Chaotic campaign against ISIS

The downing of a Russian fighter jet by the Turkish air force caused the latest fissure amongst nations embroiled in West Asia. The incident continues to simmer without showing signs of receding. The US leads the western coalition participating in air strikes, training and equipping the opposition forces in Syria, Kurdish fighters as well as the Iraqi army. The opposition forces and the Kurdish fighters battle both – the Assad regime and the ISIS.

The Russians and Iranians are also in the fray and operate in Syria in support of the Assad government. Serious Russian military intervention commenced with the downing of a Russian airliner. The terrorist strike in Paris enhanced France&’s involvement in the war and it has taken the lead in attempting to resolve differences between the US and Russian led groups.

The two groups have varying perceptions of the Syrian (Assad) regime and the ISIS. While the western bloc is clear that the regime has to go and pave way for a democratically elected government, the Russians and the Iranians firmly support the regime. The other Middle East countries and Turkey are also against the Assad regime, for other reasons. The Middle Eastern countries have shown only a limited desire to be involved in operations, preferring to employ their resources in Yemen, battling Iran-supported Houthi rebels. Turkey has been supporting the Turkmen rebels against Assad and also indirectly the ISIS.

Advertisement

Some of the players in the region want ISIS to continue in a contained way, some want it destroyed. Others view it as a means of removing Assad; and still others view it as a means of bringing balance into the region. It is truly a muddle. Within this operate various forces.

While the western bloc targets only the ISIS in both Syria and Iraq, the Russians target those battling the regime and also the ISIS in Syria. Attempts at resolving differences between the two blocks have ended in a stalemate and therefore any military incident involving participating nations would have adverse effects.

The US indicating a deeper involvement has begun providing special troops as advisors to opposition forces in Syria. This could result in American casualties as the opposition is targeted by the Russians and make the situation more complicated. The Iranians are employing boots on the ground and have suffered casualties in support of the Assad regime.

In this quagmire of forces is the ISIS, being targeted and simultaneously fighting everybody in the region, the Assad regime, opposition forces, Iraqi army and the Kurdish rebels. They are also receiving quiet and tacit support from countries which view them as beneficial. They are simultaneously exporting terrorism overseas, drawing more nations into the mess.

The restricted air space sees air power of a collection of nations in operation. Further, each force has its own priority of targets. The situation is slowly becoming chaotic as the number of forces increase. Attempts to organize air operations in a cohesive and coordinated manner have not met with success. While the western bloc functions under a common umbrella and against a common foe, the Russians operate separately.

The main sufferers in this game are local people who are targeted endlessly by a variety of forces and thus compelled to flee from the ever-changing battle zone. This has resulted in increased casualties and migration. While most migrants have settled in camps, those who can manage it are moving to Europe by a multitude of routes. This has begun to affect the unity of the EU.

The fissures within the forces involved has only benefitted the ISIS. Effectively ISIS can only be halted and choked by a combination of steps – offensive action as well as crippling its financial and recruitment market. For such action, there is a requirement of a combined strategy, centrally enforced.

This would involve choking its sale of oil, reducing its funding from abroad and isolating the battlefield. Isolation involves sealing routes of entry and exit thus preventing movement of supporters and newly inducted fighters, while destruction continues within. Turkey, the main entry and exit point, has still to enforce this.

A systematic air campaign can lead to degradation of their fighting capability and slowly restrict them to an area where they could be contained and subsequently eliminated. For any air campaign to be effective, it has to be coordinated with movement of ground troops thus ensuring that the success of air effort bears fruit on ground. This is unlikely to be a reality, as differences within involved nations widen.

The failure of a combined strategy is enabling ISIS to employ its international fighters to expand its ideology, hatred and targeting ability way beyond the current operational area, as has happened in the recent past. This would only engulf more innocent people into their carnage of hatred and expand the spread of Islamophobia. Signs of this are slowly emerging in Europe, with nations backing down on accepting refugees.

The other beneficiaries of this confused strategy are the Assad regime and arms manufacturers. While the world focus shifts away from Assad, it permits him to continue to pound his own people. For the manufacturers of armaments, the war in West Asia and Yemen is the time to rake in profit and also test the efficacy of new weapon systems.

The only way to handle this conflict is for countries to combine and work jointly. The future of Assad should be subsequent to containment or destruction of ISIS. If they fail to combine, ISIS would continue to grow, engulfing more nations into the West Asian mess.

The writer is a retired Major-General of the Indian Army.

Advertisement