Three helicopters in one week.
link It is enough to make me think we are facing a planned, Russian supported, counterattack in Iraq- and it stands a decent chance of working due to the much noted incuriosity of the White House.
Why do I think that we are facing a Russian supported, planned counterattack? Before the U.S. invaded, it was
reported by Knight-Ritter services "that two former Soviet Army generals have been so deeply involved in helping to prepare the Iraqi military for a rematch with the Americans that on the eve of this war, Saddam ordered them decorated with high honors in Baghdad." It is worth reading the full article.
Update [2004-11-13 9:46:47 by Myrkury]: "Meanwhile, the U.S. military said four American helicopters had been hit by insurgent ground fire in two separate attacks near Fallujah. Their uninjured crews were able to return to base safely." there has been a tactical shift by the insurgents- they are rolling out an effective anti-air support strategy.
However, I beleive that the author (due to his sources) seriously failed to grasp both the motives and strategies of the Russians. Stated by American officials in the article is the idea that the Russian/Soviet millitary would feel the need to redeem itself in light of the American rout of the Soviet armed and trained Iraqi forces in the first Gulf war. Indeed, that Soviet/Russian military docrine as applied in Iraq would be reactive to the sting of the first Gulf war appears to be at the core of American official (mis)understanding of the nature of Russian assistance to the Iraqi resistance.
The presumption that Russian assistance was pretty much limited to modified tank battle tactics is based on assuming that Russian military doctrine is a reaction to the lessons of the first Gulf War in the same manner that modern American military doctrine is shaped by the lessons of the Vietnam conflict. This seems odd, because the transformative military defeat for the Soviets was Afghanistan- not the first Gulf War. Why would American defense analysts not consider that the lessons being taught to Saddams military by the Russian consultants were those of Afghanistan rather than the first Gulf War? I beleive it is because of the American tendency to see military matters through the lens of Vietnam. We routinely refer to Afghanistan as the Soviet's Vietnam. The comparison is apt in the sense that both wars involved Superpowers being kicked out of putative proxy states- but militarily they were vastly different conflicts that taught their participants very different lessons.
The Afghan conflict had two major phases. The initial outbreak of the resistance took some time to build, but when it hit- the Soviets were staggered. However, the Soviets soon developed the close-air support counter insurgency tactice that make it technically feasible for a modern military force to fight guerillas with fairly minimal casulaties on your side. Tactics we are using in Iraq
today. "[AC-130's would] just walk rounds down the street in front of the Bradley teams," said Staven, 43, of Great Falls, Mont. "They sent two gunships home with no rounds left."
The Soviets almost crushed the Afghan resistance, until, in the second phase of that war, the Afghans figured out (with a little help from the U.S.) how to take out the close air support of the Soviets, particularly the helicopters.
I find it far more likely that the Russian provided Iraqi resistance plan would follow the lessons they learned in Afghanistan. Recent news suggests it.
"The dominant element of the insurgency, the [U.S.] officials said, is a loose group referred to in U.S. military documents as "Sunni Arab rejectionists," consisting largely of former members of Hussein's government. These are onetime military officers and intelligence agents who U.S. officials have come increasingly to believe had some kind of plan to reorganize into cells and wage an insurgency if U.S. forces invaded." MSGOP
What would that plan require? If it was Russian supplied, probably- Time to reorganize and regroup, a broad enough rebellion to invite enough of an American military response to reveal U.S. counterinsurgency tactics, and a healthy supply of
MANPADS. (Just right for those heavy days, eh.)
They've got the first two. As to the third- there are a few MANPADS
gone missing in Iraq-
"U.S. officials have said thousands of antiaircraft missiles, most of them SA-7s, were looted from Iraqi army stockpiles and remain unaccounted for. The U.S. military initiated a buyback program for surface-to-air missiles in August 2003, paying as much as $500 apiece. Although hundreds were acquired, military officials have said that thousands remain in circulation." (BTW- how many have made it to the U.S. by now?) From 2003 there are
reports that Russian arms suppliers are finding ways into the Iraq market. Some through the
front door. Apparently we're lifting the arms embargo on the Iraqi government so they can buy lots of Russian toys for the "new" Iraqi forces, which are of course the same as the old forces.
"Just as worrisome, the insurgents have managed to infiltrate Iraqi forces, enabling them to gain key intelligence. "The infiltration is all over, from the top to the bottom, from decision making to the lower levels," says the senior Iraqi official. In the Kirkush incident, the insurgents almost certainly had inside information about the departure time and route of the buses. Iraqi Ministry of Defense sources told NEWSWEEK the Iraqi recruits had not been allowed to leave the base with their weapons because American trainers were worried that some of them might defect. "The current circumstances oblige us not to give them their weapons when they're taking vacations, in case they run away with them," said one Iraqi intelligence officer." MSGOP-Newsweek
Why would the Russians do such a thing? Well if they didn't regard keeping western powers out of South Asia as absolutely vital to their security interests- they just wouldn't be Russians. (No link, go read a book by Kipling.) SO here's the deal-
The Russians are pissed at us. They want us out of South Asia, and preferably cut back from hyperpower to superpower status. They see everything in light of Afghanistan and they want not another Vietnam for the U.S.- but a first Afghanistan. As a bonus they will get us to buy the weapons systems that will wind up being used against us. And Bush will thank them for it because he looked into Putin's soul! Vladimir must've been laughing about that until vodka shot out his nose.
If you are curious as to the implications of fighting an adaptive modern supplied Iraqi insurgency, check out a recent piece by the eternally dry
Anthony Cordesman
One final moderating note, the downed helicopters are presumed to have been hit with ordinary RPG fire. I don't know how distinguishable that is from a MANPAD hit.
Update [2004-11-17 22:59:23 by Myrkury]: We've lost several more helicopters and surveilance drones in the last few days- [alternative media source http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=100575&list=/home.php] and [SCLM http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/10174285.htm]