Safin Hamed (AFP/File) "Iraqi kurds and Iraqi Christians hold-up signd thanking the USA during a demonstration in front of the US General Consulate in Arbil, the capital of the autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, on August 11, 2014"
ishtartv.com - sldinfo.com
By
Ed Timperlake and Robbin Laird, 2017-02-02
President
Trump has made it clear that a key priority in national defense is the defeat
of ISIS.
We
have argued in an earlier piece that victory over ISIS can be conceived as
follows:
“Cutting
the Gordian knot of endless engagement is crucial; modernizing insertion forces
that can strike at any concentrations of Daesh forces is crucial as well.
It
is about dramatically stopping their influence and impact from a force which
claims to be a state and reducing them to an impoverished band seeking refuge,
and having nowhere to go on the globe where they are welcome.”
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/01/is-trump-information-warrior-key-to-defeating-daesh-isil/
Before
President Trump’s national security team launches a full scale global assault
against Daesh, we thought it important to engage with three very senior Iraqis,
now American citizens, who could benchmark the situation left behind by the
Obama Administration and it is challenging to say the least.
The
situation is quite different when Donald Trump took office versus Obama.
Notably,
the emergence of ISIS, the return of Russia to the Middle East, the
reinforcement of the regime of Assad by a mixture of internal and external
means, the expanded presence of Iran outside of its borders (with a nuclear
agreement providing some top cover), Turkey’s President having survived a coup
and de facto supporting ISIS, and the continued fragmentation of Iraq all create
a very difficult situation within which to shape an effective way ahead. And
the Israelis are facing a growing threat from an Iranian backed Hezbollah
force.
A
key change from the past President to the new one is that the new one is facing
an Iranian-dominated Baghdad government as part of the equation as well and are
fighting ISIS for internal religious as well as geopolitical reasons.
The
head of the Iraqi Army is an Iranian.
Shaping
a way ahead will clearly require a phased approach as well as shaping clarity
with regard to the end game.
Endless
engagement is not on for the U.S. and allied positions.
And
coming to terms with the outpouring of refugees from the region has led to
domestic stress in both the United States and in Europe.
There
is little doubt that the German Chancellor’s decision on opening the European
floodgates to refugees was a key input to the Brexit decision by the British
voters.
Donald
Trump has indicated that he is not satisfied with the current NATO
structure. He has indicated that he wants to ramp up and intensify the
pressure on ISIS, is distrustful of Iran (the NSC Director Mike Flynn just
put them on notice with their recent missile launch) and may well annul the
agreement with Iran. And President Trump is unwavering in expressing strong
support for Israel.
In
this context, what can be done in Iraq?
In
fundamental ways it could be the inflection point to future regional stability.
One
of the great truths in developing insightful national security objectives is
that there is one thing worse than no intelligence and that is bad
intelligence.
Thankfully
a Congressman who President Trump just appointed to be the Director of the CIA
Mike Pompeo called out bad Iraq Intel as a significant failure in shaping
effective policy.
“From
the middle of 2014 to the middle of 2115, United States Central Command’s most
senior intelligence leaders manipulated the command’s intelligence products to
downplay the threat from ISIS in Iraq.”
The
quote comes from a New York Times article by Helene Cooper published on
Aug 11 2016 article with the title “Military Officials Distorted ISIS
Intelligence, Congressional Panel Says.”
To
get some sense of what can be done in the presence of a deteriorating situation
in Iraq without repeating the large U.S. and UK buildup which failed to turn
Iraq into a stable power, we talked with three knowledgeable Iraqis who are now
American citizens. Their lifetime courage is assumed, their judgment and
insights well-earned and they most certainly put a strong “ground truth” marker
down.
The
first was Joseph Kassab who has worked for many years on the issue of how best
to protect Christians in the Arab World facing extinction at the hands of ISIS.
The
second was General (Retired) Munthir Nalu. He served in the Iraqi Army until
1991 and since then has significant experience working with US forces operating
in the region. He progressed through the ranks to become a four star general
until his retirement.
The
third was General David Barno (Retired) who was also worked extensively with US
forces on counter-terrorism issues in the region.
We
started first by a fact-finding discussion prior to turning to thinking through
possible ways ahead.
The
Iraq situation is difficult in many ways, but most notably, with regard to any
outside power, which wishes to help, the key one is that the Iraqi government
is more than a flawed instrument.
It
is riddled with corruption, is increasingly under Iranian influence, and the
Army is increasingly a Dawa Party instrument where ranks are purchased.
It
is not an Iraqi national army in any real sense and certainly not a cohesive
instrument to provide security for the Iraqi people writ large.
