Sic Semper Tyrannis

"The Syrian Regime on the Offensive Again" Jeffrey White

Two major elements of the regime's approach are attrition and position. It seeks to wear down the opposition's forces and will by inflicting material and morale losses in sustained fighting, even if these engagements are not necessarily intense or decisive. It also aims to control key positions -- provincial capitals, airfields, strongpoints, lines of communication, dominant terrain -- at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels.

These two elements are mutually supportive. Attrition facilitates the taking and holding of key positions, which in turn imposes further attrition on rebel forces. These are necessarily slow processes and do not always work in the regime's favor, but by and large they have led to important offensive and defensive successes amid occasional failures.

The Damascus and Aleppo offensives present both opportunity and risk for the regime.  The long war it is fighting allows it to work methodically to reduce its opponents -- the regime can prioritize its objectives and pursue them without rushing, a kind of strategic patience. Nevertheless, whenever it commits serious resources to an operation with important goals, it must score enough visible success to claim "victory" and make the inevitable losses incurred worthwhile. Clear failure, as in Raqqa province last summer, results in both military and political setbacks for the regime.

The southern offensive -- which has centered on western Rif Damascus, Quneitra province, and northern Deraa province -- was launched because moderate and extremist rebel groups were pressing on the southern Damascus suburbs and threatening the regime's line of communication to Deraa city. The regime had been unable to manage the threat with its standard forces and airpower; this fact, coupled with Hezbollah's interest in establishing a new front with Israel, led to the current combined offensive involving regime, Hezbollah, and Iranian-allied Shiite militia forces.  WINEP

----------------------

SST has long described the continuing growth in capability of the Syrian Armed Forces.  (SAF) Clausewitz wrote that actual combat experience survived by an army is the best possible form of training.   The SAF has survived four years of war against a host of different opponents.  Clausewitz also believed that the same thing was true of officers and that no amount of military schooling schooling and training could ever have the educational value of a campaign or two.  

The SAF has survived that process and should be taken seriously as a battlefied "player."  pl  

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-syrian-regime-on-the-offensive-again

"How to Retake Mosul from the Islamic State" WINEP

"According to the Feb. 19 Central Command briefing, the assault force might include five Iraqi Army brigades, with three smaller Peshmerga and Iraqi brigades in support. Other reporting suggests that a follow-on gendarmerie force of Mosul policemen would be inserted into cleared areas as a stabilization force.

Under optimal conditions and with smart planning, the planned force of 20,000 to 25,000 soldiers might just be big enough. Perhaps the approach of a credible relieving force will itself cause the Islamic State's grasp on the city to crumble. In a best-case scenario, the latent militant and community networks in Mosul could begin to turn against the Islamic State, sealing off their areas and sitting out the battle. And the Islamic State might overreact and hasten its demise with acts of barbarity that spark a rolling rejection of its presence. Any of these possibilities could be accelerated by coalition airstrikes and U.S.-enabled psychological operations that take control of the cell-phone system and allow direct communications with the public. An attacking force would be well served to selectively seize symbolic locations such as Mosul's airport, the adjacent Ghizlani military complex, and even the Tigris bridges.

But attacking with such a small force represents a dangerous gamble. Iraq's post-Saddam military has never undertaken such an ambitious endeavor as the recapture of Mosul. Unless the Islamic State's determination to hold Mosul is far more fragile than anticipated, an assault force of fewer than half a dozen lightly manned brigades could quickly be ground down by the jihadis. The mooted 25,000 troops might appear to have much more than the traditional three-to-one advantage required to attack, but in reality the sheer number of military tasks faced by such a force would quickly soak up and wear down the liberators. In every area of the sprawling city, the security forces would need to defuse dense patterns of booby traps, clear buildings, screen military-age males, and restore stability and services. And getting back into Mosul may be the easy part."  WINEP

-----------------

The 25,000 number is an illusion.  The LOC to the north will have to be outposted every foot of the way.  The major towns are Sunni and will be hostile in character to the government force campaigning to the north.  These will all have to be heavily garrisoned to keep them in government hands.

The Iraqi Army, the Pesh Merga, the Shias militias and the Sunni Arab tribesmen are all groups sensitive to their own casualties.  They will shrink as they see men fall along the way.  A number more like 5,000 is more likely by the time they reach Mosul.

Once there they will face the classic combat in cities situation.  This kind of fighting requires a lot of skill in doing things like clearing buildings from the tope down, "mouseholing" walls so you don;t have to go out in the street.  At the same time the value of coalition air will be reduced because of concern for collateral casualties.

