Isis Faces
Likely Defeat in Battles Across Iraq and Syria – But
What Happens Next?
By Patrick
Cockburn
June 02,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "The
Independent"
-
Isis is under
attack in and around the last three big cities it
holds in Iraq and Syria – Fallujah, Mosul and Raqqa.
It is likely to lose these battles because its
lightly armed if fanatical infantry, fighting from
fixed positions, cannot withstand air strikes called
in by specialised ground forces. They must choose
between retreating and reverting to guerrilla war or
suffering devastating losses.
It is two
years since Isis launched itself on the world by
capturing Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq,
though it had already taken Fallujah 40 miles west
of Baghdad at the start of 2014. In its first
campaigns, its ability to achieve surprise by using
mobile columns of vehicles packed with experienced
fighters was astonishingly effective.
It had
developed these military techniques in the years of
warfare that followed the US invasion of Iraq in
2003, first fighting the Americans and later the
Iraqi army. Its menu of tactics combined ideological
fanaticism with a high degree of expertise and
rigorous training, and was distinguished by the mass
use of suicide bombers, snipers, IEDs, booby traps
and mortar teams.
Atrocities
highly publicised through the internet terrified and
demoralised opponents even before Isis fighters
appeared and go a long way to explaining why an
Iraqi army, far superior to Isis in numbers and
equipment, broke up and fled when Isis attacked it
in Mosul in 2014.
But these
tactics no longer work as well as they once did. All
the armies battling Isis are trained to eliminate
suicide bombers before they get close enough to
kill. Isis can still recruit young men – and
occasionally women – willing to die, but these days
they seldom inflict mass casualties among enemy
soldiers as they used to do.
Last
weekend, six suicide bombers attacked the front line
between Mosul and the Kurdish capital, but although
they all died blowing themselves up or were killed
before doing so, they only succeeded in wounding a
single Kurdish Peshmerga. Like the Japanese Kamikaze
pilots who attacked US and British ships in 1944-45,
suicide bombers are achieving diminishing returns
against better prepared defences.
Peshmerga
advancing towards Mosul in the past few days are
accompanied by excavators to dig trenches
immediately in front of their forces as soon as
possible so bombers cannot reach them with vehicles
full of explosives. Unfortunately, suicide bomber
are still able to slaughter civilians in great
numbers by attacking undefended targets such as
markets, pilgrimages, checkpoints and hospitals.
Isis is not
the all-conquering military force it once was, but
the war in Iraq and Syria is as much about politics
as military success. At issue for all involved in
the conflict in its present phase is not only the
breaking Isis control of territory, but determining
who will rule there in place of Isis.
So, if the
Shia paramilitaries of the Hashd al-Shaabi, whom the
US says are under Iranian influence, play the
leading role in capturing Fallujah, this will help
secure their long-term power and prestige in Iraq.
It will be seen as a success for Iran rather than
the US and its allies. Equally important in shaping
the future political geography of the Middle East
will be the relative roles of the Kurdish Peshmerga,
Iraqi army and the US in driving Isis from Mosul or,
in Syria, of the Syrian Kurds, their Arab allies,
the US and the Syrian Army in taking Raqqa from
Isis.
“It all
depends on who liberates Fallujah, how it is
liberated and when it is liberated,” says Fuad
Hussein, chief of staff to the Kurdish President
Massoud Barzani, in an interview with The
Independent. He believes that the balance of power
has shifted decisively against Isis compared with a
year ago, but warns that nobody should imagine that
the fall of Isis will bring peace and stability to
the region.
He notes
that Isis is suffering defeats but has also shown
great powers of revival and reorganisation, citing
as an example a recent attack by 400 Isis fighters
and 20 armoured vehicles in which they penetrated
the Peshmerga front line at an abandoned Christian
village called Teleskof, 14 miles north of Mosul.
What is different today compared with a year ago is
that they were not able to exploit their local
success before they came under air attack and lost
between 200 and 250 fighters.
Mr Hussein
says that if the caliphate falls, “Isis will
transform from a terrorist state into a terrorist
movement”. It will be weakened by not having secure
bases for training but it will not evaporate or be
replaced by moderate Arab Sunni politicians who
claim great influence on their own community and are
well-financed by foreign powers.
