As I explained, the Assad regime has successfully positioned itself as the lesser of the two evils, and there is in effect a military alliance now between the west and the Assad regime. One of the questions, of course, is not to identify ISIL as the enemy, but to think about what is the endgame. What is the endgame that the international community wishes to pursue with respect to Syria and with respect to Iraq and the wider regime? Otherwise, we're just going to be putting out one small fire in the middle of a much bigger conflagration.
The question remains about somehow restarting a peace process in Syria and dealing with the massive crimes that the Assad regime has created against the population. There can be no meaningful long-term solution and stability unless those underlying issues are dealt with.
I do want to end, though, by saying that while I think the military solution is insufficient, it is of course very important, for example, that ISIL has been denied the right to use a hydro dam, oil facilities.... The denial of those facilities through military means is important in defeating ISIL.
We have to also recognize that most of the advances on the ground have been by the peshmerga working in conjunction with the Iranian revolutionary guards. As I said, politics makes for strange bedfellows, and there is a profound realignment going on in the Middle East today.