“We
need the American stick to deal with the corruption problem. There was a
strategic planning agreement between the US and Iraq which could be reactivated
to deal with corruption. Without the support from the United States, there is
no way to fix the Iraqi government as currently supported by the Iranians.
American support needs to get more involved in the politics in Iraq to put it
back in track.”
“Iraq
can not be rebuilt with the current Iraqi government in charge. Iranian
influence is simply too dominant.”
The
Generals highlighted that increasingly the Iraqi Army has become a Dawa-party
dominated force.
All
three were also adamant that the Baghdad Government with the Iranian influence
specifically encourages lying to American leaders.
This
was stressed as a very significant fact in any ISIS fight in Iraq.
To
be clear the Islamic Dawa Party is identified as follows by Wikipedia.
The
Islamic Dawa Party, also known as the Islamic Call Party is a political party
in Iraq.
Dawa
and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council are two of the main parties in the
religious-Shiite United Iraqi Alliance, which won a plurality of seats in both
the provisional January 2005 Iraqi election and the longer-term December 2005
election.
The
party is led by Nouri al-Maliki, who was Prime Minister of Iraq between 20 May
2006 and 8 September 2014.
The
party backed the Iranian Revolution and also Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during
the Iran–Iraq War and the group still receives financial support from Tehran
despite ideological differences with the Islamic Republic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Dawa_Party
In
such a situation, it is clear that the former U.S. policy of backing Baghdad
and training a national army is not one, which one would wish to try again.
With
an Iranian backed Iraqi force fighting ISIS, there is clearly a major problem
facing the U.S. and the allies in trying to both defeat ISIS and to build out a
non-Iranian dominated Iraq.
“The
Iranian backed forces are perceived by many Iraqis as having saved Baghdad from
ISIS. The new Administration needs to show more support to the Iraqi people to
counter the Iranian attempt at an Iraqi takeover.”
But
realistically, what will the United States do given there is no appetite to
return to Iraq and become yet again an occupation Army with the hope that Iraq will
be transformed into a more democratic state?
If
it is difficult to work with a cohesive partner dedicated to the territorial
integrity of an Iraq, which can eradicate ISIS, what other options are
possible?
We
focused on the fight for MOSUL, where the forces fighting against ISIS are
organized under different leaders with different approaches and interests.
We
discussed the possibility of focusing on U.S. and Allied efforts to organize
the fight to retake MOSUL and to provide for provincial independence of the
city and the surrounding region as well as Kurdistan as perhaps focal points to
providing for areas from which to organize force to fight ISIS.
The
priority needs to be placed on the fight against ISIS; the 101st Airborne
earlier showed the way with regard to MOSUL, perhaps it is time to organize the
indigenous forces for this particular battle.
“There
are about four major forces fighting to take over MOSUL from ISIS. A key
element of military operations is unity of command; this is simply not the case
in the current MOSUL fight. There is a need a common commander in order to be
successful.”
By
shaping as common a force as possible, the strategic long-term goal of shaping
a secular army to support the Iraqis could be supported as well.
If
ISIS is decisively defeated in MOSUL, what might be its impact on the broader
fight?
With
success in liberating MOSUL, the broader Nineveh Plain will become very
vulnerable to a fight between the Kurds and the arabs to control.
“Who
will take control over the administration of the MOSUL, Nineveh Plain and the
Kurdish areas?”
Perhaps
shaping a more independent sector within the older Iraq is a key way ahead as a
key building block to the defeat of Isis.
Let
us be clear this is not a prelude to a return to a very large U.S. force in
Iraq.
It
is about security a safe city; the problem of the Baghdad government remains a
difficult one. But liberating Mosul and working for its security and provincial
independence a step could put forward in place.
The
Generals also suggested that they were prepared to work with the U.S. to set up
a refugee support center in Iraq from which a broader effort could be scoped
out and shaped as well.
This
type of a indigenous refugee task force building safe area’s in Iraq can also
encapsulate President Trump’s recognition that the deadly threats to Christians
have been woefully overlooked until he became President.
Such
a task force was put forth by all three Iraq experts, and they well earned the
right to be part of such a process.
This
type of a indigenous refugee task force building safe area’s in Iraq can also
encapsulate President Trump’s recognition that the deadly threats to Christians
have been woefully overlooked until he became President. Such a task force was put
forth by all three Iraq experts, and they well earned the right to be part of
such a process.
The
more general point is that one needs to shape building blocks towards an
effective outcome; progress will come in steps rather than jumping to a
virtually impossible end state – namely an integrated Iraq governed by a
responsible, non-corrupt Baghdad government.
