This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/world/middleeast/obama-syria-un-isis.html

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Obama, at U.N., Urges Allies to Join Fight Against ISIS Obama, at U.N., Vows to Counter ISIS Threat
(about 5 hours later)
UNITED NATIONS — President Obama laid out a forceful new blueprint on Wednesday for deeper American engagement in the Middle East, telling the United Nations General Assembly that the Islamic State understood only “the language of force” and that the United States would “work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death.” UNITED NATIONS — President Obama on Wednesday charted a muscular new course for the United States in a turbulent world, telling the United Nations General Assembly in a bluntly worded speech that the American military would work with allies to dismantle the Islamic State’s “network of death” and warning Russia that it would pay for its bullying of Ukraine.
In a much-anticipated address two days after he expanded the American-led military campaign against the group, also known as ISIS or ISIL, into Syria, Mr. Obama said, “Today, I ask the world to join in this effort,” declaring, “We will not succumb to threats, and we will demonstrate that the future belongs to those who build, not those who destroy.” Two days after ordering airstrikes on dozens of militant targets in Syria, Mr. Obama issued a fervent call to arms against the Islamic State — the once-reluctant warrior now apparently resolved to waging a twilight struggle against Islamic extremism for the remainder of his presidency.
“Those who have joined ISIL should leave the battlefield while they can,” Mr. Obama said in a blunt declaration of his intentions. “Today, I ask the world to join in this effort,” Mr. Obama said, seeking to buttress a global coalition that he said would train and equip troops to fight the group, also known ISIL, starve it of financial resources, and halt the flow of foreign recruits to its ranks.
The president also said: “We will neither tolerate terrorist safe-havens, nor act as an occupying power. We will take action against threats to our security, and our allies, while building an architecture of counterterrorism cooperation.” “Those who have joined ISIL should leave the battlefield while they can,” Mr. Obama said, foreshadowing the blows to come. “For we will not succumb to threats, and we will demonstrate that the future belongs to those who build, not those who destroy.” The brutality of the militants, he said, “forces us to look into the heart of darkness.”
Toward that end the Security Council unanimously approved a resolution Wednesday calling on all countries to adopt laws making it a serious crime for their citizens to join a militant group like the Islamic State or the Nusra Front. Even so, Mr. Obama said, the threat from the Islamic State was only the most urgent of an onslaught of global challenges that have given the United States no choice but to take the lead: from resisting Russia’s aggression against Ukraine to coordinating a response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa; from brokering a new unity government in Afghanistan to organizing a new campaign to confront climate change.
Mr. Obama’s efforts to forge a strong coaltion to fight the Islamic State received another lift Wednesday from Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, who recalled Parliament to meet on Friday and vote on whether to join U.S.-led airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Iraq after Baghdad requested help, the British government said. France has already taken part. It was a starkly different president than the one who addressed skeptical world leaders at the General Assembly last year, two weeks after calling off a missile strike on Syria over its use of chemical weapons. In that speech, Mr. Obama offered a shrunken list of American priorities in the Middle East and showed little appetite for the charged rhetoric or interventionist policies of his predecessor, George W. Bush.
A little over a year ago, Mr. Cameron lost a vote in Parliament when he sought approval for bombing Syria alongside the United States to punish the government of Bashar al-Assad for its use of chemical weapons. But with Mr. Cameron seeming to limit British involvement to Iraq, whose government has asked for assistance, Parliament is expected to go along this time. Mr. Obama on Wednesday spoke more like a wartime leader, reaffirming his determination to work with other countries but leaving little doubt that the United States would act as the ultimate guarantor of an international order that he said was under acute stress.
The military campaign against the Islamic State, Mr. Obama said, is only the most urgent of a raft of global challenges in which the United States has had no choice but to play a leadership role. These include resisting Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, coordinating a response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, from brokering a new unity government in Afghanistan, and marshaling a new push to confront climate change. As if to underscore his new role, Mr. Obama chaired a rare leaders session of the United Nations Security Council, which unanimously passed a resolution requiring countries to pass laws against traveling abroad to join terrorist groups or financing those efforts.
