Unruh talkback analyzes ISIS and airstrikes


The Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics continued its Students Talk Back series on Wednesday with a panel entitled, “ISIS, Syria and Iraq: The Obama Administration’s Response.” The panel featured Robert C. O’Brien, U.S. Representative to the 60th Session of the United Nations General Assembly; Unruh Institute director Dan Schnur; Raymond Nhan, a member of USC College Republicans and a student at the USC Gould School of Law and Shikhar Gupta, Vice President of USC College Democrats.

O’Brien opened the panel with background on ISIS as an organization and their presence in the Middle East.

“ISIS controls a large swath of land in Iraq and Syria … [T]hey’re basically becoming the main franchise for the Islamic extremist caliphate,” O’Brien said.

ISIS’s appeal to extreme fundamentalists has put them in direct conflict with another Islamist terror cell: Al Qaeda.

“With ISIS’s declaration of a new caliphate, al Qaeda is losing their traditional base … [T]heir interests don’t align,” Gupta said.

The conflict of interest between the two groups indicates that U.S. intervention combatting one cell could potentially help the other, putting the United States in an uncomfortable situation.

When discussing the White House response to the ISIS issue, Schnur commented on the President’s original hesitancy to intervene.

“What’s most interesting to me is watching President Obama in this situation … [H]e came under a lot of criticism early on for what had been seen as a hesitation on his part,” Schnur said.

He attributed some of this to Obama’s personal beliefs.

“The greater part of his political identity for over a decade has been as an opponent of U.S. military intervention where he does not see it fit … for years he has been the guy who was going to end the war,” Schnur said.

O’Brien suggested that the newly-announced airstrikes could have negative implications for the Obama administration.

“This president is one who took great pride in the fact that he won the war in Iraq, and now we’re back in Iraq … [N]ot only does he lose the legacy of withdrawing from Iraq, but fairly or unfairly he will receive criticism for the operations with ISIS … [I]t’s going to be very, very tough for the White House,” O’Brien said.

The panel then moved to a discussion of ISIS’s blatant human rights abuses, such as the recent beheading of American journalist James Foley in Syria.

“They’ve been extremely brutal,” O’Brien said. “What’s particularly disturbing is their use of rape as a genocide. We thought we got rid of that in Bosnia, but it’s back in a big way.”

Human rights issues have garnered international attention and rising concerns for the situation in the region.

“The aspect that really got a lot of coverage in our media was the graphic human rights violations … [Y]ou saw folks fleeing and [being] forced to convert or murdered. You saw people in Syria being crucified,” Nhan said.

The desire to cease human rights abuses was prevalent throughout the whole panel and during the Q&A portion.

“I can think of a couple of things, but the first one is the human rights aspect,” Nhan said in response to the question of why the United States is attacking ISIS.

“There is no situation in history where we look back and regret stepping in in light of a human rights issue, but there are many instances where we look back and regret not doing more,” Nhan said.