Operation Inherent Resolve - Creating Terrorists

According to legislation passed by Congress in January 2013, the position of Lead Inspector General was created to oversee America's overseas contingency operations.  Under this legislation, the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, Department of State and United States Agency for International Development must supply reports to Congress on a quarterly basis for certain operations.  The most recent report supplies us with a very interesting look at the American-led Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) which has the following mission:

"In conjunction with partner forces Combined Joint Task Force - Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF-OIR) defeats ISIS in designated areas of Iraq and Syria and sets conditions for follow-on operations to increase regional stability."

In Iraq, American forces are partnered with the Iraqi Army and Air Force, the Counter Terrorism Service, the Federal Police and the Kurdish Peshmerga.  In Syria, American forces are partnered with the Syrian Democratic Forces and their partner, the Syrian Arab Coalition.  Their mission includes:

"...disrupting the Islamic State's ability to command and control fighters, remove their safe havens, interrupt their revenue streams that fund their operations, destroy their equipment and kill their fighters.  The ultimate goal is to eliminate their effectiveness as an organized force on the battlefield."

The Department of Defense has repeatedly stated that its goal under Operation Inherent Resolve is to achieve the "enduring defeat" of the Islamic State.

According to Syria Live Map, ISIS is now controlling a relatively small part of the sparsely populated border frontier between Syria and Iraq:

This is a substantial improvement over the presence of ISIS back in October 2015 as shown on this map:

One would think that Operation Inherent Resolve has been a resounding success.  According to the most recent report from the Lead Inspector General (Lead IG), ISIS now controls only one percent of the territory that it once held in Syria.  However, there are substantial caveats to this success which is reflected in the Lead Inspector General's most recent report.  Let's look at them in turn:

1.) ISIS has now moved underground and has maintained its bureaucratic structures and fund- raising   abilities (i.e. drug trafficking, extortion, cash reserves) in place.  The Lead IG notes that this has raised concerns about the ability of the Iraqi Security Forces to operate without the assistance of the United States, raising the concerns of a resurgence of the Islamic State.  This raises questions about the "enduring defeat" of ISIS and how long it will be necessary for American troops to remain in both Iraq and Syria.

2.) The Islamic State's retention of desert terrain along the border frontier between Syria and Iraq allows their fighters to launch insurgency-style attacks against U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic forces in northeast Syria.  ISIS also retains its ability to operate in Iraq between Anbar and Diyala provinces with both desert and mountain terrain making it difficult for Iraqi Security Forces to defeat them.  The report notes that it could take years to eliminate ISIS from rural Syria and Iraq.

3.) A lower than expected outflow of foreign fighters from ISIS suggests that many of them are hiding in plain sight in sympathetic communities in both Iraq and Syria.

Let's close this section with a quote from the report:

"With ISIS defeated territorially in Iraq and remaining only in small pockets in Syria, the United States and the United Nations this quarter emphasized concerns that the terrorist organization was successfully moving underground.  A report drafted by a UN Security Council monitoring committee stated in July that ISIS was in the process of “reverting from a proto-State structure to a covert network.”  The report said that despite territorial losses in 2018, ISIS had “rallied,” due in part to a brief loss of momentum by the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and was able to “prepare for the next phase of its evolution into a global covert network.”

The DoD reported to the DoD OIG this quarter that ISIS transitioned to a clandestine insurgency in Iraq and was no longer conducting conventional operations.  In Syria, the DoD said, ISIS continued to function as a “hybrid conventional fighting force”—operating both as soldiers and insurgents—in areas of Syria that remain under its control.  The DoD also said ISIS was working to “bolster its sleeper cells” and predicted that ISIS remnants would continue to operate as “geographically dispersed criminal gangs that clandestinely seek to return to insurgent operations.”" (my bold)

It is estimated that ISIS membership still ranges between 20,000 and 30,000 members, roughly equally split between Syria and Iraq.  The ability of these members to take effective actions is classified by the Department of Defense so we have no real idea of their capabilities to rebuild or reinvent themselves as an insurgent force.

