http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/s ... s-strategyObama to lay out plan to 'degrade and destroy' Isis threat
President's strategy to 'degrade and destroy' insurgents will include military action and support for Iraq and Syrian opposition
Barack Obama will pledge on Wednesday night to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the Islamic State insurgency operating in both Syria and Iraq in an address to the American people expected to herald a significant escalation of the US military role across the region.
Though the exact extent of the anticipated US intervention in Syria remained unclear in the hours leading up to the key speech, White House officials made clear the president planned to pursue a two-pronged strategy on both sides of the border that is likely to build on existing air strikes in Iraq against the group known as Isis or Isil.
"Tonight you will hear from the president how the United States will pursue a comprehensive strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy Isil, including US military action and support for the forces combating Isil on the ground – both the opposition in Syria and a new, inclusive Iraqi government," said a senior administration official in a statement issued to reporters on Wednesday morning.
I call it a "do over" because as I discussed in another thread, while the Administration's strategy in terms of implementation has been clear (and given the circumstances we find ourselves in today, it's the best possible course) the President's ability to articulate it in a clear, consistent and unconfusing fashion has been sorely lacking...
Here's the reason I believe he has had this problem:
Barack Obama came into Office, (and he and his Administration have pushed ever since) with a narrative and an arc for his Presidency, that is fundamentally at odds with the reality he finds himself facing...
His was supposed to be the Presidency that ended our direct military involvement in the Mid-East; furthermore, his philosophy was built around the idea that the threat from Islamist Extremism was overblown...
We'd gotten bin Laden, the Radical Islamists were "on the run", ISIS was a "JV team"...
We were supposed to be basically in a "mop up" operation against some fragmented groups...groups that he was pursuing effectively with drone strikes and co-ordination with locals in various places like Yemen and Somalia...
And now the reality on the ground with ISIS has caused this whole narrative and desired legacy for his Presidency to blow up in his face...
I give Obama credit for the fact that he has from a policy standpoint, abandoned this hoped for reality in exchange for dealing with the real one. He has lived up to his responsibility as POTUS in that regard.
What he must do tonight is embrace and articulate that policy rhetorically; he's had enormous difficulty doing this...
Anyone who has followed his numerous statements about this since he first announced the initial airstrikes, couldn't help but notice the way his rhetoric has vacillated between stating the stakes and the strategy properly in one sentence, and then (sometimes literally in the very next sentence) seeming to take it back, or muddy the focus...
The result has been that on the question of the conduct of foreign policy, in the most recent NBC/WSJ poll Obama comes in with a 32% approval rating...
Which is even lower than George W. Bush's on that issue in the 6th year of his Presidency...
I believe that even though from a policy standpoint he has for the last month to a month and a half been making the right calls, he has been having a very difficult time psychologically and internally breaking free from the way he "wanted" things to be...
Hence the rhetorical confusion and contradictions in his public statements...
Tonight, he needs to rise above that, and speak in clear and unambiguous terms (like David Cameron did, and like our Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power did a couple of weeks ago in her speech at the UN Security Council about the situation in Ukraine)
He doesn't need to do what some on The Hill are asking for; he doesn't need to give some detailed cross every "T" and dot every "I" order of battle...
But he needs to lay out, in clear, unambiguous, and unequivocal terms:
1. The seriousness of the threat.
2. The overall strategy for meeting it. (but not every detail)
3. The fact that this is a fight that will not end in days or weeks, or probably even months.
That last is likely to be the toughest pill for him to publicly swallow, (since he wanted to be the President who was going to bring an end to "all this") but that's what he needs to do...
In about an hour, we'll see if he does it...
