National Security Policy In Syria

During ISIS’s rise to power, there have been several key players, which have influenced the growth or decline of its movement. The center of Gravity (COG) for ISIS has been its ability to recruit volunteer foreign fighters from around to engage in its caliphate. In addition, local people from Iraqi, Syrian, and other Nations have been key players because of ISIS’s efforts promote fear and violence against their family or communities. Sunnis and Shia countries focused on regional power and security. Furthermore, the U.S. and its 70 Allies through Operation Inherent Resolve Campaign aim to defeat ISIS and promoting regional stability. The last key players are rival terrorist franchises or organizations like AQ, Taliban, Al Shabaab, and Hamas

President Obama’s strategic plan in Iraq and Syria is to continue Airstrikes to slow the forward progression of ISIS, while utilizing deployed U.S. service members to work with coalition partners to assist with partner building capacities. These partners include “Iraqi Security Forces, Kurdish Peshmerga forces, and moderate Syrian fighters, and both Sunni and Shia militia groups.”3 To be successful in this endear as mentioned by Sec Carter, “the only way to have a lasting defeat of ISIL is to have someone who can govern and secure territory once ISIL is defeated, a local force on the ground. That 's why the strategy calls for the United States to help train and equip, and then help enable local ground forces.”4 Without basic security the Government of Iraq (GOI)

The U.S. strategy for defeating ISIS must look like defeating terrorists without compromising foreign interest in these countries, like Syria, and Iraq. There is also a risk for finding trustworthy allies, and having weapons falling into the wrong hands. Therefore U.S. should provide aids to allies and help them figure out their true ideology. A war would destroy the economy of the Syria and negatively affect the citizens as well as the environment of the region. For the betterment of the world and its people, countries should come together and end the war by negotiating rather than shooting at each other, if possible.

The United States first tool to achieve these goals is diplomatic. First, the United States needs to retract the policy that the United States does not negotiate with Terrorists. Negotiation creates a negative connotation of concession or handing power over to the enemy. Negotiation, however, can be mere discussion with the enemy to find a way to end violence. Diplomatic tools consist of treaties, conventions, alliances, and accords. Holding conventions and creating accords will be the most successful approaches. Treaties require Senate and Presidential approval which can be a lengthy process and is tied up in domestic politics. The United States already has certain alliances and it is necessary to cultivate them, but in the context of ISIS and Syria, alliances are already set with the Free Syrian Army. Conventions to bring together many nations in the Middle East, Europe, and the United States, to formulate agreements and accords with the states that are involved in Syria and fighting ISIS. ISIS, should not be a signatory since they are not a recognized state, but should be able to attend to make decisions with an understanding of ISIS’ wants because by understanding their objectives and interests we are better able to make policy to decrease violence of ISIS.

In 1945, Syria had a barely functioning civilian government and a military that was always involved in the government’s politics. Syria and Iraq have now made new allies with; Afghanistan, Libya, and Yemen. “ISIS’ involvement in the Syrian Civil War has exacerbated the conflict, leaving over 300,000 dead, two-thirds of the Syrian people in need of humanitarian aid, and some 11 million people uprooted (7 million internally displaced and 4 million refugees abroad)” (Forsythe, Monshipouri 1) which is a very big reason why ISIS needs to be stopped. ISIS killed so many innocent people, just because they wanted to bring terror into the whole worlds lives and wonder what is going to happen next, where is it going to happen, and if it is going to happen to one of us. Our U.S. foreign policy has not effective at ending Syria’s crisis, not even a little bit. After Syria’s uprising, the U.S. and United Nations have thought about resolutions to trying to defeat ISIS but, none of those strategies have worked so far. After the attacks in Paris, on November 13th, it was a lot easier for us to make airstrikes against ISIS. It was also a very big part of why Paris decided to take action and also to airstrike as well. There are also major problems that we have to think about when trying to take over ISIS. We have to think about making an effective size ground force big enough to

Born out of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the group by the name ISIS has become incredibly unpopular with everyone, especially those in the West. ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria; the name was made in the hopes to assert their dominance in Syria. Many Great Powers across the globe, the United States in particular, are focused on defeating the fast growing terrorist group, but unfortunately, have had very little success in the past due to the lack of ground troops. The United States has not done enough to fight ISIS because the country is afraid that getting too involved would take a great toll on their nation; however, the U.S. needs to directly and physically attack the terrorist group because nothing is going to change without U.S. military involvement. That said, I feel the only recommendations for further interactions are as follows:

The description you get of ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) from people is not pleasant. George W. Bush has called ISIS “evildoers,” President Obama described ISIS as a spread of “cancer” over the Middle East, and John Kerry called ISIS “valueless evil” (jewishvirutallibrary.org, “The Islamic State: Background”). ISIS is the wealthiest, and most land controlling terrorist organization in history. This dangerous terrorist group needs to be stopped. As ISIS is a growing threat to the World’s safety, we as a nation need to work on limiting supplies to the Syrian people, border control into the United States, reduce ISIS’s income, along with continuing airstrikes and troops controlling the ground. With these series of tasks the

The Washington Institute For Near East Policy convened its new proposals to bring change between four viewpoints on the potential threat on U.S and its allies regarding ISIS. While the rhetoric used during the U.S. presidential campaign has produced a range of controversial statements about “destroying” ISIS, specific policy proposals remain limited.

