In this series of articles we will hope to examine why the current campaign to retake Mosul is tantamount to the destruction of Mosul. That, sometimes, patience is a virtue and when a country acts it should act as a unified force not a fragmented society.

As the end of the year approaches the Iraqi government will begin the final stages of preparation to reclaim the city of Mosul. What will be left of the city of Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, is another topic entirely. So far the Iraqi government has been able to retake major swaths of land from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) at a large cost. Each battle for a new city seems to bring another level of destruction. This destruction is not only wrought by ISIL but also caused by the liberating forces. Mosul will be the largest prize for the Iraqi National Army since the city’s fall in 2014. But does the Iraqi government have enough forces to retake Mosul? Are the Iraqi forces unified enough to hold together against what will be a trapped foe? Is the strategic plan to retake Mosul sound to begin with? Better yet, does the Iraqi government have a plan to hold Mosul after a successful military campaign?

Currently the goal of the Iraqi National Army is to envelop the city of Mosul beginning from the North and South, but also cutting off escape routes to the West. Fleeing ISIL fighters to the east will run directly into Kurdish Peshmerga, so the eastern front is effectively blockaded against ISIL. In each battle that the Iraqi National Army, usually backed by the Badr Militia (Shi’ite militia), has successfully won, they have allowed ISIL fighters to leave the combat zone. In Ramadi, ISIL fighters were fleeing the battlefield dressed as women. In Tikrit, ISIL forces once they realized the city was lost packed up their trucks and fled to Mosul. Throughout the successful military operations in the Anbar and Nineveh provinces of Iraq ISIL has been allowed to retreat. Even with the ability to retreat ISIL has made sure to torch oil fields, booby trap homes and roads, as well as leave munitions dumps booby trapped. The invasion into Mosul will see the same type of total warfare tactics displayed by ISIL in Ramadi and Tikrit. It’s understandable that the Iraqi government wants to crush ISIL in Mosul, erase them from the map. Therefore the lure of enveloping Mosul, cutting off all lines of retreat and supply, is a very attractive idea. However, let’s not forget the timeless words of Sun Tzu, from the Art of War–

“To a surrounded enemy, you must leave a way of escape.”

While an old text, there is reason the maxims of Sun Tzu still ring true today; they work. We in the West can look back to World War II where this maxim was put under examination. The Nazi Army was fighting on two fronts, to the west they contended with American and British forces while to the east Russian forces marched to Berlin. American and British forces often allowed for escape routes for Nazi forces, simply because fighting a cornered animal is extremely dangerous. The Russian Army decided the opposite, to envelop a city and to crush all Nazi forces. As the war in mainland Europe drew to a close two distinct patterns emerged. Nazi officers and soldiers on the western front began to surrender en masse to American and British forces. They knew by surrendering their fates would no longer be in their own hands but they may still have a chance to live. This also benefited American and British forces since it eased the burden on their soldiers. Rarely are lives lost when the enemy surrenders. This behavior was partly induced by previously allowing Nazi troops avenues of retreat. It allowed for less loss of life and damage to the existing infrastructure. The fighting on the eastern front of Nazi controlled territory was a literal battle to the death (win or die) until the fall of Berlin. The loss of life and the devastation caused to cities and towns would take decades to rebuild. The Russian Army would take years to rebuild as the causality count of their annihilation strategy tested their man power reserves.

To surround Mosul, allowing ISIL no means of escape will amplify the violence to new levels in Iraq. Instead of weary ISIL fighters thinking of fleeing they will absolutely know it’s either fight or be captured by a predominately Shi’ite force. ISIL is a Sunni organization. The thought that large swaths of Sunni ISIL fighters will surrender to the Iraqi National Army is a fantasy. The belief that ISIL will not amply there force by practically booby trapping as much of the city as possible is a fantasy. The notion that Sunni’s living in ISIL territory, who desperately want to be rid of ISIL, will readily welcome Shi’ite militias as saviors is by far the most fanciful idea. The upcoming battle for Mosul under the current strategy set forth by the Iraqi government may lead to a victory, but Pyrrhic victory. That is to say they indeed may obliterate the ISIL presence in Mosul but at the cost of most of their attacking force. Then who is left to protect the city.