Posted on 10/08/2015 10:05:57 AM PDT by Sam's Army
When Russia started bombing in Syria last week, it said it was targeting ISIS — a claim it's stuck to pretty consistently in the past week. But this map of Russian airstrikes in Syria so far, put together by the Levantine Group, tells a very different story.
The Levantine Group's analysts used a proprietary network of sources, cross-checked with open-source media and information released by the Russian Ministry of Defense, to determine the locations hit by Russian planes. This map shows those strikes overlaid on territory controlled by Bashar al-Assad's regime, by anti-Assad rebels, by ISIS, and by Kurdish forces.
The results are striking — Russian strikes have overwhelmingly targeted rebel-held territory in western Syria rather than the ISIS strongholds in the north and east:
"The Russian air campaign is not geared toward the so-called Islamic State," Michael Horowitz, a Syria analyst at the Levantine Group, told me via email. "Russian airstrikes are focusing on opposition groups controlling northwestern Syria, including the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front, other Islamist groups such Ahrar al-Sham, and 'moderate' groups including the Free Syrian Army (FSA)."
Russia is targeting these rebel groups because they're the main threat to the weakening Assad regime, which lost 16 percent of its remaining territory in Syria in the first half of 2015.
The pattern of these bombings, according to Horowitz, suggests it could be a prelude to an anti-rebel ground campaign.
"The map also shows that the first week of airstrikes was meant to 'soften' opposition targets along the coast as well as inside the rebel-held enclave between Homs and Hama," he writes. "Russia is laying the groundwork for a ground offensive in these areas," likely involving Iranian and/or Hezbollah forces, given the depleted state of Assad's troop reserves.
"The Syrian regime’s most imminent threat comes from the presence of opposition forces near the Alawite heartland along the Syrian coast," Horowitz told me. "Beyond the image often depicted of a bold and assertive Russian operation that outmaneuvered the West, the intervention is meant to counterbalance recent regime losses (particularly in the Idlib province), rather than reclaiming Syria back."
Why Russia is targeting rebels rather than ISIS
From Russia's point of view, focusing on the rebels rather than on ISIS makes perfect sense. Assad's Syria remains one of Russia's few reliable allies outside of the former Soviet republics, a vestige of Moscow's former superpower status and a final military toehold in the Middle East. Russia has an important naval base on Syria's western coast, in Tartus.
"ISIS almost never fought the Assad regime," Glenn Robinson, an associate professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, told me last month. "They were much more focused on fighting other opposition groups and gaining land their opponents had already acquired."
ISIS's growth has arguably helped Assad. His forces have tacitly tolerated ISIS in northeastern Syria while focusing military efforts on the rebels. This was part of what appeared to be a deliberate strategy to encourage extremism in order to discourage foreign intervention against him.
Both Assad and Putin win, in other words, if the West is forced to choose between Assad and ISIS in Syria. Which is part of why Russian airstrikes appear to be targeting ISIS's enemies in Syria — under the pretext of targeting ISIS.
If memory serves Russia and Afghanistan didn't play well together in the recent past.
A couple of minor strikes, as cover, but essentially they’re bombing our friends.
They want to create a situation in which there is no alternative to Assad but ISIS — and then, whose side are you on?
Russia will run out of Bombs before it gets to ISIS
And those "moderates" want Christians and Alawis dead
Islamic state theoretically controls a lot of land, but most of that is desert. There is a thin strip of livable land near the rivers, but the rest is desert
That was because the USA and Pakistan sponsored Mujahideen - i.e. Islamic jihadists to fight the Soviets.
The main thrust in western Syria has been against Al Qaeda (al Nusra) and Muslim Brotherhood and splinter groups all operating under a unified “Army of Conquest” or ‘Islamic State” banner
The Russians have good ground Intel and they know what they are doing. We should join them by taking on ISIS in the west, or stay out of their way
Thee asked the us for intel sharing on ISIS to plan strikes and we refused.
Unfortunately they know what “we” are doing by condemning them for “lying” and taking on Al Qaeda and muslim brotherhood and various Sunni and salafist factions - all are extremist islamists who ruthlessly butcher anyone who doesn't agree with them
The “FSA” either cooperates with these people or runs away from them. The UN found evidence that it was probably the “FSA” that used nonSyrian CW weapons and gassed kidnapped civilians (children) to try to call Obama on his red line and draw the West as a into removing Assad
These people are going to produce a government to replace Assad?
It's not and never was announced to be just a battle against ISIS, it is a battle against Islamic extremism by many names, a larger battle
In Syria there are NO GOOD “REBELS” if you are an alawite, Christian, or simply a secular muslim from the wrong town or tribe.
Good shooting Russia. Hope the BDA is accurate in that 50% of the “IS” command and control has been taken out and the factions are in disarray and fleeing (the mercenaries) or dying (the fanatics)
One would think. It'll be interesting to see if they even go after IS in any meaningful way.
Vox is a leftist blog.
Yes they did.
The other thing, there are minimal, if any, “moderate” rebels. They’re all POS, therefore just bomb them.
They are apparently bombing Iran too. How do you aim at Syria and hit Iran?
Russians also caught trying to sell radioactive material to ISIS, ISIS is filled with Russian-speakers, it certainly makes one wonder.
It's good to see some action taken by someone to restore order. But you're right, they'll (Russia/Iran/Syria) end up with Iraq and Libya too.
"Makes me wonder if ISIS was a KGB-like invention of the Russians, created to give them cover for expanding."
Some think you could easily substitute CIA for KGB there. All that talk about light skin color and western speech in those early videos from ISIS/ISL.
Russians have talked to the moderates, so unless one throws history out, they absolutely know nothing.
No, Russia is aiding ISIS as Assad aided ISIS, Russians were caught trying to sell nuke material to ISIS.
So, now the apologists come up with some bs statements, the Russians said they’d hit other rebels first, which they did not by the way, another lie.
The maps show from the US Military that Coalition forces are hitting ISIS and Russia barely hitting them.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34471849
So now, Russian apologists defend Putin in saying they have to go after all rebels.
Maybe. I'm hoping Putin is just trying to eliminate the competition first. I mean, why make it easier for "our friends" to take more ground previously held by ISIS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
