President Barack Obama publicly addressed the nation Wednesday night regarding a Middle Eastern – and potentially global – crisis that has emerged in the form of a terrorist group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
ISIS is a group of extremists who have been terrorizing and killing innocent people in Iraq and Syria, including Muslims.
In recent days, the United States has been horrified by the direct and brazen beheadings of two freelance American journalists, James Foley and Steven Sotloff, who were inoffensively working in the Middle East.
In reaction to this and many other barbaric acts of ISIS, President Obama delivered a speech to the American people in which he stated that the United States would be recruiting a coalition to “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS. This coalition will include the deployment of 475 U.S. military advisors to Iraq, bringing the total number of American personnel stationed there to 1,600.
However, the president also made it clear that “these American forces will not have a combat mission; we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.”
President Obama also added that this mission “will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; it will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.” Instead, this “anti-terrorist” coalition will focus mainly on airstrike campaigns.
According to Lipscomb political science professor Guy Vanderpool, the president’s speech was just what our nation needed to hear.
“It conveyed a clear warning to ISIS, assured Americans that their security is his top action and emphasized that the freedom and justice and dignity of world peoples remain integral to U.S. foreign policy,” Vanderpool said. “At the same time, the president emphasized that he does not intend to exceed the wishes of Americans by getting into another protracted war.”
Marc Schwerdt, also a professor of political science, had a different reaction to the presidential address, however, maintaining that the use of air power is an insufficient way to eradicate ISIS.
“It will require ground troops, but we have already said that U.S. troops will only be there in an advisory role,” Schwerdt said. “ISIS will be able to retreat across Syrian borders and it is doubtful that Kurdish, Iraqi or other forces will pursue them for very long. The ultimate success of this operation will not be in U.S. hands.”
While some rally around the president and his narrowly defined target (ISIS), others are wary of unintended consequences this seemingly minimal level of commitment may have on the United States as well as on the international community.
“Long term, the world is seeing and reacting to a U.S. that is not taking the lead even where its ability is unmatched,” Schwerdt said. “This will have consequences unforeseen yet.”