What's in a Name: Obama's Anonymous War Against ISIS

Shirking tradition, Pentagon and White House decision-makers may want to distance themselves from a long-term campaign.

Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr., Joint Staff Director of Operations Director of Operations, shows before and after photos as he speaks on the airstrikes in Syria during a briefing at the Pentagon on Sept. 23, 2014 in Washington, D.C.

Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr. details airstrikes in Syria. The Pentagon has yet to name its operation against the Islamic State group.

By + More

The Defense Department is really good at naming stuff. The operations it carries out invariably seize a historical place in textbooks, speeches, and congressional budget requests, and specifically chosen titles can help shape how military action is perceived by enemy forces and the American public.

[READ: America's New War in Syria Won't be Short or Easy]

Operation Overlord marked the beginning of the massive D-Day invasion. Operation Anaconda started the strategy to choke off insurgents in Afghanistan in 2002. And famously, administration sources revealed the codename for the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011, Operation Neptune Spear.

Yet in Syria and Iraq, despite weeks of airstrikes now numbering in the hundreds, the deployment of more than a thousand U.S. troops, a complex multi-national strategy to train local forces, and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s declaration that the U.S. is at war against Islamic State group, the ongoing campaign still proceeds unnamed.

Even the U.S. military response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, concurrent to the Syria and Iraq strikes, bears the name “Operation United Assistance.” Military officials are quick to point out isn’t even a Defense-led mission, but falls under the leadership of USAID.

The Pentagon usually selects names for operations, sometimes at random, sometimes to help sway Congress to provide financial or policy support. But ultimately it’s up to the White House to shape the public message of an important foreign campaign.

This latest reticence to delineate the strategy -- and offer some colorful terminology to represent it -- has left many E-Ring watchers, including some who used to operate inside its walls, scratching their heads.

When asked most recently whether the military operations in Iraq and Syria had a code name, the Pentagon spokesman continued what has become a string of blunt answers.

“No. It has not,” Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said Thursday. He added, “I know of no plans at this time to name it.”

And so, what could be one of the defining battles of the early 21st century remains anonymous.

“I just don’t know the explanation,” says Eric Edelman, who served as the under secretary of Defense for Policy until 2009, following tours as the U.S. ambassador to Turkey and Finland.

Edelman’s predecessor during the Clinton administration, Walter Slocombe, also cannot remember a military operation that passed unnamed. He went on to serve as a senior adviser to the coalition in Iraq in 2003. They are among a string of former top Defense officials and military science scholars who spoke with U.S. News and could not think of another military operation on this scale in U.S. military history that never got christened somehow.

[ALSO: U.S., Arab Coalition Attack ISIS in Syria]

The practice of offering up snappy names the general public could recognize began during the Korean War, and paved the way for operations such as “Just Cause” in Panama or “Urgent Fury” in Grenada -- among the most extreme examples of titles clearly designed to shape public opinion.

Highly-publicized, catchy titles have become a way for military commanders and Defense officials to petition Congress for money or authority.

As for Operation No Name, perhaps these powers already have enough authority and funding. Either way, there’s plenty of speculation.

Some believe this is part of the Obama administration’s attempt to distance itself from the national security and defense policies of George W. Bush.

“Maybe the problem is the recent custom of giving combat operations names that seem designed to whip up enthusiasm for them,” says Edwin Moise, a professor in military history at Clemson University. He cites Operation Enduring Freedom for the war in Afghanistan, or Operation Gothic Serpent, part of the ill-fated 1993 “Black Hawk Down” incident in Somalia.

“I think President Obama really wishes he were not doing this operation, and the notion of giving it a name that sounds like something a cheerleader would yell might offend him,” he says. “And, he would be heavily criticized if he gave it a name that did not sound like something a cheerleader would yell.”