SYRIA Solidarity Movement
Over the past 3 months US, UK and other forces have carried out airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria using manned aircraft and drones. There is little public available information as yet about the impact of these strikes on the ground . Here’s is what we know – and don’t know – so far.
Background
On August 7, President Obama ordered what he called “
limited strikes” against ISIS in order to protect American personnel in Iraq. At the same time he stated that he would “not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq”. US airstrikes began that next day and initiated another US military intervention in Iraq that has subsequently been named Operation Inherent Resolve.
One month later, on the eve of the September 11 commemorations, Obama announced that he was broadening the military campaign. No longer would airstrikes only be undertaken to directly protect Americans in Iraq but rather to “destroy ISIL.” Airstrikes would also be undertaken in Syria and further troops would be deployed in a ‘advice and assistance’ role.
Obama said:
“America will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat. Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy.
First, we will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists. Working with the Iraqi government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian missions, so that we’re hitting ISIL targets as Iraqi forces go on offense. Moreover, I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq…
In June, I deployed several hundred American service members to Iraq to assess how we can best support Iraqi security forces. Now that those teams have completed their work –- and Iraq has formed a government –- we will send an additional 475 service members to Iraq. As I have said before, these American forces will not have a combat mission –- we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.
It should be noted that there has been no UN resolution on the military action by the US and its partners,
casting doubt on the legality of the action, although some insist that as the – hastily assembled and installed – new government in Iraq has
consented to military assistance, this gives legal cover under international law.
For details of US, UK and other nations military airstrikes in Iraq and Syria see the very useful and regularly updated datasets by
Chris Woods that are
here and
here.
Drones over Iraq and Syria
Since the start of the bombing campaign, US drones have undertaken both surveillance and strike missions in Iraq and Syria but military spokespeople have refused to give details about which aircraft are undertaking which strikes repeatedly using the formula “US military forces used attack, fighter, bomber and remotely-piloted aircraft to conduct airstrikes.”
Where the drones are flying from
Washington Post 8 August 2014
Several
reports have named the Ali al Salem Air Base in Kuwait as the closest US drone base to Iraq and as
the Washington Post pointed out “Predator drones from the Air Force’s 46th Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron have to fly only about 40 miles to the border.”
The
US has also confirmed that it using Erbil (sometimes named as Irbil or Arbil) in Iraqi Kurdistan as a base for its military aircraft. Despite persistent
rumours, US military spokesperson insists that it
not being used by drones. However the base is also being used as a “
Joint Operating Center” by US and Iraqi force and there an adjacent CIA facility which is
reportedly being expanded. Possibly then there are drones in Erbil but under CIA rather than US military command.
While the MoD has been happy to report the location of UK Tornado aircraft flying over Iraq as
RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus(with the RAF station commander even giving
news conference from the main gate) the MoD is being tight-lipped about the basing of its drones, leading to media reports give several different locations.
As we have suggested
previously it is likely to be either Al Minhad in UAE, RAF Akrotiri or Kuwait but without confirmation from the MoD it is not possible at this stage to be certain. One question about all this of course is, if drones are no different from manned aircraft as the MoD repeatedly insists, why are they happy to give the location for the base of the Tornadoes but not the Reapers?
UK drones operating in Syria
Impact of airstrikes on the ground
Around 800 airstrikes have taken place in Iraq and Syria over the past three months, the vast majority undertaken by US forces. The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has estimated that
more than 550 people have been killed in airstrikes on Syria including at least 32 civilians. There is little information about casualties from airstrikes in Iraq. A table of credible claims of civilians casualties compiled by freelance reporter Chris Woods is below, but there are certain to be other incidents.
Credible claims of civilian deaths for airstrikes to date*
Date | Location | Allegedly caused by | Summary | Status |
Sept 23rd | Kafar Daryan, Idlib province, Syria | US – cruise missiles | Up to 11 civilians, many from one family, reported killed in cruise missile strike on Nusra Front-held village | Pentagon continues to deny civcas in attack |
Sept 28th/29th | Manbij, Syria | US – possibly with Jordan and/or UAE | Grain silos targeted. 2 civilians allegedly killed | NGO has now apparently removed civcas references |
Oct 4th/ 5th | Hit, Iraq | US – fighters | Up to 18 civilians ‘mostly women and children’ reported killed according to local hospital | ‘No evidence’ of civcas according to Centcom |
Oct 8th | Mosul, Iraq | US – fighter/ attack aircraft | First US strike on Mosul city targets ISIL vehicles. Agency stringers report possible civcas. | Waiting on further details. |
Oct 15/16 | Kobane, Syria | US fighters, bombers | Claims that 6 Kurdish fighters and a civilian accidentally killed in a US strike | Source: Kurdish officials |
Oct 17th/18th | Khesham, Der-Ezzor province,Syria | US – type unknown | ‘7 civilians killed by coalition air strikes on a gas station near Konico gas factory.’ | Reported bySOHR |
Oct 17th/18th | Kabiba village near al-Shadadi, south of al Hasaka, Syria | | ‘3 civilians including a child under the age of 18, killed by coalition air strikes targeted oil fields .. it is still unknown whether there were workers in the local oil fields or not.’ | Reported bySOHR |
Nov 5th | Al Qaim, Iraq | Unknown allied aircraft | 7 civilians killed and 27 injured when 2 missiles hit marketplace in town | Reported by National Iraqi News Agency (NINA) |
Nov 5th | Sarmada, | US fighters, bombers and RPAs | 2 children claimed killed in strikes on Khorasan Front | Local reporter, Nusra Front |
* Extensive additional civilian casualties are often caused by other parties to both the Iraq and Syria conflicts.
In 2013, stung by criticisms of the number of civilian casualties from US drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan,
Obama imposed new restrictions saying that no lethal strike would be authorized without “near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured.” Even though Obama cited counterterrorism operations in Yemen as a
template for military operations in Syria and Iraq, Pentagon officials have confirmed that
the ‘near-certainty’ principle does not apply to airstrikes in Iraq and Syria. White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said the near-certainty standard was intended to apply “only when we take direct action outside areas of active hostilities.”
“There is a big danger here that U.S. air strikes in Syria are going to resemble the drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen in the sense that there is no accountability for who is killed. We have reports of civilian casualties from people in the area and the US government says, ‘No, they are bad guys.’ There has to be some public accountability for what happens when there are allegations of civilian casualties.”
Conclusion
“Thus, current Western policy [of airstrikes] may be just what IS strategists want. Indeed there may be serious attempts to provoke a more intensive air campaign, not least through brutal actions against Western citizens and even attacks in Western states. Much will depend on whether such provocation succeeds.”
Western leaders have warned that the air campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria is likely to be
a long one – years of airstrikes are being talked about. The impact of these strikes on the ground must be carefully assessed and this requires real transparency from those carrying them out.
More importantly the danger and damage being done both on the ground and to international security by this air campaign must be acknowledged and the numerous alternatives to airstrikes – see
here and
here must be properly engaged with.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment