Northern Iraq offensive (June 2014)
The Northern Iraq offensive (June 2014) began on 4 June 2014, when the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant, assisted by various insurgent groups in the region, began a major offensive from its territory in Syria into Iraq against Iraqi and Kurdish forces, following earlier clashes that had begun in December 2013 involving guerillas.
Not to be confused with Northern Iraq offensive (August 2014).
The Islamic State and its allies captured several cities and surrounding territory, beginning with an attack on Samarra on 4 June, followed by the seizure of Mosul on 10 June, and Tikrit on 11 June. As Iraqi government forces fled south on 13 June, Kurdistan Regional Government forces took control of the oil hub of Kirkuk, part of the disputed territories of Northern Iraq.[47][48]
The Islamic State called the battles of Mosul and Saladin Governorate "the Battle of the Lion of God al-Bilawi" (Arabic: غزوة أسد الله البيلاوي), in honor of Abu Abdulrahman al-Bilawi.
A former commander of the Iraqi ground forces, Ali Ghaidan, accused Former Prime Minister of Iraq, Nuri al-Maliki of being the one who issued the order to withdraw from the city of Mosul.[49]
By late June, the Iraqi government had lost control of its borders with both Jordan and Syria.[50] Prime Minister of Iraq Nouri al-Maliki called for a national state of emergency on 10 June following the attack on Mosul, which had been seized overnight. However, despite the security crisis, Iraq's parliament did not allow Maliki to declare a state of emergency; many Sunni Arab and Kurdish legislators boycotted the session because they opposed expanding the prime minister's powers.[51]
Possible causes[edit]
Some trace the beginnings of the offensive to the Syrian civil war which gave ISIL and other Sunni jihadi groups a cause and a battlefield when it looked like their campaign in Iraq was in decline[58] while critics of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 believe the root of these events should trace back to unsuccessful nation-building as well as sectarian and ethnic division in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein's removal from power.[59] U.S. Foreign policy on Iraq under the Barack Obama administration had shifted, and there had been a withrawal of U.S. troops and military presence. Anne-Marie Slaughter wrote that had Obama forcibly intervened in the Syrian civil war, it "could have stopped the carnage spreading today in Syria and in Iraq,"[60] while Fareed Zakaria, editor of Time and former Middle Eastern policy advisor for the Bush administration, alleged that counterproductive western intervention in Iraq and Syria served to accelerate sectarian infighting in both countries and empowered radicals on all sides.[61] The Financial Times described the conflicts spanning Iraq and Syria as religious wars akin to Europe's Thirty Years' War.[62]
According to the Iraq's government critics, the pro-Shia policies of al-Maliki have been considered one of the main reasons of alienation Sunni Arabs and Kurds, which has played a significant role in the deterioration of security and the reemergence of Sunni extremists.[63][64] Conversely, al-Maliki has accused Saudi Arabia of backing the militants of ISIL, who want to carve out a Sunni caliphate in the heart of the Middle East.[65] This view was supported by writers in Foreign Policy magazine and The Daily Beast who asserted that the Saudi government, viewing the political ascendancy of Iraq's Shia populace as a threat, elected to provide the Sunni opposition with arms.[66][67] Michael Weiss traces the origins of ISIL to Ansar al-Islam's infiltration of Iraqi Kurdistan through Iran prior to the invasion of Iraq, and further cites a variety of evidence to claim that Syrian officials intentionally abetted the rise of ISIL to damage the reputation of moderate Syrian rebels.[68]
The Iraqi army which took responsibility for holding northern Iraq, collapsed when militants including ISIL and its allies, with less than 1,000 militants, attacked and seized Mosul and Tikrit easily. The Iraqi army ceded control of Kirkuk to the Kurdish Peshmerga. There are different reasons offered for this event. According to The Guardian, one scenario is that the three Iraqi generals responsible for Mosul, Tikrit, and Kirkuk didn't want to fight for a state that wasn't working.[69] According to The Daily Telegraph, the other view is that the generals in the military headquarters of these cities had shared the same Ba'athist ideology and were the first to flee.[70] Another scenario is that the Iraqi troops quickly realized they were no match for battle-hardened and ideologically motivated jihadis heading their way. A third theory is that the Kurds had long ago lost faith in prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's ability to serve either their interests or those of Iraq.[69]
Washington Institute for Near East Policy analyst Michael Knights noted that mutual opposition to the Shia-led government allowed for an alliance between the hitherto ideologically opposed ISIL and secular Ba'ath influenced insurgents such as the Naqshbandi order. Coordination between both groups granted ISIL the assistance of underground networks of former military, insurgents, Sunni officials and tribal groups sympathetic to the Ba'ath era government, thereby allowing a relatively small number of militants to execute a "coup" in Sunni regions where the banned Ba'ath party still retains a degree of support. The presence of Naqshbandi, MCIR and other secular insurgent groups led to tribes and some Awakening Councils opposed to ISIL supporting the insurrection.[71][72] Additionally, Knights reported that in the years preceding the insurrection, the Naqshbandi led by Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri aggressively forged ties to elements of Sunni civil society opposed to the Maliki government, encouraged the establishment of protest camps at sites including Hawija and attempted to co-opt Sunni militia. The arrival of ISIS militants from Syria ultimately serving as the final catalyst behind a broader revolt.[73]
Consequences[edit]
Proclamation of a Caliphate[edit]
On 29 June 2014, ISIL or ISIS announced its name change to the Islamic State and announced the formation of a 'Caliphate', which would include Iraq and Syria, and in theory covers the global Muslim population. They called upon Muslims all over the world to pledge allegiance to their Caliph, Ibrahim Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.[176] ISIL claimed to have a plan to take over the city of Arar in Saudi Arabia, which is very close to the Iraqi border.[177]
In July NBC news reported that disagreements had erupted between ISIL and two large Sunni insurgent groups in Iraq, the Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order and 1920 Revolution Brigade, leading to skirmishes between the allies on July. NBC quoted an unnamed senior U.S. counterterrorism official claiming that "the tribal groups do not necessarily follow strict Islamic law the way ISIS does, which naturally leads to conflict".[178]
Reactions[edit]
Domestic[edit]
Despite the security crisis, Iraq's Parliament was not convened and did not allow Maliki to declare a state of emergency; many Sunni and Kurdish legislators boycotted the session because they opposed expanding the prime minister's powers.[51]
Most Iraqis view the conflict as a partial Sunni uprising, rather than as a simple lunge for power by ISIL.[186]