towards Russian aggressive moves in 2007.

Exclusive: How NATO told Georgia to ignore the Russian military threat in 2007

There are always two sides to a story especially in Europe.

http://www.georgianjournal.ge/politics/28724-how-nato-told-georgia-to-i…

Outlaw 09

Mon, 11/17/2014 - 5:59am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Bill M--part of the problem we are facing is that the old US guard of Russian linguists and poli sci types that "understood" "Soviet speak and now Russian speak" are all gone and we did not cultivate a new generation because we assumed the "war" was long over.

This also goes for radical Islamists---just how many US decision makers really understand just how the Koranic verses are being used--IS is talking to us much as is Putin---do we inherently "understand" both?--no not really.

Understanding both is rather easy but first one must totally ditch his and or her biases and "listen and re-listen"---then think it through and mull it over and then and only then speak.

Russian speak:

News and commentary from Ukraine Business Online

KYIV, Nov 17, 2014 (UBO) – According to Russian Interfax, Russian President Vladimir Putin has urged Western partners to shift from a one-sided view of the Ukrainian problem to steps towards reconciliation of positions and preservation of a single political space in Ukraine. For anyone who does not understand “Putin-speak,” we would translate this to mean that Putin wants to negotiate a scheme to establish a political entity in Ukraine that would include not only his defeated Regions cohorts but also LPR and DPR pro-Russians who continue to terrorize eastern Ukraine. The fact that such an entity would have no electoral legitimacy is a matter of no consequence to Putin.

Responding to this latest Putin plan, Standard Bank economist Timothy Ash provided the following comments at 10:03 AM today:

Putin basically wants a coalition government created in Ukraine - but remember Russia is not involved in Ukraine in any way, or that is the official view from Moscow. I think he wants representatives of the Opposition Party, and former Regions deputies in this concoction and hence in effect a veto on Ukraine's orientation.

More:
Looks like Far East #Russian_Army forces are massing on the Ukrainian border,up to no good.
pic.twitter.com/4puzh4siZj

The Golden Horde is back in East Ukraine after centuries pic.twitter.com/RgIzyQ9Ikk

Ammo & replacements come in, stolen coal & Cargo 200 goes out. Word "humanitarian" is Putin speak for logistics.

By the way the Merkel interview she gave yesterday was brutal and she speaks Russian very well and understands the Russian mindset---she openly stated Putin does not want a "solution" he wants his way end quote.

Outlaw 09

Mon, 11/17/2014 - 5:09am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

I have said here a number of times in the past that Islam must eventually go through their own Reformation phase---their problem is that it is a diversified religion meaning a large number of religious leaders and teachers can have their own definitions of what they "view" to be correct.

After al Baghdadi released his 20 or so pages recently---well worth the read in the English version---it was answered within a few days by over 120 different conservative and orthodox Islamic scholars and legal experts who claimed he was wrong over 25 times in his understanding of the Koran-and as he stated his views in his released document--a massive achievement since many of the authors move inside the Whabbi side of Islam.

The core of their released document was that IS was not correctly using the Koran---the book from God and the Haditha written by the Prophet as they stated it must be viewed as a unit not to be "picked and chosen" from.

They released the critique that he violated Sura 2, 85 which states "he who only reads one and does not pay attention to the other is what?"
That is a major rebuke/hand slap of an alleged Caliphate leader.

The authors stated that the works of both God and the Prophet must be seen as a total package---that alone was a damming statement towards al Baghdadi.

The problem is and I often saw it in Iraq during interrogation work---many of the fighters are simply not that well versed in Islam and only repeat what they have either heard and or been taught by their various leaders.

If one dug deeper after they made a Koranic statement then you and they would realize there was not much forthcoming and how lacking they were ---they were often astounded that I "a person of the book" often could quote both texts verbatim far more accurately than they could. By the way a great ice breaker.

This shot by the 120 is the opening of the Islamic Reformation and needs the support of the West to keep it moving--that is the inherent weakness of IS and al Baghdadi.

Actually in some ways the exact problem with Putin now and his "belief/biases" model of thinking.

