The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant Megathread

[Tonitrus]

Presuming that the Arab Spring would have happened without the Iraq invasion (and that's very hard to say, as the invasion of Iraq was undoubtedly a hugely monumental event for ME society), it would have been interesting, and probably tragic, to see Saddam try and deal with it. 

[Monoriu]

Relax Tim.  Everyone knows every Muslim country we insisted on fucking with is going to be a theocracy sooner or later.  In the case of Iraq, it's looking like sooner.

Are you saying that if we hadn't fucked with them they wouldn't be on the way to becoming a theocracy?

That statement has the advantage of being the truth.

I think it merely accelerated existing trends. It would have happened eventually.

Yeah, I think a lot of people won't rest until they give theocracy a chance.  Just like communism.  The only way to disprove it is to implement it.

[Tonitrus]

The big problem there though, is at least the communist states were fairly reasonable.  The Soviet Union at least wanted to stay alive, and while it might meddle, wasn't interested in destroying the world.

The crazy, ISIS, death-cult extreme of Islam seem to be the types that just want to see the world burn.  And if they ever were to get their hands on functional nukes, are far more likely to make that happen.

[jimmy olsen]

What a clusterfuck

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/05/17/266937/islamic-state-routs-last-elite.html

IRBIL, Iraq — Iraqi security forces attempting to retake control of the western city of Ramadi were routed in heavy fighting Sunday, the worst defeat for Iraq's central government since Islamic State militants stormed across the country last June.

In a replay of last year's military debacle, elite units abandoned their U.S.-provided equipment to Islamic State fighters and fled the area, leaving several hundred soldiers surrounded in the last government-held enclave in the city.

Multiple security sources, none of whom agreed to be identified, speaking from both within the besieged Anbar Operations Center as well as with the units fleeing the city, described the fight for control of the capital of Iraq's largest province as essentially over after reinforcements sent on Saturday to retake the city were crushed by Islamic State fighters.

"Only God can save us," said one officer speaking by phone from inside the Anbar operations center, where officers had been coordinating the operation. The officer said that several hundred policemen and soldiers were surrounded inside the command center, which was repeatedly struck by suicide bombers and heavy artillery fire as militants cut off their last routes of escape.

Social media accounts credibly associated with the Islamic State announced hours later that the operations center had been overrun, a claim that could not be immediately confirmed. Efforts to reach sources inside the facility were unsuccessful.

The units that had been attempting to retake Ramadi, which was attacked late Thursday evening and had fallen mostly into militant hands by Saturday, were in the process of fleeing the city and had abandoned dozens of U.S.-supplied armored vehicles, as well as artillery, heavy machine guns and other military gear as they fled mostly on foot from the fighting.

The elite Golden Brigade, Iraq's premier special forces unit, which had withdrawn to the "Stadium" neighborhood south of the city on Friday to await reinforcements and prepare a counterattack had also abandoned its positions and was retreating from the area under heavy attack by Islamic State forces, according to two officers within the unit reached by phone Sunday.

"Ramadi has fallen to Daash," one officer said. "There were many suicide bombers and many soldiers and officers are dead."

Ramadi Mayor Dalaf al Kubaisi confirmed the collapse of the city's defenses in a statement in which he said at least 90 percent of the city was in the hands of the Islamic State. He said the small portions still in government control were likely to fall quickly unless help arrived in the form of government ground forces and U.S. air strikes.

U.S. officials in Washington declined to confirm the turn of events, insisting, as they have for several days, even as it became clearer that the Islamic State was advancing aggressively in Ramadi, that nothing unexpected was taking place.

"We're continuing to monitor reports of fighting in Ramadi and the situation remains fluid and contested. It is too early to make definitive statements about the situation on the ground," Pentagon spokesman Army Col. Steven Warren said in an email. "The loss of Ramadi would not mean the tide of the campaign has turned . . . If lost, that just means the coalition will have to support Iraqi forces to take it back later."

Warren said he also could not confirm that Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the head of the U.S. Central Command, which has responsibility for the Middle East, was in Iraq, despite the appearance on Twitter of a photo of Austin meeting with President Marsoud Barzani of Iraq' autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government.

On Friday, the White House announced that it was rushing shoulder-fired rockets to Iraq that were especially useful for destroying car bombs before they could reach their targets, and there was no doubt in Iraq of the seriousness of the developments.

