Category ISIL

Flynn is inn

Sorry…..could not resist the cheesy rhyming headline. It looks like Lt. General Michael T. Flynn is going to be nominated as the head of the National Security Council. I don’t know what to make of all the stories positive and negative about him by the various left and right talking heads…..but he did recently publish a book. His “Conclusions” is mostly readable on-line at Amazon.com. Would recommend reading it before reaching any conclusions:

https://www.amazon.com/Field-Fight-Global-Against-Radical/dp/1250106222/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

It starts on page 157 and goes to page 180, with several pages missing in between. Chapter 4: “How to Win” is not available on-line.

Now, the National Security Advisor is just that: an advisor. They actually don’t run much. Foreign Policy is handled by the State Department, Defense Policy is handled by the Secretary of Defense (neither which are appointed right now). As the National Security Advisor is the person who regularly (daily?) briefs the president on what is going on the world, they often are very influential. Some, like Henry Kissinger, eclipsed the Secretary of State. Some were not near as visible. It really depends on the person and his relationship with the president. This can also change over time.

Urban Combat in Mosul

battle-of-mosul-11-nov-2016The Iraqi Interior Ministry announced on Tuesday that Daesh fighters have been cleared from a third of the city of Mosul east of the Tigris River. Pre-battle estimates by the Iraqis credited Daesh with 5,000-6,000 fighters in the city. The Iraqi government has deployed a polyglot force of 100,000 Defense and Interior Ministry troops, Kurdish peshmerga militia, and Shi’ite paramilitary fighters, supported by Western ground and air support, which have mostly surrounded the city. While official casualty estimates have not been announced, the Iraqis claimed to have killed 955 Daesh fighters and captured 108 on the southern front alone.

Despite the months of preparation and a clear objective, The Washington Post‘s Loveday Morris recently reported that Iraqi Army commanders were still “shaken” by the character of the fighting in Mosul’s urban environs. Although confident they will ultimately prevail, they doubt they will meet the objective set by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to bring the city under control by the end of the year.

Although the Iraqi military leaders profess surprise at the complexity of urban combat, their descriptions of do not reveal anything unprecedented in historical experience. Many comments reflect recurring problems the Iraqi Army has faced in its recent operations to clear Daesh from central and western Iraq.

  • It is a bitter fight: street to street, house to house, with the presence of civilians slowing the advancing forces. Car bombs — the militants’ main weapon — speed out of garages and straight into advancing military convoys.
  • “If there were no civilians, we’d just burn it all,” said Maj. Gen. Sami al-Aridhi, a counterterrorism commander. He was forced to temporarily pause operations in his sector Monday because too many families were clogging the street. “I couldn’t bomb with artillery or tanks, or heavy weapons. I said, ‘We can’t do anything.’ ”
  • Militants wait to move between fighting positions until people fill the streets, using their presence as protection from airstrikes.
  • Col. Arkan Fadhil calls in airstrikes from the U.S.-led coalition, but they are less forthcoming than in previous battles because of the presence of families, and are used only to defend Iraqi forces rather than backing them when they attack.
  • Just a few Islamic State militants hidden in populated areas can cause tremendous chaos. [E]lite units stormed [six neighborhoods on] Nov. 4, on a day that was initially trumpeted as a success before it became clear that their early gains were not sustainable. After pushing forward with relatively little resistance, the forces were ambushed and cut off.
  • Low-ranking officers in the field made some mistakes…such as pushing forward without waiting for other units or without properly clearing and securing areas, later getting ambushed and becoming surrounded and trapped. Since the pitched battles of Nov. 4, the [Iraqi] counterterrorism troops have adjusted their pace.
  • [Iraqi counterterrorism forces] said they have had to slow down as they wait for other fronts to advance on the city. Whether they can fight inside when they reach it also remains to be seen. In the battle for the city of Ramadi, the elite counterterrorism troops ended up leading the entire fight after police and army forces struggled to move forward in their sectors.
  • Restrictions in the use of airstrikes also slow their advance. But on Tuesday morning, more than half a dozen rockets roared overhead into the Mosul neighborhood of Tahrir. Officers identified them as TOS-1 short-range missiles, which unleash a blast of pressure over an area of several hundred square meters, devastating anything in their wake. The officers said they had been informed that there were no civilians in the target area. “We only use these missiles in empty areas,” Aridhi said. “We don’t use them in places with families in it.” They sometimes are used when Iraqi forces are under heavy direct fire, he said, because it is faster than sending coordinates to the coalition.

The Iraqi government has not yet released casualty figures for the fighting, but losses are perceived to be heavy by the combatants themselves.

Given the extreme ratio of forces involved, it would seem that Iraqi military leaders are on firm ground in their confidence of ultimate success. It also seems likely they are correct about the amount of time that will be needed to secure Mosul. The defending Daesh fighters are unlikely to be reinforced and cannot replace their combat losses. Simple arithmetic will do them in sooner or later. It also appears clear that the Iraqis are holding open an avenue of retreat to the west, in the hopes that surviving Daesh forces will simply withdraw rather than fight to the last.