A dangerous gamble indeed; if the new Iraqi Army force is badly damaged, the likelihood of greater Iranian intervention in Iraq will be increased.  pl  

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/how-to-retake-mosul-from-the-islamic-state

Open Thread - 4 March 2015

pl

Iraqi/Iranian Joint Operation at Tikrit

"The biggest offensive against ISIS so far happened without American help—but with plenty of assistance from Iran.

The Iraqi military launched a major campaign to take back a key city from the self-proclaimed Islamic State over the weekend—a move that caught the U.S. “by surprise,” in the words of one American government official.

The U.S.-led coalition forces that have conducted seven months of airstrikes on Iraq’s behalf did not participate in the attack, defense officials told The Daily Beast, and the American military has no plans to chip in.

Instead, embedded Iranian advisers and Iranian-backed Shiite militias are taking part in the offensive on the largely Sunni town, raising the prospect that the fight to beat back ISIS could become a sectarian war.

The news is the latest indication that not all is well with the American effort against the terror group. On Friday, U.S. defense officials told The Daily Beast that a planned offensive against the ISIS stronghold of Mosul had been indefinitely postponed. "  Daily Beast

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/02/iraq-s-attack-against-isis-catches-u-s-by-surprise.html

*************

 Shia militia to the fore

Iranian-backed Shia militiamen have played a key role in forcing IS to retreat north of Baghdad

• The Popular Mobilisation (Hashid Shaabi), comprising dozens of Shia militia, takes a lead role in Iraqi operations against Islamic State (IS)
• It was formed by the Shia-led government in June 2014 after the army collapsed in the face of an advance by IS militants across northern Iraq
• Thousands volunteered to fight after Iraq's most senior Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, called on people to take up arms and defend their country and its holy sites
• Iran provides funding, weapons and military advisers to militia in the Popular Mobilisation, and reportedly controls several of them directly
• The Popular Mobilisation is headed by Jamal Jaafar Mohammed, also known as Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis, a former Badr Organisation commander who is close to Iranian General Qassem Soleimani
• Militiamen have been accused of committing atrocities and acting with impunity. Activists say Sunni Arab civilians have been forced from their homes, kidnapped, and in some cases summarily killed

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31708996

---------------------

 Apparently, there is no US coalition air power involved in this effort to re-conquer Salah al Din Province and the city of Tikrit.  Many will doubt that Baghdad did not inform the US of this effort but I see no reason to doubt that datum.  Iran is the Shia government of Iraq's natural ally, not the US.  The US now objects to oppression of the Sunni Arabs by the government and by the Shia militias aligned with the government.  This makes no sense to the Shia.  For them, an enemy is an enemy,  period, end of story.  

At the same time the openly heralded offensive to Mosul several hundred miles beyond Tikrit has been postponed "indefinitely."  IMO this represents a prudent worry on the part of the Iraqis and their Iranian advisers that (as I observed in an earlier post ) such a deep thrust would carry a great risk of reversal beyond the point of culmination of the drive.   

It is a good idea from the Shia point of view to run a "test" of their ability t campaign to the north.  Let us see if they can do that.  pl 

The Speech to Congress

Adam L. Silverman

The link to the live feed of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to Congress is here at CSPAN.

The South Syria Front

"The southern offensive has been ongoing for over a month. The insurgents went from Jordan along the Golan up to the Lebanese border under cover of Israeli artillery. Whenever they were attacked by the Syrian army they fired a mortar into Israel proper and the Israeli army responded by shelling the Syrian army because, it said, it is the Syrian army's responsibility to keep everything calm. Nice logic ... The move is now into the direction of Damascus but a Syrian counteroffensive is planned and will soon start. These insurgents and all the fighting have been led by al-Nusra while all official mentioning, like in that Reuters piece, claims it is an FSA offensive. It is not. Al-Nusra is clearly in the lead." b -  14 November, 2014 on SST

*********** 

"In early February, an alliance of Iran, the Syrian regime, and Hezbollah launched a major military offensive against rebel groups in Syria's south, close to the borders of Israel and Jordan. This campaign bears potential strategic consequences for Israel and the Syrian theater, and calls for close U.S. and international attention.

Some 4,000-5,000 troops have been massed for the offensive, which focuses on the provinces of Deraa, bordering Jordan, and Quneitra, bordering the Israel-controlled Golan Heights. Combatants include units from the Syrian army; the National Defense Forces, a government militia; an estimated 2,000 Hezbollah fighters, constituting a sizable portion of the group's forces in Syria; and, notably, Iranian military elements including advisors and senior officers. A website close to the Syrian regime posted a photo of Gen. Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force, visiting the area, signaling its importance to Iran.

