Pentagon officials are
cautiously optimistic that the terror group is entering its death
throes, even as it advances on new territory.
This
week’s fighting in Syria has seen major changes for the self-proclaimed
Islamic State’s grip there, leaving some in the Pentagon wondering if
ISIS is trying to expand its territorial hold or is in its last throes.
This
week, Kurdish forces pushed the terror group out of two cities —al
Thawrah and Ash Shaddadi—that sit on supply routes for ISIS’s de facto
Syrian capital, Raqqa. In Ash Shaddadi, Kurdish forces received
substantial U.S.-led coalition air strike support.
At
the same time, ISIS appears to be making strides toward taking new
cities in western Syria. The terror group has aggressively fended off a
months long Russian-led defense of the central city of Palmyra, a city
that many believe could serve as ISIS’s entrée into western Syria. And
ISIS claimed responsibility for a series of deadly bombings Sunday in
the city of Homs and the southern outskirts of Damascus that killed at
least 200 people, potentially signaling its move on those cities.
Is
ISIS trying to broaden its area of control to make fighting harder for
both Russian and U.S. backed forces? Or it is losing ground around its
capital and looking for any city in Syria where it can grow?
Defense
officials are cautiously hopeful that it’s the latter, noting that the
number of ISIS fighters continues to fall. The latest Pentagon estimate
is that the terror groups ranks stand at 15,000, the lowest of the war.
“They
are shifting the fight toward territory that is fruitful,” one defense
official explained to the Daily Beast. “They more we show they are
indeed not a state the more we are undermining their narrative.”
On
the other hand, if ISIS gains more territory in Syria, even with fewer
fighters and in the face of thousands of coalition strikes, it would
solidify the group’s grip on Syria. Moreover, such gains would stretch
the Russian and coalition forces’ air campaign against them.
Should
ISIS win Palmyra and Homs, for example, it would put it far closer to
parts of Syria still under control of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Russia would be then forced to expand its war over every corner of the
county, and the already stretched U.S. coalition would be hard pressed
to fight ISIS on so many fronts.
Either way, recent fighting has marked one of the most dramatic shift for the group’s territorial hold in months.
“ISIS
is choosing where to stand and fight,” said Jennifer Cafarella, a
fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for the Study of War, who
studies the Syrian conflict.
ISIS
appears to have calculated that it would rather take on Syrian Army
ground forces, backed by Russian airstrikes, than Kurdish forces backed
by U.S.-led forces, defense officials and watchers of the conflict have
concluded.
“ISIS
is prioritizing fighting the Syrian regime over Kurdish forces. We are
at beginning of that trend,” Cafarella said. “They are ceding territory
in the north while consolidating in central Syria and positioning
themselves in the west.”
In
northeastern city of Ash Shaddadi, for example, ISIS put up a
moderately aggressive fight against the Kurdish forces on the ground and
the coalition airstrikes, so much so that Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt.
Jeff Davis said the town is starting to “crumble” from ISIS control.
In
Palmyra, ISIS has fought for months against a daily Russian bombardment
and a heavy Syrian Army ground force effort—and has yet to make any
major gains there.
“They have not gained a single inch,” a second defense official explained.
Yet, no one at the Pentagon is willing to openly celebrate. ISIS has been strategically savvy throughout the war, while U.S. has made several pronouncements that ended up being miscalculations about the group—and how to fight it. What the Pentagon sees as ISIS carrying out a new strategy could instead be ISIS grasping for any land it can.
Moreover, while ISIS has lost ground in central Syria, it conducted more strikes overall since the Russian strike campaign began last fall, according to at least one estimate.
On Wednesday, for example, ISIS reportedly escalated its campaign in the city of Khanaser, near Aleppo, despite Russian airstrikes, cutting off a Syrian Army supply route.
Most
importantly, it is not clear how much danger Raqqa is of falling out of
ISIS hands, even with the loss of supply lines. That ISIS did not fight
aggressively for those cities suggests that maybe it didn’t need the
supply lines as much as fighters had anticipated. And there is no
indication that the Kurds are willing to fight for the Arab-dominated
city. Rather, Kurdish fighters appear motivated to take cities near
Raqqa where Kurds live.
“ISIS
is in trouble. It’s a question of how much trouble they are in and how
resilient they are,” said Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at
the Washington, D.C.-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
The
U.S. and Russia agreed Monday to a partial truce in Syria that takes
effect Saturday, giving both Russia and the U.S. days still to strike
the terror group and potentially shift the landscape of the war yet
again.
In
addition to reducing the fighting, the truce is intended in the near
term to get humanitarian aid to civilians trapped between the fighting,
and eventually to open talks for the end of the war. On Wednesday, the
United Nations delivered its first airdrop of humanitarian aid to the
eastern city of Deir al-Zour, a city dominated by ISIS.
In
addressing the partial truce, President Obama, who spoke from the Oval
Office Wednesday during a state visit with Jordan’s King Abdullah II,
said he was “cautious about raising expectations” about a potential
truce, and an end to the war.
“The
situation on the ground is difficult, but we have seen modest progress
over the course of the last week or so with respect to humanitarian
access to populations that are threatened,” Obama said.
No comments:
Post a Comment