Not surprisingly, President Obama will not step into the new Iraqi quagmire called ISIS which, with the capture of Mosul, came closer to achieving its goal of a caliphate that would reshape the Middle East. A day earlier Obama had not “ruled out anything” because, as he rightly concluded, the US has a stake in making sure that jihadists do not get a permanent foothold in either Iraq or Syria. But 24 hours later, Obama ruled out American troops on the ground. And whatever options Obama will come up with, he is depending first on Iraq's ability to fix its internal political problems. So there will be no urgent deployment of military forces or even short-term military help from the United States because again, according to Obama, it won't make much difference. What Obama is apparently saying, and he has said this before, is that American military might is not always the answer to solving complex global problems, and secondly, that brute force was tried in Iraq to induce change, it failed, and it will not be repeated. But Obama did indirectly help ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, an ultra-extremist Sunni Muslim group. No doubt, his predecessor's decision to go to war was a disaster. But in quitting Iraq, Obama failed to win an agreement that left some American troops behind, or that provided American aerial support. Pulling out US troops in 2011 created a security vacuum. Only last month, he refused Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki's calls for American airstrikes against the jihadists. And in Syria, as many warned, Obama's unwillingness to provide significant military backing to opposition forces in that country's civil war has contributed to the ability of ISIS to besiege Iraqi cities. The predictable outcome of Obama's vow to prevent America being sucked into Syria has been to create a terrorist threat in Iraq, so grave that it risks sucking America into an even worse mess. To demonstrate the complexity of the picture, ISIS has put on one side the US and Iran - of all countries. Both have promised to help the fight against the insurgency but for totally different reasons. The UN has warned of summary executions and extrajudicial killings in Iraq and that the number killed in recent days may be in the hundreds. The International Organization for Migration estimates that 40,000 people have fled Tikrit and Samarra, adding to the 500,000 people who are already believed to have left Mosul. Every day violence in Iraq kills 40 to 50 people but it has only been with the seizure of Mosul that international attention has been brought back to the country. Instability and violence have always plagued Iraq but until now, its problems have not included a swift takeover of key cities by extremist Islamists. The situation is grim for Iraq's government, with ISIS picking off one city after another and picking up the American weapons the Iraqi army is leaving behind as they flee. In recent days Sunni insurgents have seized the cities of Mosul and Tikrit, and are moving closer to Baghdad. If ISIS can hold Mosul and consolidate its presence there, it will have taken a giant step toward its goal of creating an Islamist emirate that straddles Iraq and Syria. The success of ISIS can only make the turmoil in the Middle East worse. Violence is spreading and security deteriorating in Iraq, prompting Obama to say that the beleaguered government required assistance. But it's not the kind he will provide.
