FAIRFIELD-SUISUN, CALIFORNIA
Barack Obama

President Barack Obama pauses while speaking about the situation in Iraq, Thursday, June 19, 2014, in the Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House in Washington. Obama said the US will send up to 300 military advisers to Iraq, set up joint operation centers. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

U.S./World

Back to Iraq: Obama sending military advisers

By From page A1 | June 20, 2014

WASHINGTON — Inching back into a fight he tried to leave behind, President Barack Obama announced Thursday he was dispatching 300 U.S. military advisers to Iraq to help quell the rising insurgency in the crumbling nation. He also challenged Iraq’s embattled leader to create a more inclusive government or risk his country descending into sectarian civil war.

“The test is before him and other Iraqi leaders as we speak,” Obama said of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose political fate appeared increasingly in play as his rivals launched a secretive effort to replace him.

Less than three years after Obama heralded the end of America’s war in Iraq, he insisted he was not sending the military back into combat. Still, when coupled with previously announced steps, the president’s actions could put about 600 additional U.S. troops in the midst of Iraq’s deeply unstable security situation.

Underscoring the volatility was a tenacious fight over Iraq’s largest oil refinery north of Baghdad. Iraqi soldiers and helicopter gunships battled Sunni militants for a third day on Thursday for control of the refinery, the loss of which would be a devastating symbol of the government’s powerlessness in the face of a determined insurgency hostile to the West.

Despite the deteriorating conditions, Obama held off approving airstrikes that the Iraqi government has sought to stem an insurgency that has taken over the cities of Mosul and Tikrit and has pressed toward Baghdad. The president said he could still approve “targeted and precise” strikes if the situation on the ground required it, noting that the U.S. had stepped up intelligence gathering in Iraq to help identify potential targets.

Officials said manned and unmanned U.S. aircraft are now flying over Iraq 24 hours a day on intelligence collection missions. If the U.S. were to proceed with airstrikes, officials did not rule out the prospect of hitting targets in Syria, where the militant group pressing through Iraq also has deep ties.

Even as Obama left the door open for a direct military response, he said Iraq’s future ultimately rests with its leaders’ willingness to embrace a more inclusive political system. Al-Maliki has long faced criticism from the U.S. for not giving Iraq’s Sunni minority a greater role in the Shiite-dominated government.

While U.S. officials have increasingly raised questions privately about whether al-Maliki can lead his country out of the current crisis, Obama stopped short of calling for the prime minister to step down, saying “it’s not our job to choose Iraq’s leaders.”

But in what appeared to be a pointed warning to al-Maliki, Obama said: “Only leaders that can govern with an inclusive agenda are going to be able to truly bring the Iraqi people together and help them through this crisis.”

A leading Sunni tribal chief said Washington’s decision to send the military advisers would only make the fighting worse. Sheik Ali Hatem al-Suleiman, whose men are involved in the Sunni insurgency led by the al-Qaida inspired Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, said the violence would end only if al-Maliki stepped down.

Both al-Maliki’s Sunni opponents and many of his former Kurdish and Shiite allies have been clamoring to deny the prime minister a third term in office, saying he has excluded them from a narrow decision-making circle. Iraqi political leaders and U.S. officials also have met in recent days to discuss al-Maliki’s future.

Possible candidates were already lining up to replace al-Maliki, according to Shiite politicians familiar with the secretive efforts. Among them are former vice president Adel Abdul-Mahdi, a French-educated economist who is also a Shiite; and Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite who served as Iraq’s first prime minister after Saddam’s ouster.

Also lobbying for the job is Ahmad Chalabi, a Shiite lawmaker who recently joined the Supreme Council and was a favorite by Washington to lead Iraq a decade ago.

The jockeying has been prompted by the lighting gains of the ISIL, an insurgency fueled in part by the civil war in neighboring Syria. The militants have sparked a fresh cycle of sectarian violence in Iraq, which continued Thursday when the bullet-riddled bodies of four handcuffed men, presumably Sunnis, were found in a Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad.

