Air strikes against IS 'not working' - is it true?

S AT U R DAY 29 NOVEMBER 2014

The Syrian regime says two months of US-led strikes have failed to weaken
the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria. Is it right - or are other motives at
play?

The US-led coalition has carried out nearly 300 air strikes against Islamic
State (IS) militants since September, killing nearly 800 IS fighters in Syria in
the process.
Coalition air strikes have been central to defending what are seen as
strategically important locations, including the Haditha dam in Iraq and
the Turkish border settlement of Kobane.
But Syria's foreign minister, Walid al-Moualem, has told Lebanese TV IS has

not been weakened by the air strikes - only days after Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad appealed for western states to join him in "real and
sincere" co-operation to defeat IS.
"All the indications say that [IS] today, after two months of coalition air
strikes, is not weaker," Mr Moulame told al-Mayadeen TV on Friday.
US President Barack Obama was reluctant to commit ground troops to any
offensive against IS in Iraq and Syria - reflecting similar concerns in the UK
when it approved air strikes in Iraq in September, although not in Syria.
Mixed motives
Both countries may have some incentive to promote the achievements of
the air campaign, in the hope that air power alone can stop the advance of
IS and eventually lead to their defeat.
So is there any truth in Syria's claim, or is a more complex motive at play?

Air strikes in Syria killed 910 people between the start of the US campaign
in July and mid-November - including 52 civilians and 785 Is fighters according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The effect of such strikes has been called into question, given the size of IS
forces and their geographic spread, spanning the borders of Iraq and Syria
over hundreds of miles.
According to some estimates, IS (also known as Isis) is thought to
comprise up to 10,000 fighters, drawing in hundreds of foreigners
including over 500 from the UK.
The US and UK governments have said repeatedly that they are providing
support to local Iraqi forces in the battle against IS, while Syrian opposition
groups will also be crucial to the campaign.
Blurred strategies
But the US approach is emboldening the Syrian regime and "undermining
the very rebels it is ostensibly designed to support", according to Noah
Bonsey, senior analyst for the International Crisis Group.

Apparent US attacks against groups unrelated to IS - such as Ahrar al-Sham

and al Nusra Front - "strengthen jihadi claims that the US campaign aims to
quietly boost Assad while degrading a range of Islamist forces", he wrote in

Foreign Policy magazine.

The US air campaign "has further blurred the lines between US and regime
military strategies", meaning that Syrian rebels are becoming less willing to
partner with the US, he added.

Robert N Hein, a fellow at the US Brookings think-tank, has questioned the

aim of seeking a victory over IS forces.

"The enemy decides when a war is over," he said in November.

"Isis will have lost when they no longer have safe haven, can't sustain
funding, their recruitment dries up, and disillusioned young Islamic
extremists go home."

"But even then the fight will certainly not be over," he added, given that a

range of terrorist groups will seek to take advantage of "young, disillusioned

extremists".

Obama has set out to "degrade and ultimately destroy Isis", which implies
his aim is to "weaken rather than eliminate Isis" in the short to medium
term, according to Shashank Joshi, a defence analyst for the Royal United
Services Institute think-tank.
"The aim of degradation is still fluid and open-ended, but considerably more
modest than seeking outright defeat," he wrote in October at the start of
the UK's air campaign.
The Syrian regime may have its own motives in declaring the US-led
coalition unsuccessful so far - given its continuing battle with rebels within
its own borders, whom it may want to discourage from joining the US effort.
But the coalition's road towards victory, defeat or undeclared stalemate is
still likely to be a long one.