In Syria, a
more likely successor to Isis would be the Syrian
branch of al-Qaeda, Jabhat al-Nusra, which has been
growing in popularity among Sunni Arabs. Though
ideologically similar to Isis in its Salafi-jihadi
fundamentalist beliefs, Nusra is presenting itself
as a less maniacal alternative to Isis and one that
can probably count on a measure of support from
Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Sunni Arabs
as a whole have every reason to feel under threat.
The great majority of the five million Syrian
refugees come from Sunni Arab opposition areas. In
Iraq they were reduced to holding a few enclaves in
Baghdad in the 2006-7 sectarian bloodbath – “islands
of fear” in the words of a US diplomat the time, a
description that now fits almost every Sunni
population centre in the country.
The
governor of Kirkuk, Najmaldin Karim, told The
Independent that there were 500,000 Internally
Displaced Iraqis (IDPs), mostly Sunni Arabs who have
sought refuge in his province. He ticks off why they
cannot go home: they are banned from Diyala province
north-east of Baghdad for sectarian reasons by the
authorities there, from mixed communities in
Salahudin province though they can go to districts
that are wholly Sunni while Anbar is still too
dangerous.
It may be that
the enemies of Isis are dividing the lion’s skin
before checking that it is truly dead or close to
dying. The territorial losses of Isis may look
impressive on a small scale map of Iraq and Syria,
but what is impressive when driving outside the
borders of the caliphate is how big it remains.
It has the
advantage that its enemies are wholly disunited and
detest each other almost as much as they hate Isis,
if not more so. Turkey has failed to close Isis’s
last access to the outside world west of the
Euphrates and has prevented the Syrian Kurds doing
so. Isis may be weakened, but its opponents are also
fragile. The latest limited offensive by the Kurds
to take back villages on the Nineveh Plain east of
Mosul showed that these days they have the upper
hand, but in reality the attack was delayed several
days because some of the troops taking part had not
been paid their salaries. The economy of the
Kurdistan Regional Government area is in ruins.
Isis is
good at selecting vulnerable targets, in this case
rebel groups backed by the US and Turkey in the
north of Aleppo province who control the towns
through which the rebel side of Aleppo used to be
supplied. Isis fighters have been driving them
backwards in recent days, gaining control over a
larger section of the border and reinforcing their
hold on the fertile and heavily populated
countryside of north Aleppo province.
The Syrian
army does not look as strong as it did when it was
getting greater support from Russian air strikes and
drove Isis out of Palmyra. Isis has been fighting
back, capturing an important gas field and targeting
civilians in cities famous for their loyalty to
President Bashar al-Assad on Syria’s Mediterranean
coast.
In both
Iraq and Syria, Isis is responding to military
pressure by the mass slaughter of civilians, killing
some 148 and injuring in the Syrian coastal cities
of Tartus and Jableh and another 198 in a week of
bombings in Baghdad. The purpose of these massacres
is to show that Isis has not lost its strength and
can still strike anywhere, while at the same time
hoping to force Syrian and Iraqi regular forces to
leave the front line to defend their civilian
populations. It is an effective strategy that has
generally worked in the past.
One of the
many problems about ending the war is that many of
the players have an interest in seeing it continue.
Why, for instance, are there offensives against Isis
by the Kurdish authorities and the Baghdad
government this week? There are many reasons, but
one important motive is that President Barzani and
Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi are presenting
themselves as fighting Isis whole their local
political opponents are demanding reform of corrupt
and dysfunctional governments. “The main reason
people here in Kurdistan are quiet and not
protesting about the collapse of the economy and in
their standard of living is that they are afraid of
Daesh [Isis],” said a Kurdish businessman this week.
President Assad benefits from having an enemy so
monstrous as to rule it out as an alternative to
himself and therefore secure him in power. Isis is a
very convenient enemy for many of those fighting it,
which may be one reason why it is so difficult to
defeat.
Patrick
Cockburn is the author of ‘Chaos and Caliphate:
Jihadis and the West in the Struggle for the Middle
East’, published by OR Books, £18. Readers can
obtain a 15 per cent discount by using the code:
INDEPENDENT |