US Offensive on IS Is Legitimate, but Must Respect Norms

On Monday night, the U.S. Department of Defense announced it had already united several of its Middle Eastern allies in an attack on the Islamic State, and that strikes had already been carried out within Syria. The attacks included Tomahawk missiles as well as F-22s. Obama has already clarified that these attacks on the Islamic State group will continue until at least the end of his presidency.

The Obama administration hasn’t formally asked for the United Nations Security Council’s consent for this offensive. Syria has said that the day before the offensive, the U.S. reached out to Syria’s U.N. representative about the decision to carry out attacks, but Syria did not grant the U.S. the right to carry out attacks within Syrian territory.

The player with the most influence in Syria right now is the Syrian government’s army. Mutual differences and hatred abound among the army, Western-supported opposition parties, and the Islamic State group. The strongest among the three is the Syrian government’s army. America’s strategic goals are to destroy the Islamic State group, unite the opposition forces, and continue to apply pressure to Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship.

These factors ensure that this action will be difficult. No matter how much outside support the U.S. can get, it will be giving up its chance to unite more groups within Syria. Obama is afraid he has no other options to pursue, and that America’s original Middle East policy is already in serious trouble. America’s hostile posture toward the al-Assad regime has been one of the reasons that the Islamic State group has grown, but there is not enough power or courage on the part of the United States to change it.

If the U.S. can work with the Syrian armed forces, then removing the Islamic State group will be much easier. Currently, the problem is that in the Middle East, the U.S. has too many enemies; when a new conflict erupts, it’s necessary to ask “just who is the main enemy?”

In the end, it is still clear that the Islamic State group is an enemy of the civilized world. The positive intentions of the United States are evident despite being affected by other factors. What isn’t evident right now is if the primary U.S. strikes on the Islamic State group will affect the hostility it has with Bashar al-Assad, and whether or not these actions will further complicate the “war on terror.”

Obama has already warned Syria not to interfere with American war planes. The strong posture of his latest speech has focused again on the legitimacy of the al-Assad government, but has also opened the door to some cooperation. Without some areas for cooperation, it will be difficult to rule out future friction between the U.S. and Syria.

The Obama administration has already guaranteed that no U.S. land forces will be deployed; only air strikes will be used. The threat to the U.S. is small, but the probability of the Islamic State group continuing to exist is large. If the U.S. has to “make war on two fronts,” with both the Islamic State group and Syria, then its strategic objectives will become muddled.

With regards to U.S. airstrikes on the Islamic State group, China should adopt a “not-opposed” position, but at the same time remind the U.S. to respect Syrian national sovereignty and the U.N. Charter’s protocol on carrying out operations. If the U.S. expands it attacks to also target the Syrian government’s forces, then, the nature of the war will have changed and China’s attitude should be adjusted accordingly.

Obama still has a little more than two years left in his term. Previously, he displayed a cautious inclination toward starting conflicts. If the campaign against the Islamic State group continues to develop into a larger war, then, it will be a critical factor when people consider Obama’s attitude toward war from a historical perspective. If Obama can withstand the pressure from hawkish Americans, he will leave his own personal brand on the United States, rather than face being remembered by the world as one who was influenced by those around him.

The call to join in the Islamic State group’s savage and cruel campaign is said to be much more attractive to extremists than al-Qaida’s is. The U.S. must make sure that in its effort to exterminate the Islamic State group, it does not create conditions that could give rise to more “cutting- edge” terrorist organizations. Many people have this hope, and it lies within the realm of possibility.