I write this week from Paris, where the international coalition against the terrorist group, Daesh, held another meeting to shore up its ranks, after its lightning expansion in Anbar (Iraq) and Tadmur (Syria), ringing alarm bells worldwide.
Despite those setbacks, the coalition tried to sound positive in the statement issued after the meeting. But there were hardly any new steps or commitments matching those developments. Individual statements made by some key actors betrayed differences if not utter frustration. I will try to explain why.
The convocation, officially dubbed “The Ministerial Meeting of the Small Group of the Global Coalition to counter Daesh,” was off to an unlucky start with US Secretary of State John Kerry’s bicycling accident, forcing him to return home. Ministers and senior officials from 22 countries, plus the United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU), took part, discussing primarily the security situation in Iraq and Syria, humanitarian assistance to refugees and the internally displaced and protection of cultural heritage.
The meeting was co-chaired by France, the US and Iraq, which was represented by Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi. The consensus as reflected in the co-chairs’ statement included points such as renewed determination to remove Daesh from the areas they now control in Iraq and Syria and provide additional air support and training. Participants pledged to work harder to interdict the flow of fighters and funding to the group and combat its ideology.
Al-Abadi outlined the plan to liberate Anbar province, adopted on May 18. It includes recruiting and arming tribal fighters to fight alongside Iraqi forces, restructuring security forces to enable them to control liberated areas and ensuring that all forces operate under the control of the government and military chain of command. He also called for international funding to finance a UNDP plan to restore stability in liberated areas. Anticipating criticism about his governance, Al-Abadi reiterated his commitment to the rule of law, human rights, equality and fair participation for all Iraqis without discrimination.
Participants decided to hold Al-Abadi to his promise to place all armed groups under government control and to recruit and arm Anbar tribal fighters. While declaring their readiness to support him, they pointedly called for “implementation of policies and concrete measures to address Iraqi citizens’ legitimate grievances and to promote national reconciliation, based on the provisions of the Iraqi constitution and the program of government agreed by the government of Iraq in September 2014.”
On Syria, the coalition stressed the centrality of political solution and the need to address the root causes of Daesh’s ascendance, placing the main responsibility for the deteriorating political, humanitarian and security conditions on the regime, because of its continuous violation of international norms.
In an attempt to raise levels of commitment to the coalition and enable it to achieve its goals, it was agreed to hold a meeting at the head-of-state level next September in New York.
It is noteworthy that while the co-chairs’ statement was long on UN humanitarian efforts in Syria and Iraq, it failed to mention GCC states, which contributed the lion’s share in funding humanitarian work in the two countries. For example, Kuwait alone organized three international conferences, the last of which in March 2015, mobilizing about $8 billion in humanitarian aid to Syria since 2011. Last week, it pledged $200 million for Iraq. Other GCC states have made similar contributions. While the coalition sought to project a united front in dealing with Daesh, press reports painted a somewhat different story. The New York Times, for example, attributed to coalition members their belief that no matter how much support is given to Iraqi forces, they could not defeat Daesh, unless their sectarian composition is changed and unless the Sunni community is persuaded to join the fight. Similarly, Sunnis in Syria see the regime and its Iranian supporters as engaging in a sectarian war against them and would not fight Daesh until the regime is defeated first. There are, however, small armed groups that appear to be ready to fight both, even as they see getting rid of the regime as first priority.
A similar note was sounded last week by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius when he said that Daesh could not be defeated in Iraq unless the government exerted a greater effort to persuade Sunnis to join by giving them a greater role in government. Although Iraq’s prime minister made the right references to inclusive government, his emphasis appeared focused on seeking military and economic support, talking at length about the increased volume and sophistication of Daesh’s arsenal.
Some participants, according to a Washington Post report, complained that Al-Abadi made a point of blaming the international community for failing to resolve the Iraqi crisis, instead of admitting his government’s own responsibility for that failure.