The US needs to approach this problem through promoting democracy in the Middle East and attacking the ideologies of ISIS rather than their soldiers. Violent extremist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda did not exist until the US invasion of 2003 left a power vacuum that these groups were able to step in and fill (Kirk: Losing Iraq). This problem was caused by military intervention, and by leaving Iraq at the hands of an inexperienced Prime Minister who reverted back to sectarianism, and it would be naïve to think it will be solved in the same way . If at all the US is going to intervene, one has to turn its funding away from the military, and instead concentrate on supporting and helping to build a democratic government in Iraq and Syria that is representative of all of the people of different religious affinities. This plurality in the government will start to heal the rift between the Sunnis and Shias and will not crumble and pave the way for another extremist government to take over. Apart from US military force destabilizing the country, Atrocities committed by US troops at places like the Abhu Ghraib prison are being used by ISIS as recruiting propaganda to justify their brutal atrocities. (Khatib). Trying to bring more military force to the region will only create more extremists willing to join ISIS cause against what they see as western imperialism. The US needs to counteract the radical ideas that ISIS is perpetuating against the US by using the Internet and social media, as astutely as ISIS does, to promote democracy, and shed light on the atrocities that ISIS forces are committing. Without doing so, ISIS would be able to continue to propagate and spread their dogmatic ideology and further strengthen their cause. Fighting the ideologies of ISIS would open up a world of democratic education and show the people affected by the spread of ISIS that extremism is

The possible stringent action against Assad regime is a subject of intense debate amid a broader ongoing discussion concerning the U.S. policy towards the civil war witnessed in Syria. President Obama took the initiative to restore the deterrent power of United States since he had announced that when the Syrian authorities cross a red line, it will generate a response. The restraint from the American has strengthened Assad’s sense of security, hence lead to an expansion of the operation scope against the said rebels and other innocent civilians.

he New York Times reported that the United States has refrained from systematically attacking Al Qaeda’s franchise in Syria because US-backed fighters coordinate and are enmeshed with the outfit. The newspaper also reported that the Pentagon had refrained in 2015 from attacking ISIS militants in and around the Syrian city of Palmyra in order to further the US foreign policy goal of regime change in Damascus.

The radical Islamic terrorist organization, recently re-titled “the Islamic State,” has existed under several names since the 1990s. Its history is an epic of how modern terrorism progressed from a religious and political ideal into an obliterating cult. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a properly-armed group that is a threat to the global security. ISIS, whose merciless members delight in murdering innocent people, must be destroyed before its fanatical followers carry out further genocides. There is an ongoing debate on whether the United States ought to take stronger military actions against the extremist organization, ISIS, or not. Supposing that the United State does not act promptly, ISIS will fortify its territory and

With the immense funding that ISIS has from illegal activities, oil sales and taxations of people living in areas under their control, specific measures must be taken to slow and eliminate their funding. Due to the income coming from black market oil sales, it is imperative to target the middle men moving the oil, as well as target those who refine, transport and assist the black market oil sales that contribute to the ISIS revenue. There also needs to be collaboration with local governments to assist them in regaining control over areas where ISIS, or other terrorist organization, have strong holds. These strong hold where the local government has no control are the areas that ISIS and other terrorist organizations are able to exploit the natural resources and populations for their gain. Additionally the American government needs to target ISIS financial hubs and distribution routes

The United States as well as several other countries has suffered losses at the hands of the Islamic State, the United States have shown interest of finding a way to weaken the group's power and put a stop to their violent attacks. President Barack Obama’s goals for the United States U.S Strategy were degrade and defeat the Islamic State through direct military action and also provide support for local partner forces. Throughout the years the United States has conducted various operations against ISIS and other countries such as Egypt and Nigeria has provided security assistance in support on operations against the Islamic State and its affiliates. President Obama said that the strategy he his administration would work but would take time. The idea of targeting local leaders and other influential member belonging to ISIS and affiliate would have worked given time.

Ways; Increase the airstrikes bombing with prices targeting on ISIL human and logistical capacity and capability. Establishing the Combine Task Forces (be prepared) no more than Battalion size (Civilian Led, Intel, military expertise and NGO for humanitarian Support) with purpose to support the countries in