US wary over striking ISIS jihadists in Syria

Update: 2014-09-07 22:31 GMT
That, however, is far more complicated. If it launches air strikes against the group in Syria, the US runs the risk of unintentionally strengthening the hand of president Bashar Assad, whose removal the west has actively sought the past three years. Uprooting the Islamic State group, which has seized roughly a third of Syria and Iraq, may potentially open the way for the Syrian army to fill the vacuum.

The alternative would be to finally get serious about arming the mainstream western-backed rebels fighting to topple Assad. But there is a reason the administration of president Barack Obama has been deeply reluctant to throw its weight behind them.

The relatively moderate rebel factions fighting in Syria are in tatters. There are no secular groups, and the strongest factions are Islamic groups, many of which work with al-Qaida’s official branch in Syria, the Nusra Front. The Nusra Front, which has somewhat dropped from international headlines because of the Islamic State group’s exceeding brutality, is on the US list of terrorist groups and is still very active.

It and other rebels recently seized the Quneitra border crossing between Syria and the Israeli-held Golan Heights, taking 45 United Nations peacekeepers hostage. It was also among a group of militants that recently overran a Lebanese border town and is holding several Lebanese soldiers and policemen captive. While the US and its allies are now arming Kurdish peshmerga fighters in Iraq against the Islamic State group, Syrian rebels complain they are largely on their own, battling both the militants and the tyranny of Assad.

The Syrian opposition and many Syria observers are convinced the rapid rise of the Islamic State group is a result of the US having left the Syrian conflict fester for so long.

Similar News