Iraq: Out of the desert into Mosul (closed)

[OUTLAW 09]

Outlaw,

What are 'borders'? Borders are (usually) mutually agreed upon territorial boundaries between different power centers. They are organized around geography, culture, population, or sometimes just convenience. But most importantly, in the Westphalian conception of the state, they are reinforced by strong normative values and the mechanisms through which such values are enforced (principally violence but occassionally diplomacy and other conflict resolution mechanisms). ISIS does not accept these principles since principles are propagated through the political system by the dominant power - and ISIS is in opposition to the dominant power. Here in the West we are generally dismissive of this fundamental difference and assert a legal or normative right that's only self-reinforcing and generally has no legitimacy among the opposition (otherwise, why would they be taking up arms if they were satisfied with the status quo?).

Borders will change. Sure. They are indicators of political organization but not the source of political power in themselves. The concern for me is that ISIS (1) has a globalized agenda, unlike the pre-2001 Taliban, and (2) it is centrally located in the most volatile region and further situated between the two dominant competitors in the Muslim world: Iran and Saudi Arabia. I expect to see this conflict as one to be fought to the death, at least as far as ISIS is concerned. It will be business as usual in Riyadh and Tehran.

I would argue that in fact ISIS is actually following the new Putin Doctrine since the Crimea---meaning regardless of treaties, agreements and memorandums---territorial boundaries can in fact be changed due to ethnicity, culture and language---ISIS just adds the word religion.

So provocatively---why is then Putin "allowed" to change Ukrainian boundaries based on ethnicity, culture and language- but then ISIS cannot change anything based then on religion?

They need the boundary changed to prove to the rest of the Islamic community that it can indeed be done--it is all about the narrative.

[carl]

It will not go well Carl... says me sitting far away from the US. Collectively the US electorate does not have the smarts to make an intelligence voting choice... as the world has learned.

Now the US is about to elect another failure to the highest office...

I ask every American I run into who supports Hilary to list her achievements while at State or anywhere and... you guessed it... nothing.

Not one success story which is a record to make her a sure fire winner in the next election. So for heavens sake stop trying to export the American version of democracy around the world... its already badly scewed up and don't need it to get any worse. Yes Carl its happening in our lifetime... the implosion of the USA.

I can't argue strongly against anything you say. I would note that Hillary is very strongly disliked by a significant number of Americans. The people in the media aren't in that group so overseas you may get a distorted view of what the Americans really think. You definitely get a distorted view if you went by what American NGO types in Africa say. (I don't know what business ex-pat types think.) So we may surprise you, I hope so anyway.

The implosion of the USA. Lordy what a grim thought...for the world as well as us.

[TheCurmudgeon]

I would argue that in fact ISIS is actually following the new Putin Doctrine since the Crimea---meaning regardless of treaties, agreements and memorandums---territorial boundaries can in fact be changed due to ethnicity, culture and language---ISIS just adds the word religion.

So provocatively---why is then Putin "allowed" to change Ukrainian boundaries based on ethnicity, culture and language- but then ISIS cannot change anything based then on religion?

They need the boundary changed to prove to the rest of the Islamic community that it can indeed be done--it is all about the narrative.

I am curious, do you think they give that much attention to the narrative from a "western" point of view? I mean, do any of the political or international relationship conventions of the Western World really matter to them?

As you noted, they knew about the Sykes-Picot, but they also made a point of trashing it.

On a realted note, it is clear to me (as a Westerner) that the videos being released are intended to a) strike fear in the hearts of thier enemys, and b) encourage others to join based on thier dominance (everyone wants to be associated with the biggest kid on the block). But they have to know that these videos will be siezed upon by Westerners who will never see their Calaphite as legitimate. I don't think Al Baghdadi is really so stupid as to believe that he can survive as the ruler of a state without at least tacid Western approval. (I actually don't think he is stupid at all). So what is his end game?

[AmericanPride]

Outlaw,

There is no "Putin Doctrine" specific to the manipulation of borders, and even if it were, Russia's influence on the political culture of the Middle East - especially among Islamist circles - is nil. To which treaties is ISIS a party? Which political authorities does ISIS recognize? ISIS is a paradigm shift - it rejects the status quo in favor of new rules and norms. Every measurement of legitimacy in the Western paradigm is either reevaluated or totally discarded by Islamism. Who cares if ISIS is following some kind of "Putin Doctrine"? What we should care about is whether ISIS' power can be sustained, and if so, what are the consequences for the old order?

