US has spent $2.7 billion already in fight against the Islamic State

Since bombings against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq began last August, the US has spent more than $2.7 billion The Pentagon estimates that the average daily expenditure at present is above $9 million.

+ Add Image

This is the first time detailed breakdown of costs have been given. In September last year estimates of what total costs might be were given. These were much higher but then the bombings and fight against the Islamic State is far from over.

Since much of the effort against the Islamic State involves bombing and air reconnaissance, it is hardly surprising that two thirds of the cost, or $1.8 billion, was spent by the U.S. Air Force. Combat, reconnaissance, and other flights are costing more than $5 million each day. In a rare breakdown of costs, the report indicates that secret special forces operations had cost more than $200 million since last August. These details were revealed just as the US Congress rejected legislation that would have banned any spending on combat operations before a new war pøwers bill was passed.

Other costs from last August include $438 million for the Navy, and $274 million for the Army, which has trainers and special forces troops on the ground. There was also $16 million for military pay; $646 million for munitions; and $21 million for intelligence and surveillance operations. The U.S. will also be faced with the task of replacing equipment and munitions seized by the Islamic State in their original offensive. The retreating Iraqi forces often left munitions and equipment at their abandoned bases. The same situation repeated itself during the recent capture of the city of Ramadi by the Islamic State. The military-industrial complex prospers through this creative destruction. They sell the U.S. government the planes and bombs that destroy the munitions and equipment now in possession of the Islamic State, which formerly was provided by U.S. industry to the Iraqi government. Now the Iraqi forces will need to be resupplied.

Two recent events may ensure that there is increased U.S. spending on the fight against the Islamic State. Obama has announced that he will be sending up to 450 more US troops to Iraq. The US is also considering sending arms directly to Sunni and Kurdish forces in Iraq. There are other countries such as Canada, the United Kingdom and a number of Arab states who have joined the U.S. in the fight against the Islamic State. If their costs were included the total spent on the fight against the Islamic State would be much higher. The appended video is from March of this year.

Obama sends 450 more troops to Iraq as US mission grows

On Wednesday the White House announced it would send up to 450 additional troops to Anbar province in eastern Iraq. The troops will advise and otherwise assist Iraqi forces in their battle against the Islamic State(IS) in the province.

+ Add Image

With the addition of these 450 troops, the total number of U.S. military forces in Iraq will now number 3,550, less than four years after the U.S. pulled all of its troops out of the country. The White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, sounded the regular refrain of the Obama administration: “These additional US troops will not serve in a combat role.”

In spite of constant bombing by a U.S.-led coalition of IS positions, the group has managed to retain much of the territory it took and has even driven Iraqi forces out of some cities such as Ramadi, although Iraqi forces have taken the city of Tikrit from the Islamic State. There is no sign yet of Iraqi forces being able to retake the major city of Mosul.

The new troops are termed "advisers" by the White House. They will provide "operational advice and planning support for Iraqi forces" with the aim of improving their ability to "plan, lead and conduct operations" against the Islamic State, also called ISIS or Daesh. As with the earlier occupation of Iraq, the UK is a junior partner in the campaign against IS. It is sending 125 more trainers to Anbar province as well.

The new troops are being sent to a base at Taqaddum, just 15 miles from Ramadi, the capital of Anbar,just recently captured by the Islamic State. The Americans will be in a position where they may be subject to attack by IS and suffer casualties. This might be used as a reason to send even further troops although it could also cause a reaction against intervention. US officials described the new deployment as follows:The new U.S. forces will begin arriving in six to eight weeks. About a quarter of them will be advisers; the remainder will provide security and other logistics.The U.S. forces will advise the 8th Iraqi Army Division, based at al-Taqaddum, on intelligence gathering, logistics, troop deployments and other tactical and administrative improvements to help them develop a plan to retake of Ramadi. That division includes forces that fled the Islamic State attack on the city last month.Note that most of the troops deployed are to protect the hundred or so advisers. The administration must realize that they are locating in an area where their troops will likely be attacked. Obama has not ruled out further steps to be taken in the fight against the Islamic State. There are obvious signs of mission creep already. Some Republicans including John McCain are urging Obama to further involve the U.S.

Shiite militia "rebrand" mission to retake Iraq city of Ramadi

Every military operation appears to require the proper name or branding. The Pentagon has become expert at providing euphemistic names for operations such as Enduring Freedom.

+ Add Image

The Shiite militia, who are launching an operation to retake the city of Ramadi, named it "Labyek Ya Hussein" which means "At your service Hussein." The name does not honor Saddam Hussein of course but Husayn_ibn_Ali the first Imam of Shia Muslims. He is a key and revered figure in Shia Islam. Many felt that the name was too clearly sectarian to be appropriate in an operation to free a largely Sunni city.

