Executive Summary
This 2016 RAND report assesses the first 18 months of the U.S.-led politico-military campaign to counter ISIL. It evaluates the partner-based strategy, analyzing the capabilities and limitations of anti-ISIL forces in Iraq and Syria. The report finds the initial approach insufficient and recommends a more robust advisory effort, improved political-military synchronization, and a long-term commitment to train-and-equip programs to achieve a lasting defeat of the proto-state.
Why It Matters
This document provides a critical assessment of a major counter-terrorism campaign, offering insights into the complexities of politico-military operations and the challenges of international partnerships in volatile regions. Defense and geopolitical analysts can learn from the strategic and tactical lessons identified in combating non-state actors and managing regional power dynamics.
Key Takeaways
- The counter-ISIL campaign requires better synchronization between military and political efforts to achieve lasting success.
- A robust advisory effort and long-term commitment to train and equip local forces are crucial for effective partnered approaches.
- The absence of political agreements in Iraq and Syria risks creating a vacuum that new insurgent activity could fill post-ISIL.
- The intervention of Russia on behalf of the Syrian regime significantly complicated the anti-ISIL fight, blending it with the civil war.
- The U.S. expeditionary targeting force was effective against ISIL leadership but needed to be balanced with building competent hold forces.
Strategic Relevance
This report offers a detailed analysis of a complex counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism campaign, highlighting the critical interplay between military operations, political objectives, and international partnerships. Its recommendations are vital for understanding and improving future interventions against non-state actors and managing regional conflicts.