[AmericanPride]

TC,

Al Baghdadi is well-educated, and after surviving for many years in the insurgency, I agree with you that he is not 'stupid'. But I think you may be over-estimating the importance of "Western approval". What does that mean in practice? That the West is not actively trying to overthrow the government? Iraq and Libya demonstrates that there are states out there who's existence will be quickly called into question as soon as the opportunity arises. The strength of movements like ISIS is not their ability to capture "Western approval" but to know that "Western approval" is a farce that exists by default when the West perceives it does not have the political or military capabilities to effect change.

[OUTLAW 09]

Outlaw,

There is no "Putin Doctrine" specific to the manipulation of borders, and even if it were, Russia's influence on the political culture of the Middle East - especially among Islamist circles - is nil. To which treaties is ISIS a party? Which political authorities does ISIS recognize? ISIS is a paradigm shift - it rejects the status quo in favor of new rules and norms. Every measurement of legitimacy in the Western paradigm is either reevaluated or totally discarded by Islamism. Who cares if ISIS is following some kind of "Putin Doctrine"? What we should care about is whether ISIS' power can be sustained, and if so, what are the consequences for the old order?

Here is the problem---ISIS and the related Sunni insurgent groups have in fact proved that their power can be sustained at least from 2003 to until now 2014---they outlasted the US Army, JSOC, and Malaki's 300K man military do you not think--and they will outlast the Iranian Quds Force. Remember Iran is struggling now on two fronts, struggling with a massive failing economy and is taking losses---yes they had staying power in the Iraq war but the mood of the younger Iran is definitely not for a war if one listens to the social media.

Secondly, to mention Sykes-Picot in a formal ISIS battle video released on their primary web site is not a "fluke" or "accident" which alludes to their full understanding of territorial boundaries and what they mean thus a Caliphate claim that crosses two up to now international recognized countries Syria and Iraq would in theory mean the dissolution of the two existing countries to pull off a Caliphate or as they stated Sykes-Picot is "dead".

Just as Putin in fact stated that signed agreements protecting territorial boundaries are now a thing of the past ISIS has declared Sykes-Picot "dead" and that will have an impact in the ME.

[Ray]

Al Qaeda-inspired ISIS militants now ‘world’s richest terror group’ after looting nearly a half-billion from Iraq bank: reports
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/worl...icle-1.1828661

Any comments?

[OUTLAW 09]

This article is really interesting as it comes from the Voice of Russia and is probably right now a very balanced press release on the Iraqi issues especially coming from Russia.

Is now Malaki trying to stir up Shia anger against the Saudi's who are sitting with a well trained Army and Air Force on his southern border and itching to "assist" fellow Sunni brothers since 2003 especially now that their regional hegemon rival Iran is engaged in killing Sunni's near their border.

Malaki does not seem to understand just where al-Baghdadi and the supporting Sunni insurgent groups are headed.

There is now a dynamic in play that even the US cannot gauge where it is headed--maybe they should have not teed off the KSA over Syria.

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_0...ilitants-6099/

[OUTLAW 09]

Any comments?

Not even the mothership AQ comes anywhere close to what the bank robbery got ISIS.

Now they can fund their Shia war and create the Caliphate---their recruiters have already fanned out across Europe- a few have been arrested.

Go back and research where the Sunni are situated/residing in Iraq---they are actually the majority population along the southern border to the KSA--watch how ISIS will swing mobile units undetected (right now Baghdad is fighting the "near" fight and not seeing the "far" fight) down to the southern flank while they have the attention of the Quds Force in Diyala and then makes a dash across the open desert to the south of Baghdad--they really do enjoy utilities---and the KSA sits on the southern border. Zarqawi laid it all out in 2006.

Two things have impressed me with this AQI/ISIS generation---their great use of swarming tactics and speed ---it is almost like the US use of "shock and awe" only in reverse.

[davidbfpo]

This is the first of two pointers. to commentaries by analysts.

First, from Kings of War a new voice:

That’s why I’m delighted to have had the opportunity to speak in our first Kings of War podcast (18 mins) with Dr Victoria Fontan, currently Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at Duhok University in the Kurdish region of Iraq. Victoria, as you will hear, has been kicking around Iraq in one capacity or another for over a decade now and is currently working on her second PhD with us in the War Studies Department (having turned to the dark side) researching ‘slow insurgency in Iraq’. She has been studying ISIS since 2010 and has done more and more intimate interviews with them than any other researcher I know.

The link to the summary & podcast, with some surprises which I cite below:http://kingsofwar.org.uk/2014/06/isi...owcast-vol-1/?