The U.S. complained about the name as did many Sunnis in the area. The paramilitaries, called Hashd al_Shaabi, responded by re-branding the operation as "Labyek Ya Iraq" or "At Your Service Iraq." A spokesperson for the militia, Karim al-Nouri said that the two names had "the same meaning": "Now we have opted for 'Iraq' and there is no problem," .

Even the Shia cleric and leader Moqtada al-Sadr was critical of the earlier name for the operation. He claimed it was much too sectarian for an operation to rescue their Sunni brothers. Although fiercely anti-American and having spent much time studying in Iran, al-Sadr is a strong Iraqi nationalist who unlike many of his brethern sees it as crucial to develop good relations with the Sunnis if there is ever to be a unified Iraq. He has also been critical of some Shia militia fighters who have taken vengeance on Sunnis when they capture territory For once Al-Sadr agrees with the Americans on an issue, as Pentagon spokesperson Col. Steve Warren expressed disappointment at the operation’s name, claiming it was “unhelpful.”

Map locating Ramadi, the capital of Iraq's Anbar's province

Graphic/AFP

The Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi no doubt worries having Shiite militias play a key role in liberating Ramadi may create a backlash against the central government dominated by Shias. However, given the poor performance of regular Iraqi forces in defending the city against the Islamic State his choices were quite limited. If the militia are successful this may make them even a stronger power within Iraq and further Iranian influence. However, the Islamic State insurgents are digging in and laying mines on the outskirts of the town. Retaking Ramadi may not be an easy task. Already IS has ambushed and killed six police and tribal fighters east of Ramadi. They also seized a village just 19 miles northwest of Baghdad after ambushing a military convoy and killing eight soldiers. Iraqi troops massing for an offensive in Anbar were hit by devastating suicide attacks.

As more Sunnis are fleeing battle areas such as Ramadi, the humanitarian situation is getting much worse. The sectarian divide and conflict is also increasing as Shiite authorities are restricting where the fleeing Sunnis may go. They fear they may be a security threat. Of those in flight almost 85 per cent are Sunnis and as the Islamic State holds much of the Sunni areas of Iraq, the Sunnis are seeking safety in Shiite controlled areas where they are sometimes not welcomed.

Islamic State captures many US-provided weapons and equipment as it retakes Ramadi

Iraqi troops retreating from Ramadi last Sunday left behind many U.S.-provided vehicles, including tanks, armoured personnel carriers and artillery for ISIS fighters.

+ Add Image

Colonel Steve Warren, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, estimated that IS captured about a half dozen tanks, about the same number of artillery but almost 100 wheeled vehicles such as Humvees and a number of armored personnel carriers. Warren noted while some vehicles were operational, others were not as they had not been moved for months.

The capture of Ramadi is the worst defeat for central government forces since the IS offensive began last June. Apparently several hundred Iraqi soldiers were left in one area of Ramadi surrounded by IS fighters. Reinforcements had been trying to reach Ramadi but were kept away by fierce IS resistance. All contact with the Anbar Operations Center in the area where the soldiers were was cut off and IS later claimed they had overrun the center.

The retreat in Ramadi, follows a pattern that happened earlier in a number of places in which equipment is left behind when Iraqi forces retreat, to be destroyed by U.S.-led air strikes later. When Warren was asked if the vehicles should have been destroyed before the retreat, he said that was preferable but was not done in this case. While Warren was confident that Ramadi would be retaken he said it could be a difficult battle.

Derek Harvey, a retired colonel and former Defense Intelligence officer said of the Islamic State: "They are adaptive and they remain well-armed and well-resourced. The different lines of operation by the U.S. coalition remain disjointed, poorly resourced and lack an effective operational framework, in my view."

Given the difficulties in recovering territory from ISIS, some U.S. officials have suggested containment might be an alternative strategy. However, at the present time this is not being discussed. General Martin Dempsey, chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said of Ramadi: "Setbacks are regrettable but not uncommon in warfare. Much effort will now be required to reclaim the city." The U.S. remains adamant that it will not commit substantial numbers of ground troops to the fight against the Islamic State although it is clear that there are a number of advisers, trainers, and special forces in both Iraq and Syria. Pentagon officials were quick to claim that the Ramadi defeat did not show any fatal weakness in the U.S. strategy but was just part of the inevitable "ebb and flow" of warfare. In some areas the Islamic State has lost ground. Tikrit was recaptured recently. However, the town of Baghdadi north of Ramadi is also reported to be surrounded by IS fighters and could also be captured without outside help.