Mr. Obama delivered a searing critique of Russia’s incursions into Ukraine and promised to impose a rising cost on the government of President Vladimir V. Putin for what he called its aggression. He was particularly critical in describing the downing of a Malaysian commercial airliner over eastern Ukraine in July by what the United States and its allies have said was a Russian-made missile system, and he denounced the subsequent efforts to block recovery teams to investigate. All 298 people aboard were killed. “If there was ever a challenge in our interconnected world that cannot be met by one nation alone, it is this,” he said, “terrorists crossing borders and threatening to unleash unspeakable violence.”
For all the hardening of Mr. Obama’s tone, though, it remained unclear whether the speech represented a fundamental rethinking of his policy or a reluctant response to the threat posed by the Islamic State, brought home for many Americans after the militants posted Internet videos of American hostages who were beheaded.
The strategy he outlined would protect the United States from terrorist threats by crippling the Islamic State and other militants like the Khorasan group, which was also targeted this week by American airstrikes, and not by trying to transform the societies in which they took root, as did the architects of the Iraq War.
Still, his remarks clearly seemed designed to get past months in which the president appeared visibly conflicted about the proper use of American military force in the Middle East — an ambivalence that opened him to criticism that he was feckless and irresolute.
In addressing the Ukraine crisis, Mr. Obama used his strongest language yet, portraying Russia’s incursions as an affront to the principles of the United Nations and promising to levy a cost on President Vladimir V. Putin. He accused Russia of conspiring with Ukrainian separatists to obstruct an investigation into a downed Malaysian jetliner.
“This is a vision of the world in which might makes right,” he said, “a world in which one nation’s borders can be redrawn by another, and civilized people are not allowed to recover the remains of their loved ones because of the truth that might be revealed.”“This is a vision of the world in which might makes right,” he said, “a world in which one nation’s borders can be redrawn by another, and civilized people are not allowed to recover the remains of their loved ones because of the truth that might be revealed.”
Mr. Obama also said the United States would train and equip moderate opposition forces in Syria to counter the government of President Bashar al-Assad, and he repeated calls for a political settlement to end a civil war that has killed more than 200,000 people. The 39-minute speech was also notable for what Mr. Obama did not say. Last year, he singled out nuclear negotiations with Iran and Syria’s civil war as two of his top priorities in the Middle East. On Wednesday, he mentioned them in only a cursory manner.
“Cynics may argue that such an outcome can never come to pass,” he said. “But there is no other way for this madness to end — whether one year from now or 10. I can promise you America will remain engaged in the region, and we are prepared to engage in that effort.” Iran, he said, should not let the chance for a nuclear agreement slip by. But he made no reference to Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, who has made clear he does not want to shake hands with Mr. Obama this week, a gesture long-awaited as a symbol of thawed relations between Iran and the United States. Privately, American officials have expressed deep skepticism about the status of the negotiations with Tehran, and Mr. Obama’s subdued remarks suggested he shares that pessimism.
Still, on the Syrian civil war and Iran — issues that Mr. Obama identified last year as two of his top priorities — he struck a markedly different tone. He mentioned Iran only in a cursory fashion, asking its leaders not to let the opportunity for a nuclear agreement slip by. American officials have privately expressed deep skepticism about the likelihood of reaching a deal with Tehran, and Mr. Obama’s remarks suggested that he shared that pessimism. The president also did not single out President Bashar al-Assad of Syria for criticism, as he did last year, over the use of chemical weapons, though he spoke of the brutality of the Assad regime. Mr. Assad has voiced support for the American-led strikes in Syria, and his air force has not interfered with American warplanes entering Syrian air space.
The president also did not single out the Syrian president for criticism, as he did last year, over the use of chemical weapons, though he spoke of the brutality of the civil war. Mr. Assad has voiced support for the American-led strikes in Syria, and his air force has not interfered with American war planes entering Syrian air space. In a sign of how the fight against the Islamic State has reordered priorities, Mr. Obama pledged to train and equip moderate rebels in Syria — something he long resisted and labeled a fantasy. He repeated calls for a political settlement to end the civil war, acknowledging that “cynics may argue that such an outcome can never come to pass.”