In September, Congress appropriated $1.35 billion, down 23 percent from fiscal 2018 levels, to the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund which supports the Department of Defense's fight against ISIS in both Syria and Iraq.  This fund provides assistance to vetted Syrian opposition fighters, the Iraqi Security Forces and the Kurdish Peshmerga.  The Iraqi Security Forces are heavily reliant on American-sourced intelligence operations to launch their attacks against ISIS and the Department of Defense notes that it will take "...a generation of Iraqi officers with continuous exposure to Coalition (i.e. American) advisors to change cultures and institutions that inhibit the establishment of a self-reliant Iraqi fighting force."  In the case of Syria, the sectarian divisions in the nation could make it vulnerable to an ISIS-led insurgency which could bolster ISIS' ability to rebuild itself.   

It is becoming increasingly clear that the Islamic State has evolved from a more-or-less conventional fighting force to an insurgency/terrorist force that likely still retains its abilities to act as both locally and internationally, one of the unintended consequences of meddling in the Middle East.  If Washington is truly serious about eliminating any future threat from ISIS, it appears that the American military will be on the front lines of the conflict for decades to come.  Additionally, given the Islamic State's ability to morph into an insurgency force, one would almost think that Washington has forgotten the hard-learned lessons that were taught by the creation of al Qaeda out of the remains of Afghanistan's anti-Russian mujahideen, wouldn't one?

So much for the ideas of "increasing regional stability" and the "enduring defeat" of ISIS.   

James Mattis, the United Nations and America's Involvement in Syria

In a recent "hallway press gaggle", Secretary of Defense James Mattis and an unnamed member of the media had the following exchange:

"Q:  You know, Assad says Iran and Russia were invited into his country, you were never invited in; you're there illegally.  What legal standing do you have to -- to you know, be in Syria?

SEC. MATTIS:  You know, the U.N. said that ISIS -- basically we can go after ISIS.  And we're there to take them out.  But that doesn't mean we just walk away and let ISIS 2.0 pop back around? as if we're surprised either.  So we got to get the U.N.-brokered effort in Geneva to take this thing forward."

So, according to the Secretary of Defense, the United Nations authorized the United States to enter Syria with the goal of eliminating the Islamic State.  While, in the mind of Secretary Mattis, this may appear to be the case, in fact, it is not.  Let's look at what the United Nations has to say.  According to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314, an act of aggression is defined as:

"Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:

  

(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof,

(b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State;

(c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State;

(d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State;

  

(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;

(f) The action of a State in allowing its temtory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State;

(g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein." (all bolds mine)

United Nations Resolution 2249 in 2015 did call on UN member states to do the following:

"Calls upon Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures, in compliance with international law, in particular with the United Nations Charter, as well as international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, on the territory under the control of ISIL also known as Da’esh, in Syria and Iraq, to redouble and coordinate their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL also known as Da’esh as well as ANF, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with  Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the United Nations Security Council, and as may further be agreed by the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) and endorsed by the UN Security Council, pursuant to the Statement of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) of 14 November, and to eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria." (my bold)

What was Syria's response to James Mattis' comments?  Here is a quote from Syria's Foreign Ministry as reported by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA):

"Syria states once again that the presence of the US forces or any foreign military presence in Syria without the consent of the Syrian government constitutes an act of aggression and an attack on the sovereignty of the Syrian Arab Republic as well as a gross violation of the Charter and principles of the United Nations."

Here is a quote from Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov as reported in SANA:

"We state the fact of our and Iranian legitimate presence at the invitation of the legitimate government. We also state the fact of the illegitimate presence of the coalition that has been forged by the United States and which carries out military operations, including independent ones, primarily providing support for the opposition armed groups on Syrian soil and in its airspace...On the contrary, this presence only leads to prolonging the crisis and further complicating it, and this is where the real goal of this U.S. presence in Syria lies."

