President Barack Obama wanted to shift the focus of foreign policy and security of the United States to Asia. His goal when he arrived at the White House in 2009, was to end the wars he inherited from his predecessor, George W. Bush, and close the chapter on a decade in which the war on terrorism -a expression that Obama Administration – came face to world power in time, money and blood.

The Rise of the Islamic State (EI) in Syria and Iraq to force Obama to change their plans. This summer’s political career that made his early opposition to the invasion of Iraq and his promise to withdraw troops in 2011 has sent planes to bomb positions of Sunni militants group in this country.

The president who, after the death of Osama bin Laden in 2011, held that Al Qaeda were “decimated” and “on the road of defeat” now faces a split of Al Qaeda, the EI, which aims to create a caliphate in the Middle medium and, according to the Pentagon, is “an imminent threat” to American interests worldwide.

The video with the beheading of American journalist James Foley, released this week, is a qualitative change: the message is that, again, terror arrives in the United States.

“If you go to for Americans, we’ll go for you, wherever you are.” The phrase is not the Republican Bush, prone to this combative rhetoric. It is Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser young Democrat Obama: his spokesman on security issues.

In a press conference, Rhodes confirmed Friday what General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said yesterday: United States considers attacks against the Islamic state in Syria, hitherto excluded airway intervention in neighboring Iraq.

“Can they be defeated without confronting a part of the organization resides in Syria?” Dempsey asked. “The answer is no.” No concrete plans yet, not clear what the strategy is to try to defeat the EI would be. Weary of war, Americans refuse to send troops to distant countries.

But if the United States bombard in Syria would be a double rectification: by intervening in a country that President ruled one year bombing when everything was about to do so now, and for bombing not the regime of Bashar al-Assad, as he planned to do so, but the fiercest enemies of the Alawite dictator, the Islamic State.

Another correction: up to now the target of the bombing of the United States in Iraq was not defeat but contain the spread of the Islamic State, coming to Erbil, capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, and prevent the extermination of the Yazidi minority. The words of the leaders of the Pentagon and President Obama this week indicate that the defeat of the Islamic State is on the agenda of the first power.

If the war on terrorism, a term which is still banned in the White House, fighting back jihadist groups to monopolize the efforts of the United States. “Osama bin Laden is dead, and most of his lieutenants. There have been no large-scale attacks against America and our country is safer,” Obama said last year in a speech on terrorism. “Our partnerships are strong, and our position in the world. In sum, we are safer because of our efforts.”

It was possible to get along with other countries, the United States no longer faces existential threats far away. With video of the murder of Foley and the return to Iraq, the ghosts of September 11 return to the United States. That period was not locked. Iraq and anti-terrorism show that for presidents not so easy to cut short his predecessors. Obama tried to. The first thing to come to the White House was announcing banning torture and closing Guantanamo.

But Guantanamo remains open investigations into CIA torture continue to occupy Congress. The shadow of George W. Bush continues to define the scope of Barack Obama.

NO COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY