The State/McClatchy News: Operation to retake Tikrit stalled by heavy casualties, discord
ISTANBUL — The much ballyhooed Iraqi government operation to capture the central city of Tikrit from the Islamic State has stalled three weeks after it began, amid widespread reports that Shiite Muslim militias and the government are badly divided over tactics and roiled by claims that the militias have engaged in war crimes against the local Sunni Muslim population.
A two-day pause supposedly intended to give the Iraqi government time to bring up reinforcements has stretched into a week, as reports circulate that Iraqi government troops and the militias took heavier than anticipated casualties in their first efforts to dislodge Islamic State fighters. At least 1,000 militiamen died in the early days of fighting, according to some reports, roughly 5 percent of the 20,000 men the militias have committed to the operation.
WNU Editor: I believe these reports of high casualties are true. During the taping of this Al Jazeera report from the front lines, the Al Jazeera reporter saw 5 Iraqi special forces soldiers getting killed in a few minutes .... and that was in just one small skirmish. The battle for Tikrit has been ongoing for weeks now .... one can only imagine the casualty count .... and on both sides.
Update: If this report is true .... it appears that Iraqi Shiite militias are now getting frustrated in the battle for Tikrit .... Iraqi Sunnis accuse Shi'ite paramilitaries of burning homes outside Tikrit (Reuters)
15 comments:
1,000 est. killed? Well for discussion's sake let's give that number a 5 to 1 ratio of wounded to killed getting us to 6,000 est. total casualties for the militias, roughly 30% in a week. Of course that doesn't account for wounded, treated, and returned to combat, but it would be a very high number. I suspect the militias are being used as cannon fodder by the regulars which can be effective, but not for long. As mentioned before time is against them, the atrocity meme is gaining traction and military and political operations are not helping each other effectively. Instead of talk about the taking of Mosul people might ought to consider the possible complete collapse of this effort and it's attendant consequences.
I thought Iran would be able to swing this. i thought Mosul would fall around May.
I based this on ISIS losing ground at Jurf Sakhar, Amerli (& elsewhere in Diyala.) and to the Kurds. they also made no further gains from Abu Graib to Baghdad. they were not able to take Ramadi (although it looks like they might be making headway there recently).
I also though fire power could negate IEDs by obliterating them during a bombardment.
Now I am not so sure what the Iranians & their allies can do.
How much of the casualties are due to groups jockeying for power? If we hold back air support from Iran, we weaken them (I support weakening them as they were going or always are stabbing us in the back). The IA (regulars) are holding back to let the militias expend and weaken themselves?
"people might ought to consider the possible complete collapse of this effort and it's attendant consequences."
What might those be?
More Iraqi reliance on the Iranians?
Waning of Iranian prestige?
?
Aizino,
"What might those be?"
Heck, I'm not really sure, but it needs to be considered. Just off hand the IRG's prestige is taking a big hit, which should have effects in Iran's internal politics. Assad's position weakens from Iran's inability to reestablish land communications. Russia's influence increases, especially with Assad. Increased recruitment for ISIS and the release of ISIS ground forces for other operations (Jordan, Sinai, Saudi Arabia, and Israel) in other areas. This is just a few. They should have by passed Tikrit and headed right for Mosul, but perhaps internal command conflict (pressure from Shia militia for revenge on the Baathists) precluded this. Iranians now have to consider whether to overtly commit large regular land forces to the battle thus stripping away all pretense that this is an Iraqi operation. Anyway these are just off the top of my head without much thought behind them.
Regular commentator Jay predicted this outcome. The ISIS are well dug in with booby traps and sniper positions .... it is going to take the Iraqi army and Shiite militias a long time to rout them ... and that is if they have armor and air power assets thrown into the fight .... which they they do not.
WNU,
I think it's more than that, there seems to be a large problem in command coherence, especially with the militias. The militias seem to be expending way to much energy getting even instead of winning the war.
WNU,
I should add that yes, Jay was right, but I maintain the attacking force should never have gone into Tikrit in the first place. They are fighting a battle on ISIS's terms and have lost the initiative.
WNU,
And now to one of life's greater mysteries, golf. It will be 24C here WNU and I shall be wearing shorts(but not that color socks, I want to live) and short sleeves!
The grief over my pair of socks in China continues .... even my GF died with laughter when she saw that picture last week.
As for temperatures .... I am not in Montreal right now but it is -15C over there .... but where I am right now (which we shall keep private) it is -2C. :)
Doesn't the increasing involvement of Iran and the arming of Shia militias reinforce the Sunni fear and distrust of the Iraqi government??
I mean, isn't this just going to push more of Iraq's Sunni to side with ISIS, when the alternative is Iran and a marginalizing Shia dominated government in Baghdad?
1. Tikrit is urban, For an idea of what urban warfare is like, read up on the latter days of WWII, or the Israelis in Gaza, or if you have time, look up a field manual or two on it.
2. Air power has its limitations in urban warfare for various reasons. That said, US air power is being withheld for more reasons than a potential lack of effectiveness or increased risk.
3. As Azino implied, there is no real leadership on the Iraqi side. The Iranians are arming the militias and providing some general guidance and training. But that's it. There are no Iranians or competent Iraqis at the small-unit level and above. That's where you need it.
4. IMNSHO, the Iranians aren't exactly known for their conventional warfare expertise. They won't really taking a big hit, prestige wise. At least not yet or until they take a more active role. I don't think they'll do the latter.
5. And James is right - Mosul is a distant objective, and given the current situation on the ground, becoming even more distant. For IS, it's successfully tying down Iraqi assets that could be used further west.
The Iranians and IA could borrow a page form the Americans and Julies Ceasar
Get some armored bulldozers and build and earth berm around Tikrit.
Do it Jays way.
Put some blocking force on open ground north of Tikirt. Let them come to you over open ground. Do not let them resupply Tikrit. Block the river traffic & control the West bank. Those last 2 will be the hardest to do.
Put some drone in the air to look for concentrations day & night. Hit them hard. Use harassing fire. Wear them down.
Phil,
You're dead right on Iranian competence at conventional warfare and that the Irani's in general won't lose that much prestige.
The IRG and General Suleimani will. He's had photos all over the place of him "at the front" etc etc. A loss or large set back will not be good for him or the IRG.
The battle of Hue would also be illustrative. I'll tell you what, this also highlights just how good US troopies really are.
Aizino,
It depends if you want Tikrit, or "want" Tikrit.
If you want the Tikrit votes after ISIS is driven out, then the berm and seige won't work,
You need NATO pattern sniper teams on overwatch, trained and full on body armour clear and hold teams, with Combat engineers, to "mouse hole" and "top down",
With heavy armour, infantry support and Combat Engineers to clear streets and ieds,
Killing for the most part, just ISIS, not the locals.
In a long term seige situation, I don't think the ISIS guys would have many qualms about cannibalism.
Iran & the IA has snipers.
Do they have enough? I don't know. Would they have to pull them from other fronts?
After Amerli and other areas were cleansed, I don't think the Shia care about votes.
If they do not have enough snipers, I kind of doubt they have enough combat engineers. It is not sexy.
If they resort to cannibalism, the IA needs film teams & forensic experts. Cannibalism is pretty basic to most if not all cultures. Most people find it revolting. I don't think ISIS propaganda could overcome it. Could be wrong there too.
The IA and Iranians should have the heavy armor for support. If they don't use it that is a leadership failure IMHO.
Post a Comment