Outlaw 09

Mon, 11/17/2014 - 1:47am

In reply to by Bill M.

Bill---I would tend to agree with you BUT and there is always as but--the current Russia moves are not only provocative but designed to achieve what the old Soviet Union could not and did not achieve;

1. separating the US from Europe (US seen as the defender of liberal principals that Russia refuses to even recognize as being valid)
2. degrading NATO as a power and potential threat to the new "Russia"
3. degrading and eliminating the influence and economic power of the EU---why---the EU demands from all that join it that their civil and criminal laws change to represent what the EU stands for AND this is important the EU has brings a set of economic laws that in effect would kill the Russian State Enterprises a hangover of the old SU

Part of the Russian fear with the Ukraine joining the EU is the new demand that their current products they sell in the Ukraine meet safely and food quality level for the entire EU---which Russia cannot meet--thus the fear of losing a 500M USD per year.

The core fear right now with Russia is they have not recognized they "lost" the long war simply because they were one massive Ponzi scheme as the entire economics was built on lies from bottom to top and back down--and that responsibility is not accepted by Putin---he blames the West and claims "humiliation.

The IS is indeed a threat for the entire ME--but more a threat for the Sunni side---on the whole they are fighting as well against their far deeper enemy---the Shia.

I personally do not see them branching much outside their strength point---the areas controlled by the Sunni population---where they move into the Shia side they fall into then a minority militarily as well.

I my opinion we cannot get involved in what basically is a religious war much like the 30 and 100 years wars in Europe which was over a religious question as well and when finally both sides were laying exhausted on the ground and there were virtually no people left in some areas of Europe both religions settled their differences---we are not there yet.

Iran is though really set on trying to extend their hegemon control over all countries that are part of and border the old "silk road" and that in my opinion is far more dangerous than the IS currently.

By our trying to support the Shia we have signaled to the IS we are taking sides and it is against the Sunni---again IMO a totally wrong move.

Bill M.

Sun, 11/16/2014 - 9:20pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

I'll take a stab it.

Russia for the past 50 years has had nuclear weapons that could strike Western Europe and the U.S., so the potential threat is far from new. Putin reminding us he has the weapons is provocative, but it doesn't change the threat equation.

Russia has only taken over Crimea and parts of Eastern Ukraine, much like they did before. When they did it before the British and French teamed up to take it away from Russia. That was long before anyone had nukes, so the risk of doing that was acceptable. The risk compared to the gain isn't acceptable now. Need to identify what countries, if any, Putin has his eyes on now and act preemptively to impose costs to deter him, or if need be to defeat his efforts.

IS threatens Iraq, a country that in recent memory we lost over 4,000 U.S. troops in attempting to mold it into a country in our image. National pride certainly plays a role. The situation is also a current humanitarian crisis that has spilled over into Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey.

More importantly, IS threatens to destabilize the entire region, not just Iraq and Syria. It is wise to contain the problem before they destabilize Saudi, Jordan, and the remaining Arab states. If they control the oil, they'll easily have money to purchase WMD from North Korea, or other nations/non-state actors willing to sell their weapons, knowledge, etc. to the highest bidder.

IS has no intention of staying local.

Both are important issues, Putin will probably bound his behavior within a new norm we can live with. IS will keep on going until they're stopped, or just as likely fall apart from within.

Outlaw 09

Sun, 11/16/2014 - 12:36pm

I really do wish that the senior military leadership of the US military actually hold to their previous comments on the Russian invasion currently into the Ukraine.

Is it not strange that while the US is not being threatened by the IS with nuclear tactical missiles which now sit close to the Ukrainian border and can reach into the NATO member state Rumania and or the US being "targeted" in simulated nuclear cruise missile air attacks---we might get around to having the JCoS visit say the Ukraine.

That is if they stand by their previous statements on Russian activity inside the Ukraine which the Oxford Dictionary would define as an "invasion".

Does anyone else find it interesting that while we chase IS across Iraq and Syria who has no nuclear capacities and have not actively invaded anyone--- they seem to get all the attention and weapons?

Wonder why that is?