It is somewhat unexpected that the Iraqi Army would be surprised by the character of urban fighting in Mosul, given that they have a good deal of recent experience with it. Although they did not lead the fights, Iraqi Army elements participated in the battles for Fallujah in 2004 and Sadr City in 2008. Iraqi government forces cleared Basra with Coalition assistance in 2008, and recaptured Tikrit, Ramadi, and Fallujah (again) over the last year.

There exists a significant body of conventional wisdom that holds that urban combat is bloodier than non-urban combat, requires a higher ratio of attackers to defenders to be successful, and will be prevalent in the future. None of these conclusions is borne out by historical evidence. TDI has done a significant amount of analysis challenging the basis and conclusions of this conventional wisdom. War by Numbers, the forthcoming book by TDI President Chris Lawrence, goes into this research in great detail.

Taking Mosul

It states in the article tagged below that “His Ninth Armoured Division and elite counter terrorism units fighting nearby seized six of some 60 neighborhoods last week, the first gains inside Mosul since the Oct. 17 start of a campaign to crush Islamic State in its Iraqi fortress”

Does this mean that they have taken a tenth of Mosul?

crashing-waves-of-jihadists

Note that the article is talking about 5,000 jihadists inside of Mosul. Also of considerable interest is the statement: “Hashemi said an inner core of mainly Francophone foreign fighters, given the name ‘al-Murabitoun’ (Guards) had taken an oath to fight to the death defending strategic positions in the heart of the city.”

Lt. General Michael T. Flynn

Lt. General Michael Flynn was the head of DIA for two years before he was fired (2012-2014). I gather he is close to Trump on foreign and defense policy and is in line to be the next National Security Advisor (the next Kissinger…or next Scowcroft, or next Brzezinski, or next Powell or next Rice).

His Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_T._Flynn

He does have a book that was just released. A significant amount of it is actually readable on the Amazon.com site: https://www.amazon.com/Field-Fight-Global-Against-Radical/dp/1250106222/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

Click on the “look inside” section and flip through pages 157 to 180  (“Conclusion”). Most of that chapter is there.

His co-author’s bio is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ledeen

Multiple other articles on him are here:

  1. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/donald-trump-general-michael-flynn-vp-225253
  2. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/us/politics/michael-flynn-donald-trump.html?_r=0
  3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/15/michael-flynn-trumps-military-adviser-says-colin-powells-emails-include-really-mean-things/
  4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/08/15/trump-adviser-michael-t-flynn-on-his-dinner-with-putin-and-why-russia-today-is-just-like-cnn/

I am sure there is a lot more.

 

Questions

Well, the election is done. Oddly enough there was a certain degree of continuity in U.S foreign and defense policy from Bush Junior to Obama and it probably would have continued to Clinton. Are we now looking at any fundamental changes? What will be our defense policies?

  1. In Afghanistan
    1. Significantly increase effort?
    2. Slightly increase U.S. effort?
    3. Keep the same?
    4. Decrease U.S. effort?
    5. Disengage?
  2. In Iraq
    1. Maintain current effort after Mosul falls?
    2. Decrease U.S. effort?
    3. Disengage?
  3. With Syria
    1. No fly zones?
    2. Significantly increase effort?
    3. Slightly increase U.S. effort?
    4. Keep the same?
    5. Decrease U.S. effort?
    6. Disengage?
    7. Negotiate settlement with Russia and Assad?
  4. With Ukraine
    1. Significantly increase effort (probably not)?
    2. Slightly increase U.S. effort?
    3. Keep the same?
    4. Decrease U.S. effort?
    5. Disengage?
    6. Negotiate settlement with Russia?
    7. What about Crimea?
    8. What about Lugansk and Donetsk Peoples Republics?
    9. What about sanctions?
    10. What about EU sanctions?
  5. With Russia
    1. Confront more aggressively?
    2. Keep the same?
    3. Try to tone it down?
    4. Reset?
  6. With NATO
    1. Increase commitment (probably not)?
    2. Keep the same?
    3. Decrease U.S. effort?
    4. Force our NATO allies to contribute more?
    5. Disengage because NATO is obsolete?
    6. Negotiate some arrangement with Russia?
  7. What about Georgia?
    1. Encourage NATO to take them as a member (I am guessing not)?
    2. Continue working with them (Partnership for Peace)?
    3. Decrease commitment to them?
    4. Disengage?
    5. What about Abkhazia and Ossetia?
  8. With Iran
    1. Cancel current deal and try to renegotiate?
    2. Keep the same?
    3. Try to work out some overarching deal concerning nukes, Iraq support, and Assad support?
  9. With Yemen
    1. Keep the same (remain disengaged)?
    2. Re-engage to some level?
  10. War on Terror
    1. What additional actions are they going to take against ISIL?
    2. What about Al-Qaeda?
    3. Any other long-term initiatives to forestall the development of groups in the future or stop their attacks?
  11. With the Defense Budget
    1. Increase defense budget? (He has stated that he will increase the army from 480,000 to 540,000).
    2. Keep the same?
    3. I gather we will end sequestration (which is already on hold)?
    4. Who is going to be the Secretary of Defense?
  12. And then there is East Asia (China, the two Koreas, Taiwan, Japan, Philippines, etc.).
  13. With trade
    1. Will TPP be cancelled?
    2. Will TPP be re-negotiated?
  14. Oil and Climate Change
    1. This is an international issue.
    2. Are we going to pump more oil?
    3. Are we going to use more coal (I gather this is the case)?
    4. Will interest and funding for clean energy decline (I gather this is the case)?