One police officer confirmed that at least 30 U.S. supplied armored Humvees, which had been sent as reinforcements on Saturday, had been abandoned in the neighborhood of Malaab alone. Those vehicles were part of three regiments of Iraqi soldiers sent to the city on Saturday to confront the surprise offensive on one of the last government held population centers in Anbar, Iraq's largest province.

The officer said that at least 500 soldiers and police were fleeing from that area, mostly on foot, with the main highway linking Ramadi to the capital of Baghdad, about 60 miles away, completely controlled by the Islamic State.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al Abadi, responding to the unfolding crisis, went on state television Sunday evening to announce that he'd authorized the deployment of Iranian-backed Shiite militias to the area, though it remained unclear if any part of Ramadi will remain under government control by the time those troops can be deployed.

State television said that Anbar's government council had voted Sunday to ask for the deployment, a move both the local Sunni tribes and the central government had resisted because of sectarian tensions between the mostly Shiite central government and the predominately Sunni residents of the area.

The Iraqi federal police claimed it would quickly mount a new operation. In a statement, Brig. Gen. Raid Shakir Joudat said he would head to Ramadi "commanding a huge force . . . to cleanse Anbar province from terrorist gangs."

But with government forces in a full rout, that pledge seemed likely to prove empty, and all sides appeared to agree that the deployment of the militias was a necessary last resort. "We no longer have a choice," said one civilian fleeing Ramadi.

How effective Shiite militiamen deployed far from their home areas in an overtly hostile environment would be remained an open question. The militia played the leading role in the government's effort to recapture Tikrit two months ago. But the militias took heavy casualties in the predominantly Sunni area and were unable to take the city despite overwhelming numbers. Tikrit fell only after the militias withdrew, and the United States launched air strikes against the Islamic State positions to back regular Iraqi army ground forces.

Those forces, however, were the very ones that fled Ramadi on Sunday.

The capture of Ramadi, a city whose population is given as between 500,000 and 900,000, is by far the largest Islamic State victory since the militants' June 10 capture of Mosul, which with 2 million people is Iraq's second biggest city. It comes after nine months of U.S. bombing in Iraq and offers a counter to American military officials' arguments as recently as last week that those strikes have put the militants on the defensive.

Ramadi was the scene of some of the bloodiest fighting during the U.S. occupation of Iraq – more than 1,300 American soldiers and Marines dies in Anbar. But unlike Fallujah, which was the subject of two bloody American offensives, Ramadi never fell completely into the hands of the extremists who were the predecessors of the Islamic State.

The city has been besieged since January 2014, but had remained contested until Thursday night's blitz of car bombs marked the beginning of the Islamic State's push.

The debacle unfolded despite at least seven air strikes by U.S. and coalition warplanes overnight Saturday to Sunday, with a statement from the U.S. military listing targets in and around Ramadi that had been destroyed by air strikes – including six units of Islamic State fighters and several command and control facilities used by the group – but apparently the strikes were unable to change the outcome of the battle.

Adding to the stress was word that the town of Baghdadi to the north was itself surrounded and likely to fall in the coming days or hours without significant outside help. Although not a large town, Baghdadi had remained in government control because it is a key supply line to the government garrison at the Haditha Dam, one of Iraq's largest infrastructure facilities that controls both agricultural water flow and produces hydro-electric power. The loss of Baghdadi would mean the garrison was surrounded and cut off.

"We call the Iraqi government to send helps to us immediately we are surrounded from all axis by Daash," said Hussein al Dulami from inside the town. "Send food for our families send ammunition and guns to us from the U.S."

James Rosen in Washington contributed to this report.

Prothero is a McClatchy special correspondent. Email: [email protected]; Twitter: @mitchprothero
by Taboolak

[Caliga]

Presuming that the Arab Spring would have happened without the Iraq invasion (and that's very hard to say, as the invasion of Iraq was undoubtedly a hugely monumental event for ME society), it would have been interesting, and probably tragic, to see Saddam try and deal with it.

I don't know whether or not it would have happened, but if it had and Saddam was still in power and we backed him, I'm pretty sure he would have survived.

[frunk]

The big problem there though, is at least the communist states were fairly reasonable.  The Soviet Union at least wanted to stay alive, and while it might meddle, wasn't interested in destroying the world.