We
asked as well about perceptions of Russia and its role.
Their
very strong point was that the Russian role was largely a positive one with
regard to the fight against ISIS.
“We
are hoping that there will be a good relationship between Donald Trump and
Vladimir Putin for it will help to defeat ISIS. Russians have clearly attacked
ISIS in the area. They are clearly against ISIS because of the role of the
Chechens within Russia itself.”
But
clearly Turkey is in play as well.
Donald
Trump’s concern about NATO could come into play here as a tough love policy
toward Turkey and its use of NATO to shield it from the under the table role in
supporting ISIS.
“Turkey
wants to shape a no fly zone on its border in part because this allows free
movement of ISIS into and out of Turkey.
The
Turkish government provides logistical support to ISIS. In effect, they provide
a corridor for the movement of ISIS forces.”
This
suggests that the use of sea bases and the use of U.S. airpower not based in
Turkey.
Recently, Lt
Gen Dave Deptula USAF (ret) underscored g the value of long rang USAF
strike to deal with the ISIS movement in and out of Turkey which provides
clearly a better option than a politically limited airpower force
operating from Turkish airbases.
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/01/long-range-strike-more-potent-more-survivable-cheaper/
If
there was ever a good argument for the sea base and long rang strike mitigating
USAF airpower being held hostage by Turkey , it is the fight against ISIS in
Iraq and the evolving possibly of avoiding the need for bases and contiguous
transit routes notably in and out of Turkey.
President
Trump has raised questions about the future of NATO – clearly the current
Turkish government’s support to ISIS is a key element challenging the validity
of the current role of Turkey within the Alliance.
With
the background of heightened tensions between Israel and the Iran/ Hezbollah
forces, the projection of Iranian power in Syria and Iraq could face a double
challenge – one from Israel and the other from Iraq with the use of sea bases
as well as the establishment of a small number of sanctuaries from which
pressure on Iranian-backed force could be generated as well.
We
concluded by discussing the situation facing Christians in the area.
As
Joseph Kassab underscored: “The Christians are clearly religious refugees who
should get priority in any Administration consideration with regard to
immigrant status. It is not a question of internecine war of Muslims versus
Muslims; in the case of Christians it is about radical Islam following a policy
of genocide. And President Trump has clearly indicated his support for the
plight of Christians in the ISIS-generated genocide.”
Kassab
then concluded by underscoring the concept of a phased approach makes a great
deal of sense. He then identified the priorities in the following order:
defeating ISIS; reducing significantly Iranian presence and influence in Iraq;
reducing significantly the influence of Turkey in Iraq; align the Iraqi
government and the Kurdistan Regional Government in the rebuilding of Iraq
with Western efforts as well.
In
short, the Trump Administration and the allies face a difficult road ahead.
But
by reconfiguring the coalition to fight ISIS there are clearly new
possibilities to ramp up the fight.
Biography
of Joseph Kassab
He
was born in Telkaif- Nineveh, Northern Iraq in 1952 to a Chaldean Catholic
family. In 1975 earned his undergraduate degree with excellence from College of
Science-University of Baghdad.
This
qualified him for graduate studies program at College of Medicine-University of
Baghdad to again become the first on his class and earn in 1979 Master of
Science degree in Medical Microbiology and Immunology under the auspices of the
Royal College of Medicine-UK .
He
was then hired as assistant professor at the same college, but the regime in
Iraq demanded that he joins the ruling party, when he refused he was threatened
and his position was downgraded.
When
the threats continued and the intimidations intensified he decided to flee Iraq
and join in Rome, Italy his two brothers, a pharmacist and an engineer who
earlier faced similar challenges to seek asylum. Later on in 1980 they were
resettled in the U.S as refugees.
In
the U.S, Joseph continued his education by acquiring Graduate Certificate (GC)
in Community Education Leadership from Wayne State University, under the
auspices of the Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL) in Washington D.C.
He
also pursued an intensive curriculum in political science at Wayne State
University.
While
doing all of this he worked for 25 years as Bio-medical researcher and
instructor at Wayne State University’s School of Medicine.
He
is currently the Chief Science Officer of Nano-Engineering and Consulting Co.
From
2005-2012, he served as the Executive Director of the Chaldean Federation of
America (CFA) (www.chaldeanfederation.org) where he has dealt with a number of
issues affecting Iraqi Christians in Iraq. He started his advocacy,
consultancy, and humanitarian work on the plight of the Christians of Iraq and
the Middle East since his arrival in the United States in 1980.
