Iraq: Out of the desert into Mosul (closed)

[Bill Moore]

Articles that follow show how ISIL is adapting to the air campaign, although if the breaking news today that ISIL leadership convoy was targeted turns out to be correct that may change the game, at least for the near term.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/06/wo...ref=world&_r=0

ISIS Wave of Might Is Turning Into Ripple

This title is very misleading, but if its purpose was to draw a reader in, it worked on me. What the author points out is that ISIL is adapting to current conditions, which does not mean they are being defeated. In other parts of the article the author does make a good point, if it is accurate, that ISIL has been unable to expand outside Sunni dominated areas.

Across the territories the Islamic State holds, the group has overhauled its operations. Bases and hospitals have been evacuated and moved to civilian homes that are harder to identify and bomb, Iraqi officials said. Fighters who used to cross the desert in convoys now move in small groups or by motorcycle.

Its fighters now move in small groups, making them less vulnerable to air power. And instead of storming into towns with overwhelming force, the group has begun establishing sleeper cells in areas it wants to seize.

“It used to be that a force would come from the outside and attack a city,” Mr. Alhashimi said. “Now the forces rise up from inside the city and make it fall.”

http://america.aljazeera.com/article...ttlefield.html

ISIL brings more than just brutality to the battlefield

But according to a new analysis from the Soufan Group, a New York-based security and intelligence consultancy firm, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant's (ISIL) headline-grabbing brutality has obscured the other factors behind its emergence as a formidable challenger to regional powers. Under the guidance of veteran Saddam-era Iraqi commanders, ISIL has morphed from an underground terror cell into a dynamic and well-oiled military force that defies the conventional definition of an insurgent group.

“In Baghdad, it's still a classic terror group. In Fallujah, it's a light infantry unit. It’s whatever it needs to be,” said Patrick Skinner, the lead author of Soufan’s November report, which collated open-source information and analysis from other experts.

Interesting perspective on how complex the fight is from our perspective. The time it takes to develop consensus with our multinational partners gives the adversary the ODAA loop advantage. I doubt that advantage will be decisive in the long run, but it certainly impedes our ability to apply force effectively.

Kobane is just one battle, and waging it has exposed the steep costs involved in simply stopping ISIL from advancing on a single front. It took a herculean effort of diplomatic engineering led by the U.S., coupled with massive protests by Turkish Kurds, to convince a reluctant Ankara merely to allow those reinforcements through its gates. Even with the backing of coalition strikes, all they've managed is a stalemate.

Here is the link to the Soufan Report, which is quite detailed. The authors all seem to have very good credentials. Just skimmed the report so far (66 pages), but initial impression is positive.

http://soufangroup.com/wp-content/up...tate-Nov14.pdf

[ganulv]

In other parts of the article the author does make a good point, if it is accurate, that ISIL has been unable to expand outside Sunni dominated areas.

That’s interesting in light of some of what Joshua Landis was saying in a CNN interview yesterday: http://cnn.it/1Ef74tT

[Bill Moore]

Another we need a political solution speaker that ignores the reality of human passion and hatred. We'll just draw a line on the map, you guys can have this area, and you guys can have that area. This problem will ultimately be solved weapons and force, and unless ISIL is put under significant more pressure than they are now why would they seek a political solution? Unless they the speaker thinks they're happy with the current boundaries of Caliphate? Does he assume Turkey and Iraq will be content with these proposed boundaries? Iran? Seems overly simplistic to me.

[ganulv]

Another we need a political solution speaker that ignores the reality of human passion and hatred. We'll just draw a line on the map, you guys can have this area, and you guys can have that area. This problem will ultimately be solved weapons and force, and unless ISIL is put under significant more pressure than they are now why would they seek a political solution? Unless they the speaker thinks they're happy with the current boundaries of Caliphate? Does he assume Turkey and Iraq will be content with these proposed boundaries? Iran? Seems overly simplistic to me.

I understood him to suggest Turkey as contributing substantially to the “weapons and force” part of the equation.

[Bill Moore]

I understood him to suggest Turkey as contributing substantially to the “weapons and force” part of the equation.

I was doing dishes the first time I listened, and this time I heard "we need to drag the Turks into this to disarm them and establish a good government." Paraphrased, but close to what he said I believe.

Staying in my grumpy and defiant mood, what are the chances Turkey wants to do this? Are they capable of helping them establishing a good government? Why wouldn't Turkey continue to arm the Sunni Syrians to finish off Assad's regime? Granted he is a regional expert, but it all seems out of the reach of reality to me.

[ganulv]

I was doing dishes the first time I listened, and this time I heard "we need to drag the Turks into this to disarm them and establish a good government." Paraphrased, but close to what he said I believe.

From my on the fly transcription:

[3:13] What one would have to do if they wanted to solve this problem, and not just make a narrow counter-terrorism approach to it, would be to try to draw the Turks into Syria with Saudi, American backing, and NATO backing, to try to disarm the militias and set up a government that was a good government, that everybody could get behind and pour money into for development […]

Staying in my grumpy and defiant mood, what are the chances Turkey wants to do this? Are they capable of helping them establishing a good government? Why wouldn't Turkey continue to arm the Sunni Syrians to finish off Assad's regime? Granted he is a regional expert, but it all seems out of the reach of reality to me.

First question: You got me. Almost none at the moment? The chances might go up with a few third party incentives and 5–10 more years of the current status quo.

Second question: A completely fair point. I think you can see what Landis is trying to get at when at 5:08 he discusses the need to realize that a de facto Sunni state has already been created. I think the Western government in a box + aid money approach that has been attempted in Afghanistan is almost certain to fail, too. But maybe a neighbor with longer term interests and a better understanding of the dynamics would stand a better chance. Emphasis on maybe.

Third question: Also fair. The counterweight of Iranian support for Assad?

Landis is putting it out there. For all I know he is playing Devil’s advocate, saying, “If you think what I am saying sounds out of reach of reality…”

[JWing]

Just published new security report for first week of Nov. 2014 in Iraq. Attacks remained relatively low but casualties took a jump due to IS massacres of Albu Nimr tribe in Anbar. Fighting in Anbar has hit a stalemate. IS went after Shiite pilgrims with car bombs in Baghdad. ISF and militias consolidating hold upon Jurf al-Sakhr in Babil while IS has relocated just to the north of it. ISF also on offensive in Salahaddin trying to surround Tikrit and cut off IS units there from their supply lines. Here's a link to the article.