ISIS has not emerged from nowhere. They were not ‘fading away’ before the onset of the Syrian civil war; rather, they were regrouping, cleaning up their house (imagine the rooftop discussion between Ali La Pointe and Ben M’Hidi in The Battle of Algiers when he declares that before they take the fight to the French they’re first going to sweep up the pipes and dope dealers in the Casbah). Up to July 2013, at least in Salaheddin province, ISIS’s attacks were paid for by the Turkish government, not private donors from the Gulf as is commonly mistaken. ISIS’s presence in Syria did not ‘just happen’; rather, it was orchestrated by Turkey, which then decided to back up the wrong horse–Nusra, in the Spring of 2013. This last aspect of Victoria’s strategic diagnosis is, in my view, the most worrisome.

What we are seeing is not ‘just’ a civil war but an incipient schismatic war with thick tentacles linking it abroad in a patently ominous manner...... While speaking with Victoria the first thought of the near future of the Middle East which sprang to mind was one akin to the Balkan tragedy of the 1990s–only on a larger scale, with more money for weapons and willing suppliers, and with even less scope for external mitigation.

[TheCurmudgeon]

TC,

Al Baghdadi is well-educated, and after surviving for many years in the insurgency, I agree with you that he is not 'stupid'. But I think you may be over-estimating the importance of "Western approval". What does that mean in practice? That the West is not actively trying to overthrow the government? Iraq and Libya demonstrates that there are states out there who's existence will be quickly called into question as soon as the opportunity arises. The strength of movements like ISIS is not their ability to capture "Western approval" but to know that "Western approval" is a farce that exists by default when the West perceives it does not have the political or military capabilities to effect change.

I think that “Western” approval matters in areas like financial transactions. If you cannot use Western banking systems to conduct transactions of say, selling oil on world markets, then you will always have to go through other entities. As long as they are considered a “terrorist” organization the U.S. and other countries can put considerable restrictions on their finances. That is just one area. Even Lybia and Saddam had those types of connections. The only isolated country I can think of is North Korea and even they do business with China and South Korea.

It was easier when the Soviets were still around. There was an alternative financial network. You could get everything from grain to guns. Now he will have to get someone to help sponsor his activities. I am assuming SA, but I am not sure even they will touch him being a Takfarist. So I am not sure he can make this work in the long term.

He may not think he needs those types of connections. That he can get what he needs with the cash he has stolen and with oil. he may be right, but I have my doubts.

[davidbfpo]

A short comment by Paul Rogers, which I note in particular:

If Balad air base is over-run in the coming days, the extensive munitions and equipment there will add further to ISIL’s stores. That may well be a priority for ISIL’s limited forces, not Baghdad.

ISIL planners are among the most experienced paramilitary tacticians anywhere in the world, let alone the region, including years of experience against western counter-insurgency forces.

Link:http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...aq_crisis_note

There is a third from Hamid Hussain, a SWJ contributor and USA-based analyst has reviewed his earlier work. Alas my IT cannot convert it to a format used by SWC, so standby.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Here is something I can agree with:

13.The greatest short- or medium-term aid to this will be open western military intervention in any form, even if restricted primarily to the use of armed drones.
14.Any such intervention will aid their propagandising the process as the “far enemy” at work again. Such a process would be greatly aided by any Israeli action in Syria – a return to the effective propaganda of 2003-6 when Israeli aid for the US operations in Iraq (little acknowledged in the West but well-known in the region) made it possible to propagandise the “Crusader-Zionist plot” to great effect.
15.ISIL may well act to incite Western military intervention. Any such intervention would be a grave mistake.

http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...aq_crisis_note

As the article notes, they can only maintain their territorial gains if they can build an army beyond what they have now (estimated at 10,000). Recruiting through propaganda will be key. We should offer them no moral victory by being the target of western aggression.

[JWing]

Why did the Iraqi Army just quit before giving battle and let the ISIS run amock?

Did the Sunnis stand their ground along with the Shia in the Iraqi army?

Just wanted to know.

Has been reported a lot already. 3 top commanders in Mosul ordered a disorganized retreat and forces broke. When word spread other units broke throughout Salahaddin and Kirkuk. Has nothing to do with the sect of the units or soldiers.

[Ray]

Has been reported a lot already. 3 top commanders in Mosul ordered a disorganized retreat and forces broke. When word spread other units broke throughout Salahaddin and Kirkuk. Has nothing to do with the sect of the units or soldiers.

Thanks.

Not reported where we are.

