Four-fifths of Russia's Syria strikes don't target Islamic State: Reuters analysis

[GennGreymane]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...Name=worldNews

Almost 80 percent of Russia's declared targets in Syria have been in areas not held by Islamic State, a Reuters analysis of Russian Defence Ministry data shows, undermining Moscow's assertions that its aim is to defeat the group.

The majority of strikes, according to the analysis, have instead been in areas held by other groups opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which include al Qaeda offshoots but also fighters backed by Washington and its allies.

Defence ministry statements of targets hit by the Russian Air Force and an online archive of Russian military maps show Russia has hit 64 named locations since President Vladimir Putin ordered the first round of air strikes three weeks ago.

Of those targets, a maximum of 15 were in areas held by Islamic State, according to a survey of locations of the rival forces in Syria compiled by the Institute for the Study of War.

"If you look at the map, you can easily understand that they are not fighting Islamic State but other opposition groups," said Alexander Golts, a Moscow-based defence columnist and deputy editor of online newspaper Yezhednevny Zhurnal.

The data supports assertions from Washington and its NATO allies that Russia's intervention in Syria, its biggest military deployment abroad since the collapse of the Soviet Union, is designed to prop up Assad, who flew to Moscow on Tuesday to thank Putin for his support.

Moscow's other possible motives could be to maintain a strategic foothold in the Middle East and showcase itself as a global military power at a time when relations with the West have sunk to a post-Soviet low over the crisis in Ukraine.

Russian officials have rejected the accusations and repeatedly stressed that they are targeting Islamic State, alongside other groups they classify as Islamist terrorists. They say Moscow and the West are fighting a common enemy.

However, the pattern of the strikes in Syria suggests a different picture.

Russia's air force has flown over 780 sorties against almost 800 targets in Syria since Sept. 30. As recently as Monday, its jets hit targets in six named locations, none of which were in areas held by Islamic State, the Reuters analysis showed.

"The main goal of these air strikes is supporting ground offensives by the Syrian army," Golts said.

The Russian defence ministry was not immediately available for comment.

Statements from the United States Central Command show that 84 air strikes by the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State hit 13 locations in Syria between Sept.30 and Oct. 19.

In contrast to the Russian campaign, the coalition strikes were concentrated in Syria's northern and eastern regions, where Islamic State militants have take control of large swathes of the country.

A senior Western diplomat in New York said 85 percent of Russian air strikes had been against groups not affiliated with Islamic State.

The Reuters analysis only included specific locations named by the Russian Defence Ministry as air force targets in Syria.

A total of four locations could not be found on maps including Russian military documents. But three of them were identified by Russia's defence ministry as being in Syria's western Latakia and Idlib provinces, meaning they were not in Islamic State territory.

The fourth location, Kfaysir, was in the northern Aleppo province where territory is contested between Islamic State, opposition rebels and the Syrian army.

Russia has also hit Islamic State strongholds in Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor where the defence ministry says it has destroyed command centres, training camps and munitions factories.

Backed by Russia's air force, Syrian government forces have launched offensives against rebels in Syria's Homs, Hama, Latakia, Idlib and Aleppo provinces.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group said Russia's bombing campaign has killed 370 people in the last three weeks, one third of them civilians

[Deleted]

who would've ever thought

[Independent voter]

Iranian soldiers on the ground, Russian bombers in the air, all trying to prop up Assad's Shiite regime.

Guess this conflict and the refugee crisis will last a lot longer than we thought.

[Crispin]

Not sure how they're supposed to help Assad without attacking "our" rebels, recent history shows quite clearly that when we remove a tyran the country turns into a freaking mess.

At this point I think the West should just get out and let Russia do their thing, helping refugees in the surrounding countries seems like a better way of spending money.

[Revi]

Well the rebels Al Nusra are also looking to create an Islamic state in Syria if they gain control, they're terrorists as well. I don't know which other US-supported groups are being bombed, but I only see a problem with this if somehow one of them aren't terrorist groups.

[Tierbook]

Not sure how they're supposed to help Assad without attacking "our" rebels, recent history shows quite clearly that when we remove a tyran the country turns into a freaking mess.

At this point I think the West should just get out and let Russia do their thing, helping refugees in the surrounding countries seems like a better way of spending money.

You are aware most of the weapons going to the rebels aren't from the west but other ME nations right?

[Uzkin]

The US-supported terrorists are being destroyed along with every other "flavor" of terrorist, by Russia and Syria et al.

Against ordinary terrorists, we use only conventional munitions. Against moderate terrorists, we use solely moderate ammunition. So don't worry, we take into account the moderation of some of the terrorists and treat them with justice. Our conventional munitions differ from moderate exactly the same as regular terrorists in Syria are different from the moderate terrorists: they are painted with different paint, in a lighter and more moderate tones.

http://fortruss.blogspot.fi/2015/10/...-ammo-for.html

[bufferunderrun]

honestly supporting rebels was an error to begin with, since Russia is willing for once to deal with the mess let them be. I would gladly ask Putin to solve Libya chaos next.

