Kerry Uses Arab Name 'Daesh' to Refer to Islamic State

    Following the lead of Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Secretary of State John Kerry Sunday began using the Arabic acronym "Daesh" when referring to the Islamic State (ISIL), although he continued to the latter acronym as well. Kerry was in Egypt for a meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Shoukry, and spoke extensively about the terrorist group in remarks following the meeting. The new terminology appears to be an attempt to bolster the secretary's contention that there is "nothing whatsoever about ISIL that is related to Islam."

    Kerry first referenced "Daesh" when discussing the coalition to defeat ISIL, where he used the two terms interchangeably:

And as President Obama made clear, the United States is committed to degrading and ultimately defeating ISIL. And I’m very pleased to say that more than 60 partners have now committed to joining us in this effort in a variety of ways. Not everybody will play a military role or a direct kinetic role. Some will help with respect to the delegitimization of Daesh’s claims with respect to religion.

    Throughout the run-up to the forming of the coalition and ultimately the bombing campaign against the Islamic State, Kerry has been insistent about the non-Islamic nature of the group, going so far as to say in September that "we must put real Islam out there." Kerry continued in that vein Sunday, saying that the coalition against ISIL is not "primarily military in nature," with a large part of the equation also being an "effort to counter ISIL’s false claims about Islam":

So the coalition required to eliminate ISIL is not only or even primarily military in nature, and we welcome everybody’s contribution to that effort. Particularly, the effort to counter ISIL’s false claims about Islam, a peaceful religion. There is nothing about ISIL, as the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia said, or the council that issues fatwas said, nothing whatsoever about ISIL that is related to Islam.

    Ultimately in his remarks, Kerry used "Daesh" five times and the English acronym ten times. Until now, the US State Department's use of the Arabic acronym has been relatively rare, and a review of Secretary Kerry's previous speeches and remarks did not turn up any prior usage. The White House has not used the term at all.

    In September, France 24 reported the French foreign minister's decision to make the switch:

From now on the French foreign ministry will be calling it Daesh, the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), also known as ISIS or the Islamic State group. 

Last week, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius asked journalists and media organisations to do the same. 

He said: “This is a terrorist group and not a state. I do not recommend using the term Islamic State because it blurs the lines between Islam, Muslims and Islamists. The Arabs call it ‘Daesh’ and I will be calling them the ‘Daesh cutthroats’.”... 

Daesh is a loose acronym of the Arabic for “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham).

    Although the Obama administration has claimed the fight against ISIL has yielded some positive results, Army General Martin Dempsey acknowledged Sunday on ABC's This Week that he is "fearful Kobani [Syria] will fall" to ISIL, and that ISIL's adaptations since the bombing began will complicate the coalition's efforts to identify and strike ISIL targets:

“I am fearful that Kobani will fall,” Dempsey said, adding that he has “no doubt” ISIL will conduct horrific atrocities if they have the opportunity to do so. 

ISIL is putting pressure on the city’s outskirts, and into the city itself, the chairman said. ISIL forces are becoming more adept with the use of electronic devices, he added, and are making themselves harder to find and identify. “They don't fly flags and move around in large convoys the way they did. … They don't establish headquarters that are visible or identifiable,” he said.

Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Josh Earnest Versus Ben Rhodes on ISIL in Syria and Iraq

    Josh Earnest appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe Friday in damage-control mode after President Obama's "we don't have a strategy yet" remark during his press conference on Thursday. Almost immediately after the president made the comment in response to a question by Chuck Todd, Earnest took to Twitter to quash the firestorm of criticism that ensued from friend and foe alike:

In his remarks today, POTUS was explicit - as he has been in the past - about the comprehensive strategy we'll use to confront ISIL threat.
— Josh Earnest (@PressSec) August 28, 2014

    Friday, Earnest acknowledged the president's words, but tried to provide additional context to clarify the White House message. CBS's Mark Knoeller tweeted this recap of Earnest's remarks:

On @Morning_Joe, Earnest acknowledges "no plans right now" for ISIL in Syria, but that Pres has "comprehensive plan" for ISIL in Iraq.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) August 29, 2014

     Rather than tamp down criticism, however, Earnest may have exacerbated the president's problem since his explanation contradicts a statement by Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes just a week ago. Rhodes appeared with Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz at a press briefing in Edgartown, Massachusetts during the president's vacation. In response to a question about Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey's statement about how to defeat ISIL, Rhodes replied, "[W]e certainly agree that any strategy to deal with the ISIL organization has to deal with both sides of the border, Iraq and Syria." Here is the full exchange:

Q    On Islamic State, yesterday General Dempsey said that Islamic State can only be defeated if the fight is taken to them in Syria.  I wondered, is that -- does the President agree with that?  And if so, how does he intend to undertake it?  And would it mean a significant change in the mission against Islamic State? 

MR. RHODES:  Well, we certainly agree that any strategy to deal with the ISIL organization has to deal with both sides of the border, Iraq and Syria.  The strategy that we are already undertaking does address that in the sense that we are providing training and equipping and assistance to the Iraqi security forces and Kurdish security forces who are fighting them on the ground in Iraq.  We are also providing support and military assistance to the moderate Syrian opposition.  What we would like to see is those efforts squeeze the space where ISIL operates.  

But there are other elements to our strategy.  One is to enlist the support of partners in the region and the international community, because this poses a significant threat not just to the United States and to the Iraqi and Syrian people, but to the entire region.  And there are things that we can do with partners to mobilize communities in places like Iraq to work to expel ISIL.  

Then there’s the question of U.S. military action.  And the President has already authorized U.S. military action on the very specific missions of protecting our people and personnel and our facilities in Baghdad and Erbil.  He’s also authorized military action to deal with the humanitarian crisis on Mount Sinjar.  Again, as we look ahead and look forward, we are going to do what is necessary to protect Americans.  And so if we see plotting against Americans, we see a threat to the United States emanating from anywhere, we stand ready to take action against that threat.  

We’ve made very clear time and again that if you come after Americans, we’re going to come after you wherever you are.  And that’s what’s going to guide our planning in the days to come.

    Earnest has not yet responded to a request to square his remarks this morning with Rhodes's statement from last Friday.

Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.