The US has, effectively, no partners against ISIS. Thanks be to God!

Submitted by Michael S. (United States), Sep 11, 2014 at 19:23

Yes, it's a semantic comedy. Before Mr. Obama gives what will no doubt be a convoluted exposition of what Islam is and isn't, I notice that his "boots on the ground, but not American boots" policy will amount to.

"In a joint statement with the United States, the allies, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, said:

The participating states agreed to do their share in the comprehensive fight against ISIL, including: stopping the flow of foreign fighters through neighboring countries, countering financing of ISIL... and, as appropriate, joining in the many aspects of a coordinated military campaign....

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/arab-states-pledge-some-military-help-isis-fight-n201126

None of the above seems to indicate that any of the six GCC members, nor Jordan nor Egypt, plans to put "boots on the ground" against Isis. The only other "partner" in this venture is Iraq, which is effectively divided between the Shi'a Arabs in the south and the Kurds in the NE. Both of these groups is committed to putting "boots on the ground" to recover lost Shi'ite and Kurdish areas, respectively, from ISIS; but none will commit to pursuing ISIS (foolheartedly, as it would no doubt turn out) deep into their Sunni Arab strongholds.

Note that none of the above are NATO allies. The only NATO state in the region, namely Turkey, flatly refuses to fight ISIS -- whom it supports by providing a conduit for its reinforcements and trade. Neither are any other NATO allies, such as the UK and Germany, willing to take part in the air campaign.

In my book, this is all the most desirable outcome: President Obama has not convinced any allies to effectively join him against ISIS; and as soon as Congress gets wind of the fact, they are likely to not support him either. The net effect will be one less superpower meddling in the area and making matters worse than they are.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".