 

SST: Your Netanyahu News Network... Updated with Transcript

Adam L. Silverman

Since I can't find a transcript of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech this morning to post, here's a link the video of it Mediate. I tried to embed it, but I can't get Typepad to take the URL. As soon as I can find a transcript, I'll update. Play nice in the comments...

http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-live-benjamin-netanyahu-addresses-aipac-conference/

-- Update --

The transcript can finally be found in online. I've pulled it from The Algemeiner. Full text below the fold. Tomorrow's address to Congress will be at 10:45 AM EST, same Bibi time, same Bibi station...

Write to your members of Congress! Stop Bibi!

 

This man is in the United States for the specific purpose of wrenching control of US foreign policy from the hands of our elected president and the Executive Branch of the federal government.

He does not shrink from saying that this attempt is all about his country and what he imagines are its interests and that he does not care if the interests of our country are damaged by his efforts.

A large number of retired and former officers and officials of; the IDF, Israeli intelligence, Shin Bet and the Israeli police have written to Natanyahu to advise him to cancel his address to Congress because it will alienate many Americans through  its blatant interference in US Government.

A sub-set of that group have also written to Natanyahu endorsing the opinion of the US Intelligence Community that Iran has not had a nuclear weapons program since 2003.

I strongly urge members of the SST community to write or call their US Senators and members of the House of Representatives to urge them to BOYCOTT Natanyahu's speech.  pl  

 

Partial Update: This Has Sort of Happened Before: Mr. Netanyahu's Meshugana Mystery Tour

1 

Adam L. Silverman

As we wait for the substantive portions of Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the US to get fully underway it is important to remember that this is not the first time that an Israeli prime minister from the Likud Party has tried to politically roll the President of the US (h/t to Steve M). Back in August 1981 the US was set to sell AWACs planes to Saudi Arabia. Menachem Begin, and many other Israelis, were quite concerned about this. After making unsuccessful appeals to President Reagan to abort the sale, Prime Minister Begin went around the President and behind his back to Congress. This was after one of President Reagan's advisors specifically warned him not to try maneuvering around him. The specific advisor, Jacob Stein, was reported to have explicitly told Begin: "that Reagan and the U.S. Administration would view a continued Israeli policy to persuade Senators and Congressmen to oppose the aircraft sale as a personal affront to Reagan himself." As Steve M reported several weeks ago at his site, President Reagan in his own post-presidential memoirs referred to this incident. President Reagan specifically wrote on page 415 that "I don't like having representatives of a foreign country - any foreign country - trying to interfere in what I regarded as our domestic political process and the setting of our foreign policy." 

Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit, built around a speech to Congress in an attempt to influence the US's domestic political process and the setting of America's foreign policy, is not a new trick for an Israeli prime minister. He's merely following in the footsteps of Israel's first Likud prime minister - Menachem Begin. Unfortunately, as Chemi Shalev wrote at Haaretz back in 2011, if President Obama responded in a manner similar to the way that President Reagan did, he would be impeached. More's the pity as the US/Israeli relationship continues to grow ever more dysfunctional and unbalanced.

--

Partial Update:

After sleeping on it and going back and rereading Shalev's article I think I would have preferred to have written that some people would call for President Obama's impeachment if he treated Israel the way that President Reagan did. Of course in DC they just call that Tuesday...

^{1 Image of President Reagan and Prime Minister Begin walking together was found here.}

"... last moments of Boris Nemtsov," Telegraph

"The grainy video, recorded from the other side of the Moskva River, contradicts earlier reports that Mr Nemtsov was killed by assailants shooting from a vehicle that slowed down when passing him and his girlfriend, Anna Duritskaya, as they walked home.

Instead, the assassin apparently hid in a stairwell leading off down from a bridge. As Mr Nemtsov passed, the killer emerged and began shooting at Mr Nemtsov’s back, killing him with four pistol rounds. He then hurriedly climbs into an arriving getaway car, and is driven away.

The new details confirm the high levels of preparation required for the attack, which both Russian investigators and President Vladimir Putin have said has all the hallmarks of a contract killing. Opposition politicians claim it may have been the work of the Kremlin, of which Mr Nemtsov was a prominent critic.

“You would have needed to coordinate very closely between Nemtsov and the car… It is clear that it was a very sophisticated and professional killing,” according to security expert Andrei Soldatov. Up to 15 people working in three teams could have been involved, he said."  Telegraph

-------------------

"Is a puzzlement!" ("King and I "reference)

Surely Putin is not this dumb.  Why on earth would he have this gadfly killed on a busy Moscow street when it would have been obvious that he (Putin) would be the popular suspect?

 Why?  pl  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11442967/CCTV-footage-shows-moment-that-Russian-opposition-leader-was-gunned-down.html