In fact, SANA reports the following with regard to the American involvement in Syria:

“There is indisputable evidence that the United States pretends it is waging irreconcilable struggle against international terrorism in front of the international community, while in reality it provides cover for the combat-ready Islamic State groups to let them regain strength, regroup themselves and advance US interests in the Middle East."

At the very least, unlike James Mattis' public pronouncements, it certainly appears that the Syrians and their Russian allies are most certainly not in favour of the continued American involvement in Syria's civil war.  As well, according to the United Nations, Washington's involvement/aggression in the anti-Assad movement has not been in compliance with international law or the United Nations' charter, except perhaps in James Mattis' mind. 

The Creation of ISIS

Updated November 2017

While the Trump administration in Washington brandishes its anti-terrorism mantra, a look back in time explains why the situation in Iraq and Syria devolved to the point where the Islamic State, the current global "terrorism boogeyman" arose to such prominence.  This background information came to light when Judicial Watch published a series of documents in May 2015 about the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi.  While most of the mainstream (i.e. the "real media") focussed on the State Department and its foreknowledge of the Benghazi attack, in fact, another document shows how the United States and its allies in the region were complicit in the creation of ISIS and how the group could be used in the West's anti-Assad program.   

Here is the heavily redacted formerly "Secret/No Forn" document from the Defense Intelligence Agency  in its entirety:

The Department of Defense Information Report on Iraq begins by noting that there are two sides to the situation in Syria:

1.) Supporters of the Assad Regime - Russia, China and Iran

2.) Supporters of the Opposition to Assad - the West, Gulf Countries and Turkey

Since the Sunni - Shia split is critical to understanding the Middle East, let's start by looking at a map of the region showing which nations have Sunni and Shia majorities and which nations are currently experiencing internal and external sectarian violence:

It is also key to note that al-Qaeda and ISIS are both Sunni; ISIS believes that in order to purify Islam, Shia Muslims must die.  As well, Syria's ruling class is Alawi, an offshoot of Shia as shown on this complex diagram:

It is also important to look back at a bit of history; Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) became the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in April 2013 when it began to operate in both Iraq and Syria.  In February 2014, al-Qaeda officially renounced any connection with ISIS after attempts at reconciliation between the leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, failed. 

Let's go back to the Department of Defense document.  The document notes that the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI (Al-Qaeda in Iraq) are the major forces that were driving the insurgency in Syria and that, from the beginning, AQI supported the Syrian opposition because it considered Assad's government to be a sectarian regime which was targeting Sunnis.

The document goes on to explain the situation in Syria and Iraq, and makes the following conclusions:

1.) The Assad regime will survive and control Syria.

2.) A proxy war will develop with the regime getting support from Russia, China and Iran to aid the Assad regime in retaining control the coastal territories of Syria (i.e. western Syria).  Opposition forces, supported by the West, Turkey and the Gulf States, want to retain control of the eastern areas that are immediately adjacent to the western Iraqi provinces of Mosul and Anbar.

3.) As the situation evolves, there is the possibility of establishing a Salafist principality (Salafists are a branch of Islam that is most puritan and doctrinally rigid, seeking to imitate the life of Mohammed in every aspect of their lives.  It is most often associated with the jihadist movement).  Here's the key paragraph from the document:

Basically, in 2012, the Western powers, the Gulf States and Turkey were quite comfortable using AQI/ISIS to achieve their goal of removing Bashar al-Assad from power.  This map shows the Pentagon's intentions:

With the benefit of knowing what has happened since 2012, it is quite obvious that, in their haste to overthrow Bashar al-Assad, the United States and the Obama Administration, in particular, made a grievous error by assuming that they could use Al-Qaeda in Iraq to achieve their goals of regime change in Syria.  The evolution of AQI into the now-much dreaded ISIS is yet another fine example of an unintended consequence of a poor understanding of the geopolitics and religion of the Middle East by those who "lead" us.