The fall of Ramadi, the capital of Iraq’s Anbar province, to Daesh recently after two years of failed attempts to storm into the city, raised many questions about the state of the Iraqi army.

Commenting on the fall of Ramadi, US Defence Secretary Ashton B. Carter said the Iraqi army “showed no will to fight” and this is why it was defeated again by Daesh after the Mosul battle. This is a very sensitive subject that affects the core of the national loyalty of decision-makers in Iraq.

Despite the media fuss and war slogans targeted at Daesh, the pressing question which arises here entails the US-led international coalition and its seriousness about eliminating Daesh — because no two will disagree about the capabilities of the coalition to eliminate the terrorist organisation if they were serious about the matter.

There are several analyses to explain the failure to eliminate Daesh almost a year after the invasion of a number of Iraqi cities. Most of these analyses tend to tip towards the view that says that the US does not have a strategy in this context despite the fact that it is spearheading the international coalition against Daesh. US Republican Senator John McCain is of that view.

But these analyses — despite their different backgrounds, passions and goals — are not devoid of the influence of political wrangling within the US and abroad, and this may be at the expense of accuracy and a firm objective outlook.

The US, which is leading the campaign against terrorism has well-developed institutions and research centres that work relentlessly on improvising visions and formulating long-term policies. They also have accumulated experience stretching over several decades in the fight against terrorism and high specialisation in this area in addition to unmatched intelligence capabilities.

These centres also employ media outlets in the US and other locations that are US allies for the purpose of fighting and combating terrorism. Even educational programmes in these countries are affected by the US strategy of combating terrorism.

In all truth, the US has not faced terrorism with partial responses and sporadic acts. On the contrary, they have faced it with strategies that have managed to rally around it dozens of countries to confront this danger. The continuation of life in Daesh after each one of its defeat has other reasons.

Daesh is an organisation with complex extensions in a number of countries. The perpetuating of its presence in Iraq is linked to tactical dimensions inside Syria in more than one province which has fallen under its absolute control.

Hence, there is no sense talking about the elimination of Daesh military operations in Syria and Iraq.

The methods of response to Daesh inside Iraq, which sometimes occur timidly, leave no room for doubt that the operations carried out will not lead to eliminating it, but rather to perpetuating its existence until it can be used as a tool to achieve the US administration’s tactical objectives.

The US administration ceases confronting Daesh whenever it feels that the Iraqi government has turned away from its magnet, and returns to deliver aerial strikes against Daesh when the Iraqi compass returns to its senses.

On the other hand, the International Coalition’s operations were limited in Syria to those carried out in the city of Kobani. However, they dropped significantly after the danger surrounding the Kurdish receded.

US President Barack Obama himself said earlier that “we have no strategy towards Daesh in Syria”. Hence he clearly expressed the confused and undecided policy regarding the situation in Syria.

His administration of the crises in accordance with the half-solutions approach in Iraq and to keep the Syrian problem hanging makes the strategy of the fight against Daesh an absurdity that sustains the struggle in both countries and pushes the fate of the whole region towards the unknown!

For its part, the Iraqi government is serious about fighting Daesh despite its modest capabilities, because it considers the elimination of this terrorist organisation a fateful issue. The Syrian government on the other hand is not doing anything against Daesh, simply because they consider its continued existence as a justification for their continued presence.

Eliminating Daash in Iraq and in Syria and in other locations is first a political issue before being an issue that requires war efforts. And despite the setbacks suffered by Daesh in many parts of Iraq, we see that it retrieves its manoeuvring abilities and initiative-taking capabilities while carrying out major operations, as what happened in the occupation of Ramadi.

Daesh has the ability to achieve significant breakthroughs because the atmosphere in the region is riddled with contradictions, feuds and frustrations and there is more than one country benefiting from its existence one way or another — and perhaps provides Daesh with some logistical support.

The final victory against Daesh in Iraq is impeded by the fact that the stand of most of the parties in the country is marked with hesitance, and the lack of firmness and decisiveness on many levels, starting with the US to Iraqi Prime Minister Dr Haidar Al Abadi to the tribes in Iraq’s western region.

 

 

Mohammad Akef Jamal is an Iraqi writer based in Dubai.