It could work, if U.S. troops don't leave too soon.
Michael E. O'Hanlon is the Co-Director of the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence and Director of Research in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution. He specializes in national security and defense policy. Before joining Brookings, O'Hanlon worked as a national security analyst at the Congressional Budget Office. His current research agenda includes military strategy and technology, Northeast Asia, U.S. Central Command and defense budgets, among other defense and security issues. His most recent book is "The Future of Land Warfare" (Brookings Institution Press, 2015).
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
The United States and other coalition partners need to find a way to work with Kurdish forces inside Syria while mitigating Turkish objections to the plan.
Some will say that ISIS overachieved here, or that Omar Mateen was more a deranged individual than an ISIS operative, or that recent battlefield progress by the United States and its partners against ISIS in Iraq and Syria will soon lead to the group’s demise. None of these arguments is compelling as a case for complacency. What Mateen did, even if it is the bloodiest single shooting spree in U.S. history, is entirely repeatable by well-trained individuals with access to weapons like the AR-15.
The breathless reports this weekend that a ceasefire for Syria had been reached "in principle" reveal once again how unrealistic our thinking has become about this particular national security issue.