The crazy, ISIS, death-cult extreme of Islam seem to be the types that just want to see the world burn.  And if they ever were to get their hands on functional nukes, are far more likely to make that happen.

Many early period Communists/Anarchists were similarly crazy, but I do take comfort in the corrupting influence of power and greed in these types of situations.  Unbalanced power structures like a "resurrected Caliphate" are even more vulnerable to such change.

[grumbler]

Presuming that the Arab Spring would have happened without the Iraq invasion (and that's very hard to say, as the invasion of Iraq was undoubtedly a hugely monumental event for ME society), it would have been interesting, and probably tragic, to see Saddam try and deal with it.

I don't know whether or not it would have happened, but if it had and Saddam was still in power and we backed him, I'm pretty sure he would have survived.

I have grave doubts that Saddam could have survived an Arab Spring.  His was a pretty unpopular regime even among Sunnis, and, like Qaddafi, was mostly just the head of the largest tribe around, not the head of a modern state.  Even his own tribe would be subject to defections on religious grounds.

[grumbler]

Many early period Communists/Anarchists were similarly crazy, but I do take comfort in the corrupting influence of power and greed in these types of situations.  Unbalanced power structures like a "resurrected Caliphate" are even more vulnerable to such change.

Absolutely agree.  That's why you let these groups try to rule and fail, rather than vainly trying to prevent their rise.  People tire of corruption and inefficiency soon enough, even when it is wrapped in a mantle of piety and charity.

[Berkut]

The idea that Saddam could have stayed in power indefinitely absent US/Western intervention is pretty hard to accept if you understand the history of Iraq since his rise to power, and how he held power.

It goes back to why Iraq attacked Kuwait to begin with...

[Razgovory]

I don't think anyone is arguing he would have stayed in power indefinitely.  He would have to be immortal for that to happen.

[Valmy]

Yeah eventually he would have handed power off to his sons and hilarity would have ensued.

[Caliga]

I thought Qusay was the heir apparent, since Saddam recognized that Uday was dangerously insane?

[Ed Anger]

I still get a boner thinking back when Uday and Qusay took a Missile.

[jimmy olsen]

Looks like we're going to have send ground troops in if we want to stop them. Otherwise we're just wasting ordinance and money.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/islamic-state-is-winning-in-iraq-1431990072

Islamic State Is Winning in Iraq

U.S.-led airstrikes are failing to deter the Islamist militants. Here's what must be done to defeat them.

By Norman Ricklefs And Derek Harvey

May 18, 2015 7:01 p.m. ET   
 
In the closing years of the Vietnam War it was often noted sardonically that the "victories" against the Viet Cong were moving steadily closer to Saigon. The same could be said of Baghdad and the victories claimed against Islamic State, or ISIS, in Iraq in the past year. The ISIS takeover of Ramadi in the Anbar province over the weekend exposed the hollowness of the reported progress against ISIS. The U.S.-led bombing campaign in support of Iraqi forces isn't working.

Clearly, the Iraqi government needs greater military assistance if it is to defeat what is proving to be a formidable enemy. ISIS in Iraq, the successor of al Qaeda in Iraq, is made up of Iraqi Sunnis and foreign Islamist fighters, similar to those the U.S. Army and Marines fought so hard for so many years. ISIS has routinely defeated other rebel groups in neighboring Syria and claimed large swaths of that country's territory. The militants almost took the Iraqi Kurdish capital city of Erbil in February, despite the fierce resistance of the vaunted fighters of the Kurdish Peshmerga.

Shiite militias—some armed by Iran and manned by Iranian fighters—haven't performed well against ISIS on the battlefield. After a month of fighting in Tikrit, during which the Iraqi media estimate some 5,000 Shiite militiamen were killed, ISIS abandoned the city once the U.S. and its allies began airstrikes in late March. That is what happens in guerrilla warfare. Having extracted its price in blood, ISIS withdrew rather than endure heavy casualties.

When Iraqi armed forces confronted ISIS in Anbar province in the second week of April, the Islamists responded with the massive counterattack that ultimately took Ramadi, the provincial capital, and they also attacked the Beiji oil refinery. ISIS now effectively controls the refinery, though it is too damaged to operate for now.