In Mr. Obama’s substance and tone, he conveyed a starkly different president than the one who addressed skeptical world leaders at the General Assembly last year, weeks after calling off a threatened missile strike on Syria over the use of chemical weapons. Hespoke with the urgency of a wartime president, seeking to rally allies for what he said would be a momentous struggle against the forces of Islamic extremism in the Middle East. Mr. Obama only fleetingly addressed another of last year’s priorities, the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, delivering a mild rebuke to the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “The violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace,” he said. “That’s something worthy of reflection within Israel,” he added, in a line that was not in his prepared text.
Still, it remained unclear whether Mr. Obama’s speech represented a fundamental reconsideration of his policy or a reluctant response to the threat posed by the Islamic State, which took on emotional resonance for the American public after the militants posted videos of American hostages who were beheaded. With much of the day’s focus on the threat from foreign fighters, Mr. Obama took pains to address it. In an echo of the 2009 speech in Cairo that was aimed at the Islamic world, he issued a direct appeal to young Muslims, urging them to resist the blandishments of violent jihadism.
Mr. Obama made clear that the United States would act only if surrounded by a broad coalition. He dwelled on his success in signing up five Arab nations to take part in the airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria, casting it as a historic moment in which the Sunni Arab world was united to fight the scourge of Sunni extremism.
In an echo of his speech to the Islamic world in 2009, Mr. Obama addressed young Muslims directly, appealing to them to resist the blandishments of violent jihadist ideology. Foreign fighters are one of the most immediate threats from the rise of the Islamic State.
“You come from a great tradition that stands for education, not ignorance; innovation, not destruction; the dignity of life, not murder,” Mr. Obama said. “Those who call you away from this path are betraying this tradition, not defending it.”“You come from a great tradition that stands for education, not ignorance; innovation, not destruction; the dignity of life, not murder,” Mr. Obama said. “Those who call you away from this path are betraying this tradition, not defending it.”
While Mr. Obama emphasized the new threat from the Islamic State, he also touched on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, which has flagged badly, despite the energetic diplomacy of Secretary of State John Kerry. The 50-day war in Gaza this summer hardened the differences even further. Also in keeping with past practice, he acknowledged that the United States is wrestling its own demons. “In a summer marked by instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe,” he said, “I know the world also took notice of the small American city of Ferguson, Mo., where a young man was killed, and a community was divided.”
“The violence engulfing the region today has made too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace,” the president said. “That’s something worthy of reflection within Israel. Because let’s be clear: the status quo in the West Bank and Gaza is not sustainable. “ The speech was the centerpiece of a hectic three days of diplomacy for Mr. Obama, and he appeared to make strides in broadening the coalition against the Islamic State. On Wednesday, Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain recalled Parliament to meet Friday to vote on joining American-led airstrikes in Iraq.
The president, as he has in previous speeches to this international audience, acknowledged that the United States is wrestling with its own demons when it comes to racial and ethnic tensions. “In a summer marked by instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, I know the world also took notice of the small American city of Ferguson, Mo., where a young man was killed, and a community was divided,” he said. Mr. Cameron lost a vote in Parliament last year when he sought approval for bombing Syria, alongside the United States, after Mr. Assad’s use of chemical weapons. But he told the BBC that these airstrikes were the right thing to do, and he was confident Parliament would support them. “As ever with our country,” he said, “when we are threatened in this way, we should not turn away from what needs to be done.”
To some extent, Mr. Obama’s remarks seemed designed to get past months in which the president appeared openly conflicted about the proper use of American military force in the Middle East — an ambivalence that opened him to criticisms of being irresolute. Mr. Obama also met with Iraq’s new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi. He praised Mr. Abadi as the right person to heal Iraq’s sectarian rifts, and said he “recognizes this is not something that is going to be easy, and it is not going to happen overnight.”
The speech was the centerpiece of a hectic three days of diplomacy for Mr. Obama, who met on Tuesday with the five Arab leaders to thank them for supporting the Syria operation.
Later Wednesday, he was scheduled to lead a Security Council meeting at which he would be seeking approval of counterterrorism resolution. He also was planning to meet with Iraq’s new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, and with Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, whom American officials hope will make fresh commitments to the military campaign.