Mosul in Exchange for Aleppo!

Darko Lazar

Estimates regarding the possible duration of the Mosul operation range from a couple of weeks to a couple of months. But the Americans have reportedly set their own timetable for the ‘liberation' of Iraq's second city, designed to coincide with the November 8 presidential election in the US.

While hoping to silence global critics, Washington is also looking to send a strong message to its electorate, portraying a victory in Mosul as proof that the US ‘anti-terrorism' campaign is leading the charge against Daesh [Arabic acronym for "ISIS" / "ISIL"].

News of success would presumably sway more voters to cast their ballots for ‘establishment's candidate' Hillary Clinton, as opposed to her rival Donald Trump, whose military advisers [disgruntled members of the US military intelligence apparatus] support closer cooperation with the Russians, at least when it comes to fighting Daesh.

Washington is widely believed to have chaired all of the preparations for the ‘Battle of Mosul', coordinating the efforts of the operation's numerous participants, including the Kurdish Peshmerga, the Iraqi army, as well as Turkey. The irony, of course, is that none of these players - with the exception of the Iraqi military - have any real interest in preserving the territorial integrity of Iraq.

Nevertheless, the US is hoping to replicate its ‘success' in Fallujah. The western Iraqi city was quickly overrun following guarantees to its Sunni tribal elite of greater political autonomy from the central government in Baghdad, in exchange for removing the Daesh flag and flying the Iraqi one over whatever was left of Fallujah's administrative buildings.

After the guns fell silent, only a single Iraqi army garrison was deployed in the city, which is regarded as a breeding ground for radical militant groups.

In Mosul, a major population center of over 1.5 million people, the projections are even more disturbing. Only 2,000 ‘local Sunni fighters' trained by the Turkish military are reportedly being tasked with maintaining order in Mosul after its liberation from Daesh.

Meanwhile, the outcome of the battle from a military standpoint - regardless of whether its duration meets the expectations of the Clinton camp or not - is a forgone conclusion. 60,000 troops, along with 5,000 US Special Forces personnel, enjoy the air support of the US-led coalition and massive artillery fire.

The estimated 6,000 Daesh militants currently left in Mosul are unlikely to be able to muster up so much as a defense of the city's perimeter against such overwhelming military superiority. And while the mainstream media reports about ‘stiff resistance' - a good way to illustrate the unfolding of an epic battle between good and evil - neither side will be doing a great deal of fighting in Mosul.

The sheer contrast in numbers between the warring sides is further proof that the battle for Mosul was never going to be decided by the generals or on the battlefield. Rather, the demise of Daesh in Iraq is the result of political maneuvering, which involves efforts by the US and Turkey to carve up their own pieces of other countries' pies.

This is perhaps best demonstrated by the decision to largely exclude Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units from combat in Mosul. Proving itself as the most effective fighting force against Daesh, the PMU are being kept at an arm's length from Mosul, reduced to playing a supporting role.

Political commentator Ammar Waqqaf believes that, "it is essential for every single Iraqi to participate in the liberation of Mosul. This is an Iraqi city."

"There is a tendency in the region to divide the populations under Sunni and Shiite flags. The Saudis and the Turks feel that they can play the role of the leaders of the Sunni world, and have a say in what happens in Mosul and who is allowed to enter the city and who isn't.

At the end of the day, this is a struggle between this view of national identity and a traditional one, which is that an Iraqi person is an Iraqi person whether he is from Basra, Ramadi or Baghdad. It is his duty to liberate his own land. Keeping those Sunni Arabs in Iraq on their toes against the Shiite Iraqis is basically a recipe to divide Iraq. The Iraqis in general do not want this but there is so much propaganda and so much pressure," Waqqaf opined, adding that "on the other hand you should not have a person in Basra saying ‘Mosul is a Sunni city; I couldn't care less what happens there'. This kind of thinking will allow wars to continue forever."

American Interests Drive the Battle for Mosul

Despite the tens of thousands of troops taking part in this battle, Mosul has not been completely besieged. The US-led coalition has already opened two corridors supposedly designed to allow civilians to leave the city.

But this ‘humanitarian' gesture is actually part of Washington's geostrategic agenda in the new Middle East, where it no longer enjoys the role of a dominant power, especially with respect to Syria.

Commenting on the fight for the Iraqi city, Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, warned that, "This corridor poses a risk that ‘ISIS' fighters could flee from Mosul and go to Syria."

Essentially, the opening of the corridors translates into giving Daesh militants safe passage out of Mosul and towards Syria's eastern, oil-rich city of Deir ez-Zor, where the terrorists have been besieging thousands of residents and government troops since 2014.

According to London-based political commentator, Sabah Jawad, "the Americans have two plans after the liberation of Mosul. First of all, to let the terrorist from Mosul escape to Deir ez-Zor in Syria and enhance the capabilities of ISIS across Syria. The second part of the plan involves the creation of cantons of semi-independent regions like the Kurdish regions, and to fragment Iraq without any announcements of independence. And this is also applicable to Syria."

Aside from finally hoping to capture Deir ez-Zor - where American airstrikes ‘mistakenly' killed over 60 Syrian soldiers last month - the influx of Daesh terrorists could also put pressure on the recently liberated city of Palmyra.

Washington's efforts to undermine Damascus and Moscow in their fight against terrorist groups will now likely be focused on these eastern and central regions of Syria, as most experts agree that Aleppo and even the western Idlib province can no longer be ‘salvaged' from falling back under government control.

Meanwhile, Ankara's silence over Aleppo - where Moscow and Damascus have been accused of war crimes by the west for employing the same tactics as the US in Mosul - serves as further proof that the fate of Syria's second city has already been sealed.

Not surprisingly perhaps, the territorial integrity of Syria and Iraq is hardly a priority, with Mosul looking increasingly like compensation to both the Turks and the Americans for their loss of Aleppo.

Source: Al-Ahed News