We are in communication with members of the Iraqi military, who report that Iraq's special forces performed well against ISIS fighters in Ramadi. The special forces are the only ones with the technical ability to call in accurate airstrikes. But the regular Iraqi army continues to struggle. In a fight in northern Anbar last month, Iraqi soldiers were butchered after they ran out of ammunition, while a convoy of armored Humvees sent to rescue them was ambushed with a senior commander of the Iraqi army among the many killed.

The defense of Ramadi, according to our sources, was largely left to local Sunni tribesman who were small in number and unreliable allies. The Iraqi government may now be responding to the Ramadi challenge—on Monday 3,000 mostly Shiite paramilitary forces were reported massing outside the city, intent on trying to retake it.

Tens of thousands of refugees from Anbar are now testing the capabilities of Iraq's authorities. It is no coincidence that terrorist bombings in Baghdad, which had enjoyed a prolonged period of relative quiet, have increased as refugees began flooding into the city. Now there are scores of bombings weekly. ISIS has always fomented strife between communities, and no doubt hopes that Shiite militias will retaliate against the Sunnis fleeing Anbar.

U.S.-led airstrikes have allowed the government of Iraqi Prime Minister  Haider al-Abadi, a Shiite, to consolidate its power even as it cedes ground to Iranian-backed Shiite militias of questionable motivations. The airstrikes may not have reversed ISIS gains, but the bombing campaign has complicated ISIS recruitment, financing, command and control, logistics and operational capabilities.

But that is not enough. The U.S. needs to play a more robust role against ISIS before conditions in Iraq deteriorate further. The Pentagon should employ more ground operations by Special Operations forces, like the raid in eastern Syria on Friday that took out ISIS commander Abu Sayyaf. More Apache attack helicopters and transport planes are also needed, as is a brigade dedicated to improving operational command and intelligence support.

Moreover, the Pentagon needs to end the "boots on the ground" shell game of relying on temporary deployments to work around the president's 3,000 personnel cap, which has proved dysfunctional. Most of the U.S. troops currently in Iraq are training and advising Iraqi forces. That is useful, but more need to be embedded with Iraqi units to improve the accuracy of U.S.-led airstrikes.

American logistics assets, whether uniformed or contractor, should be deployed to supply the Iraqi army—the least we can do is ensure that Iraqi soldiers don't have to worry about running out of ammunition. In addition, the U.S. must return to its role as an honest broker between Iraq's majority Shiites and minority Sunnis, as it did in 2006-07 with great success.

Like it or not, the U.S. is the only country with the strength and know-how to rid Iraq of ISIS. Iran's proxy forces are on the defensive in Syria and have made no overall progress in Iraq. Some argue that Iran isn't serious in trying to defeat ISIS. It's more likely that Iran isn't capable of doing so. What is needed is decisive U.S. leadership. Without it, the long-term entrenchment of Islamic State in Iraq may become a disturbing reality.

Mr. Ricklefs, a former adviser to the Iraqi Minister of Interior, is president of the Iraq Advisory Group, a consultancy firm.  Mr. Harvey, a retired U.S. Army colonel, is director of the Global Initiative on Civil Society and Conflict at the University of South Florida.

[jimmy olsen]

Acli is still in the Marines isn't he? If I was him I'd get ready for a trip back.


http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article21330720.html#storylink=cpy

By Jonathan S. Landay and Hannah Allam

McClatchy Washington Bureau

The Obama administration Monday called the fall of the capital of Iraq's Anbar province to the Islamic State a temporary setback that Iraqi forces would reverse with U.S. support. Experts dismissed that assessment as ludicrous.

"Delusional, really, is the better word," Ali Khedery, a former U.S. official who served as an adviser to five U.S. ambassadors to Iraq and three heads of U.S. Central Command, said of the administration's statement. "It's unbelievable, frankly. I now know what it's like to have lived through Vietnam, I guess."

Experts called the loss a stunning blow to the Iraqi government and U.S. strategy.

It wasn't clear why the administration clung to an upbeat message three days after the Islamic State overran most of Ramadi and a day after Iraq's best special forces unit fled the city with other troops, local police and tribal fighters. The message was delivered in nearly identical verbiage by White House, State Department and Pentagon spokesmen and was reinforced by a statement from Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"ISIL's gains in Ramadi are a serious setback for its long-suffering inhabitants. It is also a setback for the ISF (Iraqi Security Forces)," said Dempsey. "Setbacks are regrettable but not uncommon in warfare. Much effort will now be required to reclaim the city. We will continue to support Iraq's security forces with U.S. airstrikes, training and equipment."

