They may be strange bedfellows, but the Gulf States and the U.S. remain close allies not simply because they now share the same goal of fighting IS, but more importantly because they both want to eventually topple the Bashar al-Assad regime. The coalition has not yet attacked Syrian government targets because both Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel are outspokenly against it, since Syria has a robust air defense system. More importantly, they have questioned both the purpose of such air attacks and what would come next. They seem to be worried that bombing yet another Middle Eastern country will create more extremists in addition to miring the U.S. in a widened war.

The American people are sick and tired of war in the Middle East, and 70 percent of active military personnel do not want another ground war.

But the war mongers and neocons are getting impatient. Washington Post deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl claimed in a recent article that it was Assad's war against the opposition that gave rise to IS, arguing that Obama cannot keep ignoring Assad for this reason. Sorry, Mr. Neocon, you are standing facts on their heads. It was U.S. and its allies, especially Saudi Arabia, who fed the beast and strengthened the Islamic State by arming and training IS's fellow fighters and prospective members in Syria.

In Iraq, the U.S. is relying on the new Haydar al-Abadi government, which is, unfortunately, not much less sectarian than its predecessor. Hailing from the same Dawa Party, Abadi's cabinet is filled with Dawa politicians, and he refused to appoint Badr Corps commander Hadi al-Amiri as minister of the interior. As for the Kurds, they are in virtual rebellion, seeking independence.

Under these circumstances, military action alone cannot solve the IS problem. There has to be a political solution. Washington includes IS bankrollers in its coalition but excludes Russia, Iran and Syria. That does not bode well for a political solution. U.S. blind faith in military power in the 21st century is against the current of history.

Is Washington promoting democracy in the world? Obama called Assad an authoritarian killer of his own people. But the U.S.'s Gulf monarchy allies are at least as authoritarian as Assad, if not more so. The suppression of Arab Spring demonstrators in Bahrain by Saudi and UAE troops was certainly no less brutal.

Is the U.S. on the right side of history? The reader can draw his or her own conclusion.

The author is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit:

http://www.h5a3.com/opinion/zhaojinglun.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.