Balancing on the Edge, Editorial

A recent New York Times Editorial titled "A Balancing Act on Iraq" supports President Obama's stance on the militant insurgency sweeping across Iraq. The main group pressing across Iraq from the north calls themselves The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria or ISIS. These Islamic militants are also fighting a war in Syria over control of regions within that state. The group is mainly of Sunni background which desires to overthrow the Shiite controlled Iraqi government. These two groups have been fighting for centuries; this is just the most recent skirmish. However, to allow Iraq to fall deeper into sectarian violence would be a serious folly on the part of the American government.

This editorial speaks to the fact that Mr. Obama is taking the correct approach to this situation. Engaging the region's states to take an active role in quelling the violent upheaval of the government controlling Iraq is the best course of action. Iran, which is also controlled by a mainly Shiite government, has a significant interest in maintaining Shiite control in Iraq regardless of how much Iran wants to downplay this fact. Diplomats from both Iran and the United States meet in Vienna this week to discuss possible cooperative actions. Should Iraq fall into Sunni control, it would represent a significant threat to the security of Iran. Hopefully the Obama administration does not lose sight of this fact when discussing what cooperative actions will be considered and what Iran will do to secure U. S. involvement. An illustration of the parallelism between supporting Iraq's Shiite government and securing Iran's national security is paramount during these discussions to ensure Iran is not bargained into cooperation with reprieve from economic sanctions or other bargaining chips.

Is it really not in the United States' interest to have a Sunni state with such proximity to Iran? The fighting that would ensue would surely only weaken Iran as well as Iraq. However, as much as an even more weakened Iran might be appealing to the U. S. and more so Israel, to destabilize the region more would be even more perilous to Israel and by association the United States. Mr. Obama has called on the Iraqi government to form a diverse representative government of Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds as a condition of United States military action in the region. More likely than U. S. troops on the ground will be tactical drone attacks on the insurgent militants to support Iraqi armed force in retaking northern regions of the country which are under the control of ISIS. Unfortunately, there is a certain aspect of posturing to be considered in the United States' reaction to ISIS taking control of parts of Iraq. This situation cannot be allowed to show America as weak on the international stage. After the long military campaign in Iraq, for a militant insurgency to sweep control of the nation in a short period of time and hold it would not speak to the might of the American military and would only illustrate the massive mess we've made of the region.