[carl]

Here is something I can agree with:
http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.u...aq_crisis_note

As the article notes, they can only maintain their territorial gains if they can build an army beyond what they have now (estimated at 10,000). Recruiting through propaganda will be key. We should offer them no moral victory by being the target of western aggression.

Aggressive, expansionist and murderous organizations like ISIS don't require actions by us for either good or ill to score propaganda points. If there is something small there, they'll make it bigger. If there is nothing there they will make it up or they will slaughter innocents as a provocation. This particular group of takfiri killers doesn't want us to leave them alone. They want us-convert, dhimmi or die.

That's what I figure anyway.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Aggressive, expansionist and murderous organizations like ISIS don't require actions by us for either good or ill to score propaganda points. If there is something small there, they'll make it bigger. If there is nothing there they will make it up or they will slaughter innocents as a provocation. This particular group of takfiri killers doesn't want us to leave them alone. They want us-convert, dhimmi or die.

That's what I figure anyway.

So why give them what they want?

[carl]

So why give them what they want?

Good question. Since what they want is to subjugate us, I see no good reason to allow them to do so. We defend ourselves as we must from takfiri killers and if they whine about us nasty crusaders picking on the poor downtrodden Muslims, we've lost nothing since they would whine about that no matter what.

[davidbfpo]

Professor Olivier Roy, a regional expert of some renown, has a short interview on:http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...unni-shia-rift

Succinct:

The U.S. invasion of Iraq has just destroyed the main Sunni bulwark against Iran, with two consequences: the solidifying of a de facto independent Kurdistan, the secession of a large Sunni populated area in Northern Iraq that shifted from Baathism to Jihadism and straddles the border with Syria. Saudi Arabia, instead of allying itself with the mainstream Sunni organizations (like the Muslim Brothers), wants to crush them, while it supported for decades the very radicals that are now taking the lead in Pakistan, Iraq, and Syria.

Thus Iran is the great beneficiary of the collapse of the dominant order built between 1918 and 1948, with a minimum engagement on the field.

Shashank Joshi, from RUSI, has a short commentary 'Iran and America in Iraq: a Great Rapprochement, or Hot Air? and he concludes (from the sub-title):

The crisis in Iraq appear to have united the US and Iran against the jihadists of ISIS. But claims of a historic rapprochement, let alone collaboration, are wildly overblown.

Link:https://www.rusi.org/analysis/commen.../#.U6C-qECRcdW

[OUTLAW 09]

This is the first of two pointers. to commentaries by analysts.

First, from Kings of War a new voice:

The link to the summary & podcast, with some surprises which I cite below:http://kingsofwar.org.uk/2014/06/isi...owcast-vol-1/?

David---I had earlier mentioned that Turkey has supported and sided with ISIS in Syria thus the kidnapping of their Consulate personnel immediately after arriving in Mosul. You will notice absolutely no mention of the 48 in the last several days means to me and knowing Turkey-- money is ready to flow or maybe ISIS will totally break with Turkey and kill the hostages---doubt it as they still need crossing points and I suspect next to money Turkey will quietly "agree" to under the radar crossing points which are not "public" so Turkey can save face.

The main resupply/recruitment rat runs went basically through the Turkish border which Turkey has been shutting down under pressure by the US/Europe over the last four months thus again the recent fighting on their border at the Syrian crossing points.

Iraq is implementing the Iranian /Iraq war experience's ---meaning throwing thousands of limited trained "fighters" as "volunteers" against the ISIS---simply attempting to overrun their positions by sheer manpower---basically a suicide run by the "volunteers" as was conducted in the long Iran/Iraq war. ISIS is getting their Holy War---watch what happens when thousands of Shia remain in Sunni territories after the fighting---it will drive the Sunni insurgency even harder to strike them thus Zarqawi will have in the end his "war". Besides does anyone think Shia volunteers "know" how to deal with Sunni civilians other than killing them since they will be under control of the Shia militias who feel the first ethnic cleansing was not effective?

Turkey was also the main recruitment funnel point for the European ISIS foreign fighters as well and if I recall there was a recent Daily Beast interview with an American Iraqi veteran with Salafist fighters after he crossed over the border.

Balad is a major target as it has a great airfield/a central supply point and a "swimming pool" compliments of the USAF and still used by defense contractors until they were pulled out.

Watch Russia and watch the KSA---KSA has been unusually quiet lately and their recent reported private conversations on oil are not all that dead as reported they were---my link to the Voice of Russia was interesting in that is was relative balanced for recent Russian reporting on Syria and the region which has been pro Syrian in the past.