It wasn't until Monday that the administration and U.S. military officials acknowledged the fall of Ramadi after several days of insisting that the situation in the city of 900,000 was fluid and contested and that the Islamic State was on the defensive in Iraq and neighboring Syria.

"This is something we've known was possible for some time," said Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman. "Ramadi has been surrounded for probably a year now."

State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke faced a barrage of questions from reporters who tried to puncture his message, which boiled down to: Ramadi was contested for 18 months, the fight against the Islamic State will be long and difficult, but that the overall assessment of the efforts of a U.S.-led international coalition helping Iraq fight the group is "positive."

When Rathke asserted that Iraqi security forces, with U.S.-led coalition support, "have the capacity and the will to retake Ramadi," a reporter asked why U.S. officials hold that view. Rathke offered no specifics.

"There's no denying that this is a setback but there's also no denying that the United States will help the Iraqis take back Ramadi," he said.

Despite what he also acknowledged was a setback, White House spokesman Eric Schultz said that the administration isn't considering a change in the U.S. strategy of staging airstrikes against the Islamic State and training, arming and advising Iraqi security forces, but not deploying U.S. combat troops.

"ISIL will ultimately be defeated in Ramadi and elsewhere in Iraq because we believe the Iraqi forces have the capacity to ultimately take Ramadi with coalition support," said Schultz, using the government's preferred acronym for the Islamic State.

Experts who closely follow Iraq framed the situation in far bleaker terms.

Ramadi's fall, they said, brings every major population center in Anbar, which is Iraq's largest province and accounts for one-third of its territory, under Islamic State control and moved its fighters much closer to Baghdad's western suburbs, where the extremists command sympathy among minority Sunni Muslims.

"The fact that al-Anbar is all but entirely controlled by the Islamic State puts neighboring Baghdad and Karbala province increasingly within its reach of attack," said an analysis by Zaineb al-Assam of IHS Country Risk, a London-based risk assessment company.

Ramadi's fall also underscored persisting weaknesses of the Iraqi army, which has long suffered from corruption, poor leadership and nepotism.

As a result, analysts said, Baghdad and Washington will have to focus on rebuilding sufficient Iraqi forces to clear Anbar, indefinitely postponing a planned offensive to retake Iraq's second largest city, Mosul, which the Islamic State seized when it launched its land grab from sanctuaries in Syria last June, experts said.

"Mosul is completely off the radar screen now," said Kirk H. Sowell, the editor of Inside Iraqi Politics, a newsletter that he publishes from Amman, Jordan. "The liberation of Mosul is out of the question."

Moreover, even with U.S. airstrikes and reinforcements from Iran-backed Shiite militias that are being dispatched to Anbar, the heartland of the country's minority Sunnis, it is unlikely that Iraqi security forces will be able to recapture Ramadi, let alone the rest of the province's key towns and cities, anytime soon, experts said.

Michael Pregent, a Middle East analyst and former U.S. Army intelligence officer who served in Iraq, said that the Shiite militias' abilities are overblown. Moreover, he said, their main priority now is protecting Baghdad and Shiite holy cities, not retaking Ramadi.

"Their focus isn't Ramadi. It's protecting Najaf, Karbala and Samarra," he said.

Deploying the Shiite militias, which are accused of committing atrocities against Sunnis – though not on the same scale as the Islamic State's atrocities against Shiites – also risks further inflaming sectarian tensions and driving more Sunnis to join the extremists, experts said.

Khedery, the former U.S. official, said it was time for a strategy makeover.

Obama should replace top Iraq policymakers with "a new set of egos that aren't tied to policies that are failing."

The current policymakers are too invested in the existing approaches to concede that they haven't worked, he said, contending that the Islamic State threat has metastasized to a point where "you're asking a surgeon to eradicate a brain cancer that he's watched spread for six years."

Meanwhile, an intelligence official who spoke on the condition of anonymity under the ground rules of his agency offered a caution: With the anniversary of the Islamic State's declaration of a caliphate coming next month, "it would not be surprising if the group sought to mount a major attack or propaganda blitz to demonstrate its capabilities, and attract additional recruits."