International coalition against ISIL must tackle all forms of terrorism

What the Arabic-language media is saying about the battle to contain ISIL

Although the regional and international coalition has had shaky beginnings, it will have to vigorously counter the wave of terrorism that has taken hold in parts of the Arab world. This is particularly the case in countries that have been weakened by internal conflicts and instability, and have thus been the prey of choice for terrorist groups such as ISIL and Jabhat Al Nusra, commentators say.

In Al Ittihad, the Arabic sister newspaper of The National, Abdullah bin Bajad Al Otaibi tackled the expectations placed upon the international coalition and remarked that “terrorist movements are no longer of one single nature nor from one single confession.

“They have become of multiple sectarian colours, united in terrorism and divided by sects. In sectarian language, we now have Sunni terrorism and Shiite terrorism and they both spring from one and the same sectarian well,” the writer said.

“Most contemporary terrorism finds its origins in a regional country that is hostile to the Arabs: Iran. It has sponsored and supported Sunni terrorism, building long, ongoing relations with it. It has also created Shiite terrorism, whose byproducts have infested Arab countries.

“In light of US hesitation in forming an international coalition against ISIL and Iran’s participation, or lack thereof, subject to various contradictory statements by American officials, Iran has not yet lost all its bets in Iraq and the Levant. However, the upcoming phase seems to suggest a return of Arab countries to Iraq with great fanfare, particularly Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Gulf countries who support the stability of Iraq and its total independence from any external interference.”

The writer concluded that “in view of ensuring its success, the international coalition must achieve four objectives: it must first eliminate terrorist organisations whatever their confessions and orientations. It must then solve the Syrian crisis and get rid of Bashar Al Assad and restore the Iraqi state; develop this war so as to face the roots of terrorism that sprang from the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups of political Islam; and go after other terrorist organisations in the region such as those in Libya, Mali and Yemen.”

In the pan-Arab daily Al Hayat, Georges Semaan opined that “the new coalition sports many holes, gaps and lacerations, and each step forward reflects the deep correlation between the various crises in the region, the growing role of local forces at the expense of regimes and governments, and the deepening differences between countries in the region over their roles in the future order of the Middle East.”

In the pan-Arab daily Asharq El Awsat, Sameer Saleha commented on Turkey’s stand towards the coalition. He noted “the fact that the Turkish foreign minister refrained from signing the Jeddah agreement [in which Arab nations agreed to join the fight against ISIL] was perceived as ‘incomprehensible’ by some”.

The writer said that the official reason for Turkey’s stance was that ISIL had held 49 Turkish hostages in Mosul for more than three months – but he added that “undeclared reasons are definitely deeper and more important”.

“Even though the Turks did not sign, the Jeddah summit is the right step – to say the least – towards reading and analysing the risks and the need to join forces and gather support to realistically, practically and credibly deal with the challenges ahead.”

He concluded: “Turkey will inevitably be part of this international coalition in one form or another, otherwise top US representatives would not have prompted meetings and talks with the Turkish government.”

Translated by Carla Mirza