Real challenge in Mosul is the aftermath
Iraq’s offensive to wrest control of Mosul from Daesh (the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) has come under intense media scrutiny
Outlining the context of the operation, the newspaper said: “As the history of previous offensives in Iraq has painfully demonstrated, an enduring defeat of [Daesh] will depend mostly on nonmilitary factors, including the physical and humanitarian costs it imposes and whether it is followed by workable political arrangements. The United States and its Iraqi allies failed on those fronts in 2003 and 2007 — and the outlook for Mosul in 2016 is mixed, at best.”
The Chicago Tribune took up the question of the aftermath for deeper examination. “Few doubt that the offensive now underway in Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, will end [Daesh’s] barbaric two-year rule there. The question is how to manage the aftermath so it doesn’t plunge Iraq back into civil war. You almost need a scorecard to keep track of all the players in the effort to liberate the ethnically diverse metropolis... They are all arrayed against just 5,000 or so [Daesh] fighters. It is a case where the spoils are going to be more problematic than the victory,” the paper said.
The Toronto Sun meanwhile urged Canadians and the world to support the military campaign against Daesh in Mosul and said: “There are still about a million residents living in the city, located in northern Iraq. Throughout all this time, they’ve been terrorised and held hostage by [Daesh]. Now it’s time to free them. Iraqi forces, Kurdish Peshmerga, coalition members and, yes, Canadians, are playing their part. There are dozens of Canadians on the ground, mostly advising the Kurds. And while the Trudeau government has been tight-lipped on exactly what our Canadian Forces members are up to, there can be no doubt they will be in firefights. They will be taking up arms against the enemy. [Daesh] is up against the wall. We’ve got a key stronghold cornered. It won’t be a quick or easy fight. Coalition strategists predict street-by-street combat to come.”
British paper The Independent analysed the military strategy in place for the offensive and said: “The assault on Mosul has been telegraphed well in advance and commenced broadly on the date that politicians and military commanders in countries involved in the operation have been publicly talking about. This is relevant because it shows that the need to surprise the enemy was not a factor of paramount importance. ”
But it also concurred with the majority of media outlets in worrying about the future of Mosul. “The real problem for this mission will start when that happens. The reason [Daesh] was able to make such a rapid advance in the west and north of Iraq was because it exploited the anger and resentment felt by the Sunni population at their treatment in the hands of the [Shiite]-dominated government of [former Iraqi prime minister] Nouri Al Maliki. The US and Britain, responsible for the disastrous invasion of Iraq... could be charged with being oblivious to the divisive sectarian policies being carried out.. or knowing and not foreseeing what this may bring. These bitter sectarian scars have not healed, and that is where the danger lies with Mosul.”