The fight continued for control of the Beiji oil refinery, with Iraq’s government desperately seeking to hold off the extremists. By late Thursday, the two sides held different parts of the refinery, which extends over several square kilometers of desert.

The 300 Green Beret special operations forces Obama plans to deploy to Iraq will be focused on assessing the state of the Iraqi security forces, which have struggled to hold off the insurgent advances and in some cases have deserted their units. Initially the deployments will be limited to several teams of about a dozen soldiers apiece who will operate mainly in Baghdad at various Iraqi military headquarters.

The first wave will also assess the state of the battle with the insurgents and set the stage for the deployment of follow-on military adviser teams. More broadly, the role of the advisers is to gather intelligence and share it with the Iraqi forces, and assess how best to increase the training and equipping of Iraqi Security Forces in their fight with the insurgents.

The military advisers will join up to 275 U.S. forces that Obama previously announced would be positioned in and around Iraq to provide security and support for the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and other American interests.

Mindful of what he called “the deep scars left by America’s war in Iraq,” Obama was adamant that U.S. troops would not be returning to combat.

“We do not have the ability to simply solve this problem by sending in tens of thousands of troops and committing the kinds of blood and treasure that has already been expended in Iraq,” Obama declared at the White House. “Ultimately, this is something that is going to have to be solved by Iraqis.”

On Capitol Hill, congressional reaction to Obama’s decisions broke down along party lines with Republicans criticizing him but offering wildly different recommendations of what steps to take. Democrats cautiously backed the president.

Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, pushed for airstrikes. Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, complained that Obama’s “half-step” wouldn’t resolve the crisis. McKeon pressed for a comprehensive course of action but provided no specifics on what that should be.

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia and Independent Angus King of Maine welcomed the limited U.S. military support to the Iraqi forces. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, speaking in advance of the president’s announcement, voiced concern about dispatching even a small contingent of Americans to Iraq.

“I think that you have to be careful sending special forces because that’s a number that has a tendency to grow,” she said.

The Associated Press

The Associated Press

LEAVE A COMMENT

Discussion | 9 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • PatriotJune 20, 2014 - 5:29 am

    Smells like Vietnam to me. If any of these advisors gets killed the blood is now on Obama. He cannot blame Bush anymore.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • 2realJune 20, 2014 - 6:04 am

    NObama!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DanielJune 20, 2014 - 7:31 am

    Kirchy and CD after the latest obstruction, the IRS tapes being destroyed, let's hear your excuses for this one? What does he have to do to finally admit we have another Nixon on our hands (only worse)?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJune 20, 2014 - 7:37 am

    Daniel, once again I ask YOU, what factual information do you have that can substantiate your claim? Go ahead and disappear like you always do. You have nothing so stop the nonsense.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rudy MadronichJune 20, 2014 - 8:50 am

    I thought Obama said that we would leave and get out of Iraq. Now we are sending in advisers. I guess President Obama is a hawk and not a dove when it comes to Iraq. This is now Obama's War. But the liberal left will continue to say its Bush's war.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Danny BuntinJune 20, 2014 - 5:08 pm

    As long as we are not moving complete armies, I have no problem with this. So, you are hoping someone dies, so you can complain about that Obama? Fake outrage at its best.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rudy MadronichJune 20, 2014 - 4:42 pm

    I just thought i would check back after work this afternoon to see if their were any more comments and surprise surprise nothing from the liberal left i guess they have nothing to say as usual. They can talk a good game and put some outlandish spin on a story or just plain avoid what is going on right in front of their nose all because they defend this president no matter what he does and blindly follow him.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Danny BuntinJune 20, 2014 - 5:15 pm

    It is what it is. What would you do? Maybe you and Patriot can go set them straight? Our foreign policy has not changed for 14 years, despite the change in presidency.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • FDCJune 20, 2014 - 7:46 pm

    Those of us old enough remember when a few "advisers" were sent to South Viet Nam. The madness begins again.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2015 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.