[ringpriest]

Well the rebels Al Nusra are also looking to create an Islamic state in Syria if they gain control, they're terrorists as well. I don't know which other US-supported groups are being bombed, but I only see a problem with this if somehow one of them aren't terrorist groups.

All Syrian militant groups are "terrorists" (insofar as that term has any meaning anymore) - early on, the lion's share of the funding (and weapons) from the GCC and others (like Turkey) went to various flavors of extremists, also, the extremists tended to be better able to recruit. They then used those advantages to utterly dominate whatever secular rebel groups existed - and there were precious few to begin with: Assad's (murderous and authoritarian, even sectarian) regime was pretty secular, and so are the Kurds; Wahhabism and its variants are the inevitable opposition.

Now, what's left of Assad's regime has had a sort of de facto truce with the Islamic State (aka. Daesh, ISIS) for a while - there's been a big "buffer zone" of various militant groups (including Al Qaeda's Al Nusra branch) between Daesh and most of Assad's forces. So when the Russians started to directly support Assad's regime (in predictable "make a silence and call it a peace" fashion), of course they started off bombing the various mix of militias who were fighting the government in Damascus - doing otherwise would have been idiotic; they'd have been helping the people fighting their client state! (Via removing pressure on them from ISIS).

Now, what will be telling is what will happen when (or if - it'll probably take months unless there's a collapse or the Damascus regime gets a lot of more ground troops from somewhere) the other extremist groups fighting the Alawites & Co (Assad's faction) are decisively beaten... that will be telling. I see a couple of options: 1) the Russians and their Damascus puppet can cut a deal (explicit or de facto) with the Islamic State, stabilize the border on a much bigger Syrian 'rump state' and call it a day; 2) they can mostly stop advancing, but keep up airstrikes and occasionally seizing territory when its to their advantage; or 3) keep on rolling until Daesh is kicked out of Syria, or gone from both Syria and Iraq.

If I had to guess, I'd bet on a mix of 1 & 2 - they'll get the Alawites the better part of Syria, then spend a month or two hitting Daesh directly, declare victory, say "we did our part", mock the US & Company, and try to push Daesh into fighting the Saudis instead of the Shia part of Iraq.

[Theinquisition]

To be honest, I'd rather have Assad running things than the other groups struggling for control.

Better to take the evil you know, than the evil you dont

[Deleted]

as opposed to the, you know hospital bombing...

[Combatbutler]

Iranian soldiers on the ground, Russian bombers in the air, all trying to prop up Assad's Shiite regime.

Guess this conflict and the refugee crisis will last a lot longer than we thought.

What makes you think supporting the rebels would stop the refugee situation? Assad still has enough support from some of his people otherwise he would have been toppled years ago.

OT

Hardly surprising, since Russia sees the rebels as terrorists.

[Theinquisition]

as opposed to the, you know hospital bombing...

I was wondering when this would come up. That's totally on topic and relevant....stay classy

[Aeluron Lightsong]

What makes you think supporting the rebels would stop the refugee situation? Assad still has enough support from some of his people otherwise he would have been toppled years ago.

OT

Hardly surprising, since Russia sees the rebels as terrorists.

Or they're supporting him out of fear.

[soulcrusher]

oh dear you mean theyre killing US/israel/saudi/turkey trained and equipped al queada? how terrible.

[Independent voter]

What makes you think supporting the rebels would stop the refugee situation? Assad still has enough support from some of his people otherwise he would have been toppled years ago.

Assad stepping down will bring stability to Syria. Certainly no one can agree to Assad staying with all of the crimes he committed against the Sunni Syrians? Assad used nerve gas on Sunni Syrians or so the UN says.

[Combatbutler]

Or they're supporting him out of fear.

Possible, but why do you think that is, because they fear Assad himself or the alternative.

[Fayolynn]

as opposed to the, you know hospital bombing...

Sad shallow dig at the US in an attempt to change the topic of the thread. *golfclap*

[Combatbutler]

Assad stepping down will bring stability to Syria. Certainly no one can agree to Assad staying with all of the crimes he committed against the Sunni Syrians? Assad used nerve gas on Sunni Syrians or so the UN says.

In some ways true, but do you honestly believe it would be that simple, the answer is no. There are no easy solutions in such matters, just look at Lybia, it is of worse of without Gadaffi and the syrian rebels are far from united, it will become a battle royal for power, once the establishment is gone.

[Gheld]

Reuters also showed up in my city doing street interviews hours after the Zehaf Bibeau shooting in Ottawa asking leading questions and trying to spin the international terrorism angle on it before me and my gf at the time told them where to shove their american wag the dog bullshit.

EDIT: So the only thing Reuters should be analyzing is my ballsack when I teabag their sorry asses back to their corporate military industrial complex loving circle jerk party.