Defence analyst Konstantin Sivkov, President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, told us:
Washington is making extremely weird mistakes in Syria and Iraq, but what some describe as errors are in fact planned steps aimed at helping US-backed radical forces. “Accidental” airstrikes, as well as Washington’s inability to separate so-called moderate groups from al-Nusra Front, are prime cases in point. All of these mistakes are extremely weird since they work for the benefit of those forces whom [Washington] backs. Any claims that they’re fighting against al-Nusra are a myth. They aren’t really tackling [Daesh] as well. They’re instruments of [American] geopolitics. That’s why [the USA] isn’t particularly addressing the issue of destroying [these groups], but rather takes them under their control to use for other tasks.
The Pentagon helped the militants to move from Mosul to Syria at a time when Iraqi security forces, the US-led coalition, and Kurdish fighters were trying to push the terrorists out of the second-largest Iraqi city. It’s been Daesh’s stronghold since June 2014. This is why all these “mistakes” are, let’s say, planned. The US military and intelligence communities are behind this strategy. The US military doesn’t have comprehensive intelligence on Syria. They mainly receive information [on the embattled country] from the CIA. This is how separation of duties works there. The CIA is occasionally making these so-called mistakes. I think one shouldn’t blame solely the Pentagon. It’s much rather a matter of a concerted stance of America’s political, military, and intelligence leadership.
Sivkov further commented on the Pentagon’s apparent decision to launch an operation to free Raqqa in the coming weeks. Earlier, US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter suggested that the USA had enough resources for two major overlapping anti-Daesh operations, but Sivkov pointed up another possible explanation:
Now, all field personnel are near Mosul as part of an operation to free the city. This is why the Americans don’t have enough resources to secure a lasting blockade of Raqqa. What they need is a pretext to justify additional deployment of foreign occupation forces, including those from Turkey, the USA, and other countries that sent ground troops to Syria without authorisation from the Syrian government. Initially, Washington intended to focus its efforts on helping Baghdad retake Mosul, with Raqqa taking a back seat. However, since the Americans’ minions, that is al-Nusra and similar groups, have increasingly struggled on the Syrian battlefield, the USA needs to take perhaps a large part of Syria under its control and deploy its forces to the area.
27 October 2016