First, it
is rather unlikely that the entire 101st
will be deployed in the region. At most we are
talking about a few battalions, maybe a ‘combat
team’, but hardly enough to constitute an invasion
force. Besides, the 101st is a light
infantry division which simply is not suited for a
land invasion role. In a conventional war, the 101st
would support regular ground forces, but not replace
them. In a counter-insurgency war, the 101st
could do many things, including security,
anti-terrorist operations, training of local forces,
intelligence gathering, etc. But to imagine that the
101st will drive down from northern Syria
to Damascus to overthrow Assad is simply not
realistic. As for the airfield the USA supposedly
took over in northern Iraq, take a look at a map to
see for yourself where it is located: far away in
the northeastern corner of the country, close to the
Turkish and Iraqi borders, but very, very far from
the city of Damascus or from the Russian radars in
the Mediterranean or Latakia.
The
Americans have announced that they are planning a
two pronged offensive, one towards Mosul and another
towards Raqqa. Considering that the US already has
airbases in Turkey and Iraq, the only thing which
this rather primitive airstrip (used for
“agricultural purposes” in the past, i.e. crop
dusting) would give them is a convenient place to
bring specialized personnel in and out of the
region, but hardly the hub for a major invasion
force. Besides, it is still unclear whether the
elements from the 101st will be deployed
only in Iraq or also in Syria. At least
one US magazine seems to think that rather than
a combat force, the Rmeilan air base in Syria will
be used by various type of US special forces
including combat controllers, pararescue jumpers,
special operations weathermen and other JSOC
personnel. If so, then we are talking about a
small and specialized force, not a ground
invasion of any kind.
I think
that regardless of the public statements made by
Biden and Carter, it is too early to determine what
Uncle Sam plans to do in Syria next. The airfield in
Rmeilan is most likely just seen by the US as a good
place to establish a presence and keep options open.
I don’t believe for one second that the US has any
intention of invading Syria, but if it did, we would
see a much bigger logistical effort and the
concentration of several large formations coming
from different directions (Turkey and Jordan,
possibly Iraq). In that case, Rmeilan could be used
for US helicopters but not for fixed wing-aircraft,
at least not without a major upgrade of the runway(s)
and infrastructure.
What about
the bigger question of whether the US has a
“military solution” for Syria – is that really a
possibility? I don’t think so for a very simple
reason: the only force out there which can fight
Daesh on the ground is the Syrian military. Even the
Iranians and Hezbollah do not, at least right now,
have the force levels needed to take on Daesh by
themselves. In purely military terms, Turkey or Iran
could, I suppose, launch a full scale invasion, but
the political costs would be prohibitive. Plus the
Turks probably don’t have the stomach for such a
bloody war with no clear exit strategy. At most, the
Turks want to seize a strip of land in northern
Syria and keep the Kurds down. Unlike the Turks, the
Iranians could at least be legally invited by the
Syrians, but that would hardly assuage the USA, the
KSA or the Turks which would be absolutely enraged
by such an Iranian move. Having just won a major
diplomatic victory over the USA and Israel, Iran
probably has no desire at all to create yet another
major crisis. Finally, as I said it a gazillion
times ‘the Russians are *not* coming’. So that means
that the only force capable of taking on Daesh is
the Syrian military and I don’t see the US being
able to provide anywhere near the kind of force
levels to become a credible actor in this war.
The Syrians
on the ground, the Russians in the skies, and some
special assistance from Iran and Hezbollah – this is
the only alliance which can take on Daesh and slowly
squeeze them out of most of Syria. The Americans
seem to want to use the Kurds in a role similar to
the one played by the Syrian military, ‘boot on the
ground’, but that completely ignores the fact that
the Kurds are not a single force, that they do not
have a regular army, that they are not Arabs and
that Turkey, a key ally in any US operation, will
never allow the Kurds to play a major regional role.
It is possible that the Kurds, the Americans and the
Iraqis could together retake Mosul, especially
against a weakened Daesh. As for them taking Raqqa,
I don’t see that happening, but maybe I am wrong
here and Daesh is even weaker than I think it is.
But that’s it. If that is what Biden calls a
“military solution” then it is very much a misnomer.
At most, I would personally call it an “American
side show”.
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)