Report: US efforts to combat ISIS 'incoherent' and 'disorganized'

A report by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service skewers the administration for leading an "incoherent" and "disorganized" effort to combat ISIS.

Gee...a think?

Tell me if this doesn't sound like a Keystone Kops operation.

Washington Free Beacon:

As the United States and 21 other nations attempt to push back IS forces operating in Iraq, the new report warns that the war effort is being undercut by a lack of coordination and, in some cases, efforts that “contradict” one another, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service that was not made public but was released by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS).

The report comes amid numerous reports IS is making gains and solidifying its control key Iraq cities and even expanding outside of the war torn country’s borders.

CRS concluded in its analysis that the effort, dubbed Operation Inherent Resolve, is being led in a haphazard manner that leads to inefficient military action by the countries involved.

“Without a single authority responsible for prioritizing and adjudicating between different multinational civilian and military lines of effort, different actors often work at cross-purposes without intending to do so,” the report states.

Exact financial contributions by countries remains fuzzy, making it difficult to track exactly what each nations if funding and for what reason.

“Each nation is contributing to the coalition in a manner commensurate with its national interests and comparative advantage, although reporting on nonmilitary contributions tends to be sporadic,” the report found.

Recent military campaigns provide evidence of the incoherent strategy, according to CRS.

“These coalition coordination challenges were demonstrated in recent military campaigns (and particularly in Afghanistan),” it states. “Exacerbating matters, other actors in the region—some of whom are coalition partners—have different, and often conflicting, longer-term regional geopolitical interests from those of the United States or other coalition members.”

“This, in turn, may lead nations participating in the coalition to advance their goals and objectives in ways that might contradict each other,” the report found.

These flaws are impacting the success of the joint military campaign against IS, which has cost the United States $3.21 billion as of July 15.

The big problem: the U.S. refuses to take the lead. The United States is conducting the overwhelming number of missions compared to any other coalition member but can't bring itself to assert a leadership role that would unite the partners and bring organization and coherence to the mission.  This has been a problem that has emerged in every other military operation in which the U.S. has participated. 

Although the administration continues to say that the offhand remark by an unnamed Obama aide that the U.S. will "lead from behind" didn't mean what he said it meant, the proof is obvious that this is the overall strategy that's been adopted.  The CRS report gives us a good idea how it's working.

A report by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service skewers the administration for leading an "incoherent" and "disorganized" effort to combat ISIS.

Gee...a think?

Tell me if this doesn't sound like a Keystone Kops operation.

Washington Free Beacon:

As the United States and 21 other nations attempt to push back IS forces operating in Iraq, the new report warns that the war effort is being undercut by a lack of coordination and, in some cases, efforts that “contradict” one another, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service that was not made public but was released by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS).

The report comes amid numerous reports IS is making gains and solidifying its control key Iraq cities and even expanding outside of the war torn country’s borders.

CRS concluded in its analysis that the effort, dubbed Operation Inherent Resolve, is being led in a haphazard manner that leads to inefficient military action by the countries involved.

“Without a single authority responsible for prioritizing and adjudicating between different multinational civilian and military lines of effort, different actors often work at cross-purposes without intending to do so,” the report states.

Exact financial contributions by countries remains fuzzy, making it difficult to track exactly what each nations if funding and for what reason.

“Each nation is contributing to the coalition in a manner commensurate with its national interests and comparative advantage, although reporting on nonmilitary contributions tends to be sporadic,” the report found.

Recent military campaigns provide evidence of the incoherent strategy, according to CRS.

“These coalition coordination challenges were demonstrated in recent military campaigns (and particularly in Afghanistan),” it states. “Exacerbating matters, other actors in the region—some of whom are coalition partners—have different, and often conflicting, longer-term regional geopolitical interests from those of the United States or other coalition members.”

“This, in turn, may lead nations participating in the coalition to advance their goals and objectives in ways that might contradict each other,” the report found.

These flaws are impacting the success of the joint military campaign against IS, which has cost the United States $3.21 billion as of July 15.

The big problem: the U.S. refuses to take the lead. The United States is conducting the overwhelming number of missions compared to any other coalition member but can't bring itself to assert a leadership role that would unite the partners and bring organization and coherence to the mission.  This has been a problem that has emerged in every other military operation in which the U.S. has participated. 

Although the administration continues to say that the offhand remark by an unnamed Obama aide that the U.S. will "lead from behind" didn't mean what he said it meant, the proof is obvious that this is the overall strategy that's been adopted.  The CRS report gives us a good idea how it's working.