I am not sure what President-elect Trump intends to do on any of subjects, although he is probably going to do something on trade.

There are a few articles detailing his plans, like this one: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/trump-defense-plan-detailed

And this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/11/09/four-questions-about-how-trump-would-affect-the-military-industrial-complex/

But at this juncture, we really do not know what our future defense policy will be.

Isolation of Mosul

mosul_battle_zone_map_medium01

Well, it looks like Mosul is isolated, sort of: mosul-iraq-advance

The Shiite militia have cut the main road to the west of Mosul. As no one wants the Shiite militia to go into the city, this is a good use for them. Also the Turks don’t want them to advance on the Turkmen town of Tal Afar. Not sure who is supposed to take it, but it appears that Mosul is not yet completely isolated. But, I suspect that anyone ISIL wanted to stay are still in Mosul and anyone they wanted to leave has left.

Are there 5,000 ISIL fighters in Mosul? I doubt that. I suspect there is a holding force of hundreds and probably no more than a thousand. If they left more than that behind, then it is just a gift for the Iraqi Army, for the insurgents are nicely gathered together ready to be killed. They are a bigger problem is they go back to being guerillas, which is what I assume most of them are doing.

The Iraqi army has not yet entered the city. The front line in the east is just 200 meters from Mosul (two Canadian football fields away).

They are on Schedule

Well, they are on schedule: iraqi-forces-attempt-first-push-mosul

Two weeks ago Peshmerga Brigadier General Sidwan Barzani (nephew of the president and telecom millionaire) said that there would be a two-week advance and a six-week mop up. So far, they appear to be on schedule. I do note that a number of the talking heads on U.S. TV seemed to discount this prediction.

Anyhow, they have entered the eastern suburbs of Mosul today (Monday). We shall see if this is over in six weeks.

Wounded-To-Killed Ratios

Some wounded-to-killed ratios drawn from my upcoming book War by Numbers: Understanding Conventional Combat. I have an entire chapter on the subject in my book (Chapter Fifteen: Casualties). This first chart is from Trevor Dupuy’s Attrition:

table01

A table I created to compare U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps ratios:

table02

A tabled I created looking at the U.S. units the I Corps area of Vietnam. This is after the Tet offensive, and these units are operating side-by-side and listed from north to south. The 1st Bde, 5th ID was up at the DMZ while the 23rd (Americal) Division was in the southern part of I Corps:

table03

And finally the ratios from Iraq and Afghanistan. Note these are higher ratios compared to what is reported in the previous post for the Iraqi Army and the Peshmerga.

table04

This is why the Iraq Army and Peshmerga wounded-to-kill ratio in the previous post caught my attention.

NOTES

[1] Table from Attrition: Forecasting Battles Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War, page 49. The dates for the wars were added by this author.

Body Counts

Have some estimate of losses from the operations around Mosul. See: us-general-says-800-900-fighters-killed-mosul

This operations have been going on since Monday, October 17, so I am guessing they cover a 10 day or so period.

A few factoids:

  1. Up to 900 Islamic State fighters killed (source: Gen. Joseph Votel, who heads the U.S. Central Command).
  2. There are between 3,500 – 5,000 ISIL fighters in Mosul (I assume we have not really engaged them yet).
  3. Up to another 2,000 ISIL fighters in the broader area (I assume this is who they have been fighting).
  4. As of late Tuesday Iraq Army had lost 57 killed and 255 or so wounded.
  5. For the Kurdish Peshmerga the numbers are 30 killed and 70- 100 wounded.

Let me do a little back-of-the-envelope calculations here:

  1. 900 ISIL killed versus 87 allied killed = 10.3-to-1 exchange ratio. This seems high.
  2. Wounded-to-killed ratio Iraq Army = 4.47 wounded per killed (this seems low)
  3. Wounded-to-killed ratio Peshmerga = 3.33 wounded per killed (this seems low)
  4. Wounded-to-killed ratio ISIL…unknown, but with 900 killed then are there 1,800 are 2,700 wounded…or are there no wounded?
  5. If there are wounded, then if total ISIL casualties (killed, wounded and missing) are 2,700 – 3,600 and there are 2,000 ISIL fighters in the broader area…..then…….

The body count seems high. What appeared to be more relevant in Vietnam was the number of rifles and other personal weapons taken after the battle. The assumption was that most dead warriors left a weapon on the battlefield. Often the weapon count was less than half the estimated number of killed.

It appears that the estimate of 900 ISIL killed may be high and the Iraq Army and Peshmerga reports of wounded are low. This seems to happen a lot.