Too many disagreements in the coalition against the caliphate

The advance of the caliphate, especially favored by an initial underestimation of the phenomenon, in the Iraqi and Syrian territories has created a new pattern of regional alliances, dictated, not by strategic constraints, but by the need to eradicate the Islamic state. This condition is not sufficient to overcome the mistrust of countries that have often been on opposing sides and not automatically determines the adjustment of their geopolitical goals, which, of course, are far from identical. This situation does not meet the criteria of urgency, which should require the military response. The alliance against the caliphate, on paper is very extensive and has about 60 countries, but, until now, the practical effects were few, as the Pentagon has rightly pointed out. But part of the large extent of the members of the coalition against the Islamic state, the members of which may be more decisive, in addition, of course to the United States and the United Kingdom are the countries that are part of the region and are of Sunni Islam; their role is twofold: from the political point of view allow you to fight off an army declares that the armed wing of the current Sunni Muslim, and the fact that it is fought by their own brethren belies the possible prosecution of religious war, while from the point of military geographic proximity and the same religious nature would allow a use on land, considered essential by all the experts of the field to win the military conflict. There is also the silent presence of Iran, formally enemy of the United States, the Gulf monarchies and in general of all the Sunnis, as the nation's main current of the Shiites. Tehran, unofficially of course, is the only armed force to have fought on the ground, both on the side of Iraqi Kurds, and this was crucial to stop the advance of the caliphate and therefore acceptable to Washington, both in Syria, but the side of Assad. The dictator of Damascus does not fit into the plans of a possible alliance with the United States, although it may represent a barrier against the advance of the fundamentalists in Syria. For now, the White House sees it as a minor problem, but the continuation of his regime is viewed with disfavor by Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but Iran and Russia, which, for now, has maintained a marginal position in question despite being strongly affected, not to favor the Americans. The participation of Saudi Arabia and Turkey alliance against the Islamic state is something official, but you can clearly see how their positions are antithetical. Valga limited to the statement by the Saudi foreign minister, who said explicitly that if the terrorist cells, exceeding their action, while still dangerous, but limited and they turn into continued military presence in Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Syria and Yemen, the situation is likely to become highly unstable. This statement, which can be read in different ways, even as the indirect admission of a wrong strategy by Saudi Arabia, which has financed its objectives mainly Sunni extremist groups in Syria, is not shared by Turkey, which remains linked to his vision that identifies the Kurds greater danger as a factor of internal destabilization. For the current government in Ankara on votes of Sunnis is crucial and really fought a war, that is far beyond statements of principle, against the Islamic state, whose forces are placed on the Turkish border, the country could lead to significant problems of order inside. From a strictly military point of view, then, one is left with the commitment on the part of the Kurds on the ground and air operations of the Air Force United States; only these tools can only limit the advance of the caliphate, which, indeed, as admitted by the Pentagon, it was not at all stop in the Iraqi territories, where the action of the national army is not enough and in Syria, where the forces of Assad and the rebel Democrats fail to maintain control of the land. What is emerging is a war of attrition and, as a Kobani, including location, then a long duration, a type of fighting that was considered almost overcome, but where the exclusive intervention of the air force can only be a support, important but not decisive. The rest from the outset the United States administration had anticipated this eventuality, just because he knew the extent of the Iraqi army carried out military supplies and subtracted from the men of the caliphate. The story seems so far removed from the end without an agreement between the countries of the Sunni coalition that will touch, inevitably, the commitment on the ground with its armed forces. instability also to the surroundings.