United States arms Kurdish forces directly
The United States government has begun to funnel weapons directly to Kurdish forces fighting Islamist militants in northern Iraq, officials said on Monday, deepening American involvement in a conflict that the Obama administration had long sought to avoid.
The decision to arm the Kurds, via a covert channel established by the CIA, was made even as Pentagon officials acknowledged that recent American airstrikes against the militants were having only a temporary deterrent effect and were unlikely to sap their will to fight.
“I in no way want to suggest that we have effectively contained, or that we are somehow breaking, the momentum of the threat,” said Army Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr., the director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
In a reflection of the administration's reluctance to fight another full-fledged war in Iraq, Mayville said there are no plans to expand the limited air campaign, which President Obama ordered last week to prevent the massacre of Iraqi minorities and to protect Unites States military and diplomatic personnel in the northern city of Irbil.
Military officials said they have conducted 17 airstrikes — including four on Monday — against fighters from the Islamic State, a terrorist group that has swept across northern Iraq in recent months and controls large parts of Syria. Mayville added, however, that the militants have responded by melting into populated areas, making it harder to target them.
“They're very well-organized,” he said. “They are very well-equipped. They coordinate their operations. And they have thus far shown the ability to attack on multiple axes. This is not insignificant.”
The Islamic State has an estimated 10,000 fighters and has routed Iraqi army units across much of the country, seizing large quantities of weapons and ammunition originally supplied to Baghdad by the American government. In recent weeks, the group has overwhelmed the semiautonomous Kurdish militia forces, surprising officials in Washington with the speed and breadth of their territorial advances.
Kurdish leaders have complained that they are outgunned and unable to mount a counteroffensive without more assistance.
American officials have tried to expedite the transfer of arms from the government in Baghdad to Kurdish fighters in the north. But that process has gone slowly, prompting Washington to open a direct pipeline to the Kurds via the CIA, according to two officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the spy agency has not publicly acknowledged the operation. The CIA declined to comment.
A military official said the Pentagon and the State Department are discussing other possible ways to deliver weapons to the Kurds through open channels, but they will need special legal authorization. Arms sales normally are restricted to sovereign or central governments.
A former American military official who still works closely with the Kurds described the arms pipeline as “a trickle” that has been limited to Kurdish forces in the vicinity of Irbil. “They need everything, especially heavy weapons,” the former official said.
Some military analysts said the effort to arm the Kurds and the administration's limited airstrikes were unlikely to make much of a difference in the overall campaign against Islamist insurgents in Iraq.
“At most this will move the front lines at the margins,” said Stephen Biddle, a professor at George Washington University and frequent adviser to the Pentagon. “This war is headed for a Syria-like stalemate.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Floods paralyze Manila
- Shiite, Sunni clashes in Yemeni capital kill 120
- Scots reject independence from United Kingdom in historic vote
- Scotland’s ‘No’ will change Britain
- It’s not a small world after all: Global population estimated to soar
- Aid to Ukraine uncertain as its leader visits U.S.
- Obama, generals part ways on ground war in Iraq
- Outraged Chinese fight ‘fake beef’
- U.S., EU sting Russian energy sector in sanctions
- Russian gas disruptions ‘test’ Poland
- Study: Ocean algae can evolve fast to adjust to climate change