Defeating Isis Likely To Take Years, Warn Military Analysts -- Sam Jones in London and Erika Solomon in Sayida, Financial Times
The brutal murder of the American journalist James Foley on Tuesday has gruesomely raised the stakes in the international effort to battle the spread of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis).
The beheading has been a turning point for Isis, marking the first definite shift in its attention away from regional fighting and towards hurting the West and its citizens. It has also come as a visceral reminder for a hitherto-guarded Washington and its allies of what the violent jihadi group represents and the threat it poses.
Read more ....
My Comment: Here is a sobering statistic .... Islamic State 'has 50,000 fighters in Syria' (Al Jazeera)
Update: Max Boot has an idea on how to defeat the Islamic State .... Time to Annihilate ISIS; Here’s How (Max Boot, Commentary)
12 comments:
Stick a Nazi flag on them, and would you be honestly able to tell the difference?
Perhaps one could observe that they're 'worse' than the Nazi's.
If a Nazi movement took power today, as in it quickly sprouted up into a movement similar to ISIS, you can pretty much guarantee a 100% clamp down on the movement. They'd be crushed before they get anywhere.
I still feel the Western powers are not taking ISIS seriously enough. It's like their maintaining a safe distance from acknowledging the potential threat they pose.
Sure, they have special forces now inside Iraq, but they should have realised this threat ages ago. The intelligence community failed big time on this one.
I'm not sure Plowman if this is really is an intelligence failure. I think the intelligence was there, but a policy failure occurred. Where in the chain from collection to executive action this happened I don't know, but that will be the big debate
Intelligence failure .... maybe. But definitely a political failure. The number one priority for our federal leaders is always national security .... either the threats were presented to them and they choose to downplay it .... or they did not ask the right questions about ISIS/Islamic State when they started to expand over a year ago.
These guys really do see this as being on the cover of GQ magazine.
Financial Times pointed out some very important aspect of this conflict. It's really worth to read it, and far more this is one of the best summary of the current situation of the last few weeks. But it's just hard to call a win to a win until we see the details. The situation in Tikrit or the fighting around the Dam are both important, but the actual losses of IS is still 'missing' from the news. Winning (recapturing) a place/area/territory is not a total/real win, and sometimes hurt more then it's helped. Managing the frontlines and to decide what to hold and what to give to the enemy without fighting is an element of the wars but by the media it's mostly just called as weakness and being coward, but if it's needed to win, it has to be done on that way.
AJ and SOHR can report 50.000 IS soldier, but I don't belive in these reports. This number is huge, and with that many fighter they could advance even bigger areas than they doing now. Only 600 IS fighter were used on the capture of the 17th Division base in Raqqa, and just about the same number were reported in the new IS offense against Tabqa Airbase in Raqqa province. I just not see where are those soldiers now, and it's just seems to be a propaganda thing. Surely they have about 20.000 fighter combined in Iraq and Syria, but 50 is just a different size.
About the Commentary's article, I don't see a chance for any similar plan will be used. As always there are many ways to solve a problem, and his idea is not wrong, but it's just will not happen, because there are other ideas which could work better (in some ways). As FT summed up at the end of their article, the airstrikes just giving time not solution and this is what needed for both Iraq, US and SAA.
Intead of only focusing for the US intervention on this conflict, it's could worth more to (try) understand what IS do and why they do so. Especial when we talk about military aspects. The attack on Tabqa Airbase was expected and totally logical, but what could be their goal with the offence around Aleppo? Also why they no made new advances in Der-er-Zor province of Syria and why they are on defence only in Iraq? By understanding these happenings we could learn more, than just talking about what if they would wear Nazi flags and so on...
ISIS is an existential threat to the West. The beheading of James Foley is only the first taste of what ISIS will inflict on the West, if they can.
Having said that, ISIS has several weaknesses, which we ought to exploit. They are not 10 feet tall.
1. ISIS offer an extremely unattractive religion, combined with a miserable way to live. For ISIS, the world is truly binary. To live, one must adhere to an extremely narrow, harsh, joyless version of Islam. For everybody else, ISIS offers only beheading, crucifixion, etc.
2. The PBS Newshour last night reported that well over 1 million people have fled the caliphate to surrounding areas. The report focused on the burden the refugees were for the local authorities. The report specified that the refugees are not only Christians, Shiites, and Yazhidis, but also ordinary Sunni Moslems. Note well that ISIS attracts (1) young men who are religious fanatics, who want to kill and die for Islam, and (2) criminals who enjoy killing for fun. Any organized state requires lots of people to do ordinary jobs: farmers, taxi drivers, plumbers, bank clerks, electricians, etc. You can't run a state with only the people who ISIS attracts. The caliph will have to solve this problem: Few ordinary people want to live in his caliphate. This is a serious weakness.
