US President Barack Obama has outlined his strategy to combat Islamic State (IS) jihadists who have taken over vast areas of Syria and Iraq and who have committed horrendous crimes against humanity as well as genocide against thousands of people.

In a long-awaited nationally televised speech Obama said on Wednesday he will not hesitate to take action against IS militants in both Syria and Iraq. He pledged more support for ground forces fighting IS, such as the Iraqi and Kurdish military, as well as the moderate Syrian rebel forces.

The President also promised increased counter-terrorism efforts to cut off IS’s funding and to stop the flow of fighters into the region, and more humanitarian assistance for civilians affected by the jihadists’ advances.

“As Americans,” he said, “we welcome our responsibility to lead”.

While Obama made it clear that the US would not have a combat role in this war, he announced that an additional 475 American military personnel are to be sent to Iraq, mainly in an advisory and training role.

Two and a half weeks ago, Obama was criticised by his Republican opponents for telling the press that “we don’t have a strategy yet” to combat IS. While Obama’s comment could probably have been worded better (such as “we are putting together a comprehensive strategy to deal with IS”), I think he was right not to shoot from the hip and immediately come out with an impulsive decision.

The important thing is that Obama has now come out with a clear plan to address the IS threat, which presents a danger not only to countries in the region but potentially also to the US and Europe. The success of America’s strategy of course depends to a great deal on how effective the US-led coalition against IS turns out to be. At the Wales Nato summit the week before last, nine states, including the US, plus Australia pledged to combat IS through a number of measures, including co-ordinated air strikes and support for the Iraqi forces.

Crucially, Secretary of State John Kerry travelled to Saudi Arabia last Thursday where he secured the support of a group of key Arab countries in the war against IS. A joint communiqué by declared a “shared commitment to stand united against the threat posed by all terrorism, including the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) to the region and the world”. Those who signed the document promised to contribute “as appropriate” to “the many aspects of a coordinated military campaign against ISIL”.

The communiqué was signed by representatives of the Gulf Cooperation Council, namely Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and the US.

Turkey, a Nato member with a huge army, took part in the Jeddah meeting but did not sign the document. Ankara is deeply worried about the fate of 49 Turkish citizens who were kidnapped from its consulate in Mosul three months ago and remain in the hands of IS jihadists.

However, Kerry met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davultoglu in Ankara on Friday as part of his campaign to broaden the coalition fighting IS militants, and said that Turkey was “very engaged and very involved”.

The involvement of Saudi Arabia and Qatar – allies of the US – in the fight against IS is also crucial

I have no doubt that Kerry pressed Turkey to secure its borders against IS fighters crossing into Syria. Unfortunately, Turkey has been the main entry point for weapons and foreign fighters entering Syria ever since the conflict began.

The involvement of Saudi Arabia and Qatar – allies of the US – in the fight against IS is also crucial. Saudi Arabia has a lot of clout in the Sunni Arab world, but there are suspicions that private donors in both countries are funding IS. Will the Saudis and Qataris take whatever action is needed to stop such funding?

During his televised speech, Obama also announced that Saudi Arabia has agreed to host training camps for moderate Syrian rebels. This is a positive development, although it is largely overdue.

Iran, which considers IS to be a serious threat – the jihadists view Shi’ites as heretics and have been slaughtering them in Iraq – can also play a constructive role in this war.

It has been reported that Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has approved co-operation with the US as part of the fight against IS. If this is true, then this is encouraging.

I have often said that a genuine rapprochement between Washington and Teheran – where both sides apologise for past behaviour towards each other – can have a tremendously positive effect on the whole region. Hopefully, the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme will be successful, and will strengthen this latest ‘alliance’ between the US and the Iranians.

Obama’s strategy in Iraq also depends to a great deal on the success of Baghdad’s new government, which has been welcomed by the international community. The US on Monday called the announcement of a new government in Iraq a “major milestone” for the country.

The new government, headed by moderate Shi’ite Haider al-Abadi, also includes Sunnis and Kurds. It must now govern for all Iraqis, and in particular reach out to the Sunnis, thus depriving IS of any popular support.

In Syria, Obama’s strategy will be more difficult to implement than in Iraq. The Syrian and Russian governments have made it clear that any strikes against IS in Syria will have to take place in coordination with the government in Damascus. The Russian Foreign Ministry even declared that military action without the approval of the UN Security Council would be a violation of international law.

So Obama has difficult choices ahead. Should he deal with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, bad though he is, in order to attack IS in Syria? If he does (the US has so far ruled this out), will this help further radicalise Sunni Muslims?

Also, a number of analysts fear that Assad’s departure could unleash further chaos, massacres of his Alawite minority as well as Christians, and more fighting between IS and the moderate rebels for control of the country.

As bad as it sounds, I think there should be some sort of dialogue with the Assad regime, not in support of it, but in an attempt to try and reach some sort of truce (difficult as this may sound) between the Syrian government and the moderate rebels. This might help the fight against IS in Syria.

• Gozo Bishop Mario Grech’s plea for parishes to give refuge to Iraqi Christians should be seriously considered. This appeal follows a similar one by Nationalist MP Jason Azzopardi, who highlighted the terrible plight of Christians in Iraq facing persecution by IS. Within our limited means, Malta should show its solidarity with its fellow Christians.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.