Biography
of General Nalu
General
Nalu has 32 year’s experience managing people and resources in a military
setting. He is a retired Chief ranking officer in the Iraqi Army. He has been a
military advisor and interpreter with the US Army for nearly nine years. He was
Deputy Program Manager for the Military Advisor Support Team (MAST). In this
role, he was involved in the rebuilding of the Iraqi Army and the training of
Iraqi Army Staff officers embed in the Military transition Teams working with
Iraqi Army Division and Operation Commands HQ to develop the combat
capabilities of the Iraqi Army.
Biography
of General Barno
General
Barno has worked extensively with the US Army in the rebuilding of the Iraqi
Army. He has worked with the 486th Civil Affairs battalion, the 506th
Regimental Combat Team, the 1st Brigade Combat Team and with the 2nd Armored
Cavalry Regiment.
Col
Robert “Juice” Newton USAF (ret), a fighter and test pilot, with significant
combat service in both Iraq and Afghanistan, was an important and
insightful member of the conference call. He highlighted the possibility of
leveraging the Mosul initiative to shape a building block towards shaping in
effect a secular armed forces which could then gain trust of the Iraqi people.
That could be set as a long term goal, with the saving of Mosul and the
expansion of stability into the Ninevah plain as a beginning step to that
journey.
(For
an article by Newton which we published in 2011 on the ballistic missile threat
which unfortunately Iranian actions just recently highlighted the
relevance of to evolving U.S. and allied policy, see the following: http://www.sldforum.com/2011/09/building-stability-in-an-unstable-world/).
As
the Trump Administration works through changes in U.S. immigration policy, one
priority identified by the President is reversing the last Administration’s
approach to Christian refugees.
As the
President noted with regard to Christians in the region:
“They’ve
been horribly treated. Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was
impossible, at least very tough to get into the United States?
“If
you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost
impossible and the reason that was so unfair, everybody was persecuted in all
fairness, but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the
Christians.
And
I thought it was very, very unfair.”
For
earlier articles of interest, please see the following:
http://www.sldinfo.com/an-update-on-the-evolving-situation-in-iraq-an-interview-with-joseph-kassab-2/
http://www.sldinfo.com/conducting-an-information-war-against-islamic-extremists
http://www.sldinfo.com/christians-in-the-middle-east-washington-conference-looks-at-minority-under-seige
http://www.sldinfo.com/isis-and-information-war-shaping-the-battlespace
http://www.sldinfo.com/the-iraq-dynamic-working-with-kurds-to-save-iraqi-christians/
http://www.sldinfo.com/a-way-ahead-in-iraq-calibrating-a-response/
http://www.sldinfo.com/president-obama-and-his-historic-opportunity-in-iraq
http://www.sldinfo.com/in-iraq-back-to-the-tribes/
Editor’s
Note: The Turkish challenge underscores the importance of NOT operating
aircraft from Turkish bases, highlights in turn the importance of longer range
strike as well as sea bases. We do not see these as mutually exclusive
but reinforcing capabilities.
That
was the approach we highlighted in our book on Pacific strategy.
For
example: “Precision strike coming by air, ground, and sea forces would be the
means to strike as many aim points as possible to create escalation dominance
and to win the “air-sea battle.”
If
this is the approach, then more traditional approaches will be prioritized and
funded, such as the Carrier Battle Group, air expeditionary strike groups, and
new systems like long-range bombers that can load up on capabilities to deliver
large strike packages.
But
what if the air-sea battle really is about shaping a presence force with
significant reachback to support a different kind of force structure and set of
objectives?
Then
precision strike deployed on as many platforms as possible— old and new— is not
the means to the end. Rather, a different set of ends could well drive the new
approach.
The
key focus becomes presence forces able to operate across the spectrum of
security and military operations. These forces need to be effective, agile, and
scalable, with both significant interoperability within the region and
reachback to surge forces operating on the fringes of the Pacific.”
Laird,
Robbin; Timperlake, Edward; Weitz, Richard (2013-10-28). Rebuilding American
Military Power in the Pacific: A 21st-Century Strategy: A 21st-Century Strategy
(Praeger Security International) (p. 126). ABC-CLIO. Kindle Edition.
Joseph Kassab visiting Capital Hill.
Generals Nalu and Barno as seen in the office of Joseph Kassab.
ISIS graffiti is painted on walls and nurseries around the city brainwashing those living there and claiming the terror group will defeat its enemies Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4171124/Mosul-liberated-ISIS-legacy-remains.html#ixzz4XQf3KihF Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
President Trump greeting Joseph Kassab.
Map on the wall of the office of Joseph Kassab showing Christian churches and settlements in Iraq.
|