3. ISIS captured lots of weapons and money, and now controls cities. Given #2, it is hard to see how ISIS maintains what it has, and keeps the weapons operational, the lights on, the water flowing, the food arriving, etc. Young religious zealots and criminals can't do this. As ISIS develops its military, it will also require logistics. I wonder how well the youthful zealots and criminals will perform that job.
4. Given #1, ISIS has no allies. They are truly alone. Even the Saudi and Qatari financial backers of ISIS don't want ISIS for themselves, but hope to use ISIS against Iran. That is a dangerous game, but there is truth in this observation: as much as ISIS despises the West (and everyone else), they reserve their principal loathing for the Shiites. ISIS will definitely try to attack the West, but their principal focus will be to attack Shiites.
5. The West should try to contain ISIS within Iraq and Syria. We should give weapons to the Kurds and air support when appropriate, such as retaking the dam. We should support Jordan if ISIS moves against the kingdom. The West should not try to interpose itself between ISIS and the Shiites, or between ISIS and Assad. We are hated by both sides. The Shiites and Alawites are ISIS's neighbors. They will have to defend themselves. We can't do it for them. Moreover, we have spent $2 trillion dollars and thousands of American and coalition lives to get Iraq on its feet. It is time for them to stand on their own.
6. One last word about air power. The desert which ISIS controls is mainly vast barren areas. The few cities and towns generally have nothing but wasteland between them. Any attempt by ISIS to move significant numbers of fighters will be vulnerable to attack by drones and air strikes. It will be difficult for the caliph to move his military forces around given his lack of control over the air.
mclacix,
I agree with especially on the "just talking about what if they would wear Nazi flags and so on..." part. Of course I'm guilty of it too. That said, I don't think ISIS is all that special or different than what has been in the past. Basically a ideologically driven light military operating in a weak ethical, political, and military environment.
Their strengths:
Quick movement, hence the illusion of being everywhere and more numerous than is true.
Religious ideological underpinning therefore willing to fight fanatically and use extreme cruelty.
Their weaknesses:
Cannot lose a fight or any fight, their aura invincibility must maintained at all costs.
Terror: One of their strengths in their in tactics and strategy, but when used there is no going back; in essence terror has captured them.
No organic cadre of air force, engineering or heavy weaponry. Yes, I'm sure they have a pool of ex-Iraqi military to do this to save their own hides, but it's not same as traditionally having it.
A lot of their foreign rank and file are there for the romanticism and excitement, to keep them there and their morale high you must give them victory or spoils on a steady basis or you lose them.
There are many ways to decisively defeat them if you keep a clear head.
Like any armed group they must have supply, money and recruiting.
A start would be to take control of the roads in ISIS country, kill anything not authorized to be on them and don't become static in position. Isolate there centers of power, Aleppo, Raqqa, etc, force them to come out and fight. Of course this would bring howls of protest from some international quarters, but eventually that will have to be ignored.
Damnit! Publius beat me to it and said it better.
My only beef with Publius is that he rarely posts a comment. But when he does ... it is always a must read.
James, you are not guilty on this, I just said it in general. Both you and Publius comment is great, and highlight similar weaknesses. The ongoing battle for Tabqa Airbase which can't last longer than a week or two will show how strong the units of IS compared to SAA forces which have supplies and possibility to take actions in the battle, not just stay defend.
Your detailed analysis and input is always appreciated mlacix. The Syrian civil war is not being properly covered by the western press (too dangerous .... I understand) .... so anyone who can provide a bit of information here or there is always a must read in my book.
Thanks WNU. It's would be nice if there would be some website where the latest development of the Syrian Civil War could be seen. I already know some good source of information, but the mass of news there just make it hard to follow. Some easier to read summary would be great, maybe one day there will be some like that out there.
The latest news from the battle for Tabqa Airbase is that the "PR officer" of IS from Raqqa (well known for ViceNews report) and another IS field commander and 100+ fighter died during the last two days, while the defenders have a way smaller cas. ratio. The battle is not yet over, but the winner here can access to the deeper Hama province areas so SAA just can't loose it, it's not an option for them, not matter on what cost. but with this intensity (3-400+ dead and wounded just in two days) the battle cannot be stand so long.
Post a Comment