One of the primary reasons that the U.S. administration is prioritizing Iraq in its campaign against Islamic State (IS) is because a form of realpolitik still largely dominates its policy towards the Syria situation.
Syria's Foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, said the Syrian authorities of whom he is an accredited representative aren't displeased with U.S. air strikes against IS forces in his country. He even went as far as to say they were "satisfied" with it.
In Syria the so-called realists continue to make a point of missing the point. Assad isn't a solution to the Islamic State threat. He is in fact part of the reason it gained so much ground in the region.
Britain's Defense Minister, Michael Fallon, recently announced that Britain will be involved in the campaign against Islamic State in Iraq that may last a few months. What kind of operational role will it, along with the U.S., likely be undertaking?
Now that the international community is taking action to help Iraq defeat the Islamic State threat to its existence the Syrian regime is simultaneously delegating more of its stretched resources to fighting Islamic State forces in Syria.
A recently disclosed Israeli foreign ministry document presents us with an appropriate time to ponder the feasibility, not to mention the possibility, of a two-state solution to the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict.