Over the past 24 to 48 hours the US and the Gulf States seemingly random
bombing of Iraq and Syria has continued albeit at a slightly reduced
rate.
On Friday (26/9/14) through to Saturday (27/9/14) the US struck 7
targets in Iraq with 5 strikes taking place in the vicinity of Kurdish
Peshmerga forces close to Kirkuk, 1 taking place in the vicinity of
Iraqi forces close to Baghdad and 1 taking place close to Al Qaim which
is right on the border with Syria around 200km (120m) south-east of the
Syrian city of Dayr az Zawr.
The strikes close to Kirkuk destroyed 3 Humvees and one supply truck
belonging to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). They also
damaged 2 ISIL armed "technical" trucks and damaged 1 ISIL
Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle (MRAP). The strike close to
Baghdad destroyed an ISIL bunker, guard post and a technical. The strike
close to Al Qaim destroyed 4 technicals, a checkpoint and what is being
termed a "command and control node" which presumably means some type of
radio transmitter.
Despite the majority of these strikes taking place close to Kurdish
Peshmerga forces who are operating on the ground close to Kirkuk and
Iraqi forces who are operating on the ground close to Baghdad there
seems to have been absolutely no attempt to co-ordinate these
air-strikes with those ground forces in order to allow those ground
forces to take advantage of the strikes to liberate territory from ISIL.
In fact the Peshmerga have been complaining that they are being given
so little information about when and where air-strikes are going to take
place that there is a constant risk of them being caught up in
so-called friendly fire.
Within Syria the US alongside Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab
Emirates (UAE) have carried out an undisclosed number of air-strikes
against undisclosed targets close to the Kurdish city of Kobane/Ayn
al-Arab which is around 1km (0.6miles) from the border with Turkey. The
secrecy around this strikes may be intended to give the impression that
they have been carried out to stop ISIL's advance into Kurdish
territory. However it appears that rather then being attempts to attack
ISIL forces these strikes have instead been targeting buildings which
the US has been happy to let people believe are ISIL oil refineries.
According to people on the ground though these buildings are actually
just fuel stores which are used by civilians living in the local area -
gas stations essentially.
As there seems to be a lot of confusion as to whether these fuel stores
are even under ISIL control these strikes again raise the problems I
highlighted on Thursday (25/9/14). As there has been no attempt to
engage ISIL forces with these strikes it almost goes without saying that
there has been absolutely no attempt to co-ordinate the air-strikes
with ground forces operating in the area.
The most peculiar of the weekend's strikes though took place in Syria's
Homs province east of the city of Palmyra. The first thing that is
strikingly odd about these strikes is that ISIL are almost exclusively
located north of the Euphrates River. These strikes have taken place
some 130km (78miles) south of Raqqa and 150km (90miles) south-west of
Dayr az Zawr which are both on the river putting the strikes well
outside of ISIL controlled territory. The other very strange thing about
these strikes is that it is far from clear who controls that area
because largely being desert there isn't actually much there to control.
The main purpose of the strikes therefore seems to be a hope that people
would mistake Homs Province with Homs City which is the provincial
capital but is around 160km (96miles) to the west. Homs City is very
firmly under the control of the Syrian government so along with the
announcement that camps belonging to "other terrorist groups" who aren't
covered by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2170
(2014) these strikes seem to have been the Saudis sending the very clear
message that they intend to do whatever they like in Syria including
bombing government forces
Despite these fresh air-strikes and Saudi Arabia's pretty vocal threats
there still doesn't seem to be any indication that any of these bombings
are going to be brought together in a coherent strategy to defeat ISIL
anytime soon. Of the 12 nations who have contributed military assets to
the coalition 5 of them have yet to conduct any air-strikes whatsoever
for the simple reason that they still don't have an airbase to operate
from. The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has indicated that he
is very keen to send Turkish ground forces into northern Syria. However
as he is still refusing to allow the coalition to use Incirlik airbase
which was used as the base for "Operation Provide Comfort" (1991-1996)
and "Operation Northern Watch" (1997-2003) I suspect that this is simply
Erdogan looking for an excuse to use Turkish troops to further occupy
Kurdish territory.
The coalition is still lacking a central command cell and a supreme
commander of forces. If such as structure were to be established the
commanders first task would be to take US President Obama's super vague
objective of "degrading and ultimately destroying ISIL" and turning it
into a series of concrete military objectives.
The first of these would likely be to prevent ISIL from advancing
further into fresh territory. This would be achieved by flying armed
patrols along the borders of the territory ISIL currently controls. If
the aircrews flying those missions were to identify any offensive ISIL
targets - e.g a firing position - they would then immediately engage
that target in an attempt to destroy it. The next objective would likely
be to force ISIL out of the territory they currently occupy. This would
be achieved firstly by weakening ISIL's forward positions by conducting
strategic bombings raids against the networks directly supplying those
forward positions and secondly by providing close air-support to ground
forces in order to punch a hole in that forward line allowing the ground
forces to move in and clear the area. While this is taking place the
coalition is also likely to carry out strategic bombing of ISIL's rear
echelon positions to weaken the organisation overall.
Unless the coalition does put together a strategic plan to defeat ISIL I
am going to have to start questioning whether this ad-hoc bombing is
doing more harm then good by increasing the threat that ISIL pose to the
nations in the coalition. By attacking ISIL the coalition is very
obviously provoking the organisation and its supporters to attack
members of the coalition in retaliation. By failing to show that the
coalition is capable of quickly defeating ISIL it is further encouraging
ISIL to stand and make a fight of it by giving them the impression that
they can win. So unless a plan comes together soon I am beginning to
wonder if I can recommend that the US Congress supports this operation
in its current form.
Following the UK Parliament giving them permission to join the coalition
on Friday (26/9/14) the UK's Royal Air Force (RAF) have flown several
armed patrols consisting of 2 Tornado GR4's operating in pairs over
northern Iraq much as they did during Operations Provide Comfort and
Northern Watch. However the RAF have yet to identify any ground targets
to strike. Although I'm sure they're far to well disciplined to say it
outright this strikes me as the RAF contributing to the coalition by
pointing out that they are there to successfully achieve a series of
military objectives.
They are not there to randomly bomb things in the hope that the electorate will get off their backs.
(Originally Posted) 15:30 on 28/9/14 (UK date).
No comments:
Post a Comment