The threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is being overblown to a dangerous and untruthful degree by U.S. government officials, who are getting away with it without question. Micah Zenko argues that U.S. officials must envision America’s enemies “more accurately and honestly.”
Who leaked the New York Times story claiming that Obama was thinking of shaking up his foreign policy team? Leslie H. Gelb suggests how we might solve this mystery and think about the importance of the tale.
President Obama can't move on domestic policy, but still has the power to make headway abroad—especially with Iran (to explore a Mideast strategic overhaul), China (to emplace a viable and critical Asia pivot), and Russia (to prevent a new little Cold War). He shouldn't throw this last chance away.
Despite perceptions among Americans that the country is unsafe and a terrorist attack is "likely," the real threats don't emanate from actors like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Rather, as Micah Zenko argues, self scrutiny is needed among U.S. policymakers to recognize the true threat of terrible domestic crimes, generally not labeled as "terrorism," as they are more likely to occur, and do so frequently.
Panetta's recent, uncharacteristic, and very public criticisms of Obama's Syria/Iraq policy actually get scant attention in his new memoir, Worthy Fights. It is very sad that this typical Washington memoir is probably the final act of a truly noble and effective public servant, says Leslie H. Gelb
The U.S.-led coalition to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) includes fifty-five states, nine of which have taken part in military operations or stated their willingness to do so. However, over time, CPA's Micah Zenko argues, these commitments will diminish as the mission shifts, resources dwindle, and national support decreases, just as was the case in the Iraq War and 2011 intervention in Libya.
American leaders repeatedly offer unrealistic and outrageous counterterrorism strategies that are destined to fail. This is no different for the Obama administration's policy to "destroy" the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, says Micah Zenko.
Americans and Congress repeatedly claim that President Obama is not "tough" enough. Micah Zenko discusses the idealistic concept of strength and basis upon which leaders are judged, concluding: "Foreign policies should not be judged upon the tone and tenor of their announcements, but rather upon their merits and their success."
Government officials frequently proclaim that the world is more dangerous than it has ever been, and mainstream news outlets filter what stories are featured, usually leading with those of bloodshed or violence. Micah Zenko debunks these inflated threats and discusses their consequences for U.S. foreign policy.
The pentagon last week acknowledged that the United States deployed armed drones to Iraq to provide surveillance and strike capabilities as the crisis with the Islamic State of Iraq and and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) continues to deteriorate. However, Micah Zenko points out that while numerous U.S. officials have called for the deployment of drones, these demands have not been accompanied by justifications, and there is still no precise goals for the deployment.
U.S. policymakers are calling for airpower and bombings in Iraq, just two days after the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham captured territory in the north. Micah Zenko discusses why policymakers so quickly resort to bombing as a policy option, and the unfortunate consequences of this limited discourse.
In this CSR, coauthored by Paul B. Stares and Micah Zenko sponsored by the Center for Preventive Action, evaluates the U.S. system for foreseeing and heading off crises and assesses in detail current U.S. practices with regard to different types of preventive action. More
This report, authored by Bronwyn E. Bruton and sponsored by the Center for Preventive Action, argues that the current U.S. policy of supporting the TFG is unlikely to succeed and ineffective foreign meddling threatens to prolong and worsen the conflict. Instead, the United States should pursue a strategy of "constructive disengagement" while still maintaining support for localized development initiatives and humanitarian assistance. More