Is the United States at war with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria? Depends on whom you ask.
Secretary of State John Kerry on Thursday said no, preferring to call it “a very significant counterterrorism operation.”
National Security Adviser Susan Rice said what the U.S. is doing is “very different” from what Americans think of as war because it doesn’t involve U.S. ground troops in combat.
But White House spokesman Josh Earnest, when asked by reporters about Kerry’s comments, said: “We are at war with [the Islamic State].”
Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby was even more emphatic: “Make no mistake: We know we are at war with [the Islamic State] in the same way we are at war and continue to be at war with al Qaeda and its affiliates.”
The mixed messages from administration officials are reminiscent of those between the White House and the Pentagon over whether the president had a strategy for dealing with the Islamic State and whether it represented an “imminent” threat to vital U.S. interests as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in August.
The differences have sparked frustration not just from Republicans in Congress, but also from U.S. allies in the region who have been concerned about Obama’s willingness to keep on task when faced with crises.
“There is a genuine sense among the leaders I talked with that America is disengaging from the region and concerns about American credibility, at a time when credibility counts,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon, R-Calif., said Thursday, describing what he had learned on a recent visit to the Middle East.
“Our relationships with these allies in the region are at a tipping point.”
But despite their differing word choices, administration officials agree on the point emphasized by President Obama in his speech Wednesday night outlining the U.S. strategy against the Islamic State: It will not be a repeat of the years-long ground wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Instead, Obama’s strategy relies on building a coalition that includes “boots on the ground” from regional nations, some of which have reasons to be reluctant to join.
Kerry, in Turkey on Friday pressing the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to join the coalition a day after Ankara refused to sign a communique outlining an anti-Islamic State approach, announced that retired Marine Gen. John Allen, a former NATO commander in Afghanistan, would be a special U.S. envoy to the growing group.
The U.S. diplomatic efforts are having some success. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, for example, chose to smooth over his country’s many concerns with the administration — most notably its reluctance to support rebels fighting the government of Syrian President Bashar al Assad — after meeting with Kerry on Thursday.
“I only see agreement. I don’t see disagreement,” Prince Saud said. “I see the agreement that we have about the present situation.”
But Turkey has proven to be more difficult. A NATO ally with a Sunni Islamist government, Turkey is seen as a key partner. After meeting with Turkish officials, Kerry praised Ankara’s “ongoing partnership” but could not say specifically what they would do to help against the Islamic State.
Kirby, however, told reporters he expects Ankara to come around.
“I don’t think it’s going to be an issue,” Kirby said. “I think Turkey will contribute, they’ve indicated that. But they’re going to do it in their own way.”
