GIS Forum
In previous discussions we looked at how GIS can be used in counter
terrorism and why it is important to know how our GIS products and analysis
will be used by the end-consumer. We will now focus on the GIS data needed
to build products and provide analysis for our DC threat scenario.
Review of Scenario. The Washington Regional Threat Analysis Center (WRTAC)
Director has asked you to provide an overview of the Washington, DC embassy
area around Massachusetts Avenue, NW to support the law enforcement, medical
and other first responders who would respond to any terrorist incident. She
specifically wants to know where the embassies of governments participating
in Operation Inherent Resolve are located, whether there are any clusters of
these embassies, and the location and proximity to the clusters of police
stations, fire stations, and hospitals. She provided the CRS report to aid
you in the identification of the governments participating in OIR.(See attached PDF)
In Labs 3 and 4 you located and imported street data for Washington, DC.
This discussion contains three questions for you to answer.
What other data is needed to create the product and provide the analysis?
The WRTAC Director asked for clusters of embassies. How would we define what
a cluster is in this scenario?
She also asked for the proximity of the clusters to police stations, fire
stations, and hospitals as she is interested in first responder response
times. How would you measure “distance” in this scenario?
Coalition Contributions to Countering the
Islamic State
Kathleen J. McInnis
Analyst in International Security
November 18, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R44135
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service
Contents
The Global Campaign to Counter the Islamic State ……………………………………………………………… 1
Military Aspects of the Coalition ………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
Recent Significant Changes to the Counter-IS Coalition ………………………………………………………. 3
France ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Canada ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
Russia ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Turkey ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6
Possible Enhanced NATO Involvement? ………………………………………………………………………. 6
Challenges to Coalition Coherence ………………………………………………………………………………. 7
Figures
Figure 1. Country Participation at Training and Capacity Building Bases in Iraq ……………………. 11
Tables
Table 1. Contributions to the Military Coalition to Defeat IS, by Country and Capability ………… 8
Contacts
Author Contact Information …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 1
The Global Campaign to Counter the Islamic State1
On September 10, 2014, President Obama announced the formation of a global coalition to
“degrade and ultimately defeat” the Islamic State (IS, aka the Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant, ISIL/ISIS or the Arabic acronym Daesh).
2
Subsequently, some 60 nations and partner
organizations agreed to participate, contributing either military forces or resources (or both) to the
campaign.
3
In Brussels in December 2014, these 60 partners agreed to organize themselves along
five “lines of effort,”
4
(by contrast, the United States strategy involves nine lines of effort), with
at least two countries in the lead for each:
5
supporting military operations, capacity building, and training (led by the United
States and Iraq) ;
stopping the flow of foreign terrorist fighters (led by The Netherlands and
Turkey);
cutting off IS access to financing and funding (led by Italy, the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia and the United States);
addressing associated humanitarian relief and crises (led by Germany and the
United Arab Emirates); and
exposing IS’s true nature (led by the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom,
and the United States).
According to the U.S. State Department, participants in the coalition include Albania, the Arab
League, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada,
Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, the European Union, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kosovo,
Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco,
The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of
Korea, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sweden,
Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States.
6
Each country is contributing to the coalition in a manner commensurate with its national interests
and comparative advantage. Contributions include both military and non-military assistance,
although reporting on non-military contributions tends to be sporadic. Some illustrative examples
of the kinds of counter-IS assistance countries provided as the coalition was being formed in
1
For more information on the status of efforts to defeat IS, see CRS Report R43612, The “Islamic State” and U.S.
Policy, by Christopher M. Blanchard and Carla E. Humud.
2
Testimony from Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, House Armed Services Committee, June 17, 2015.
3
Precise figures on participating states are difficult to determine, as different governments report different figuresFor
example, the United Kingdom reports that 63 nations participate (https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/isil-
uk-government-response—3) while the United States maintains 65 countries are currently participating
(http://www.state.gov/s/seci/index.htm). The variation in numbers may be due to the fact that coalition participation
tends to change over time.
4
U.S. Department of State, “Joint statement issued by partners at the Counter-ISIL Coalition Meeting,” December 3,
2014. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/12/234627.htm
5
Remarks by General John Allen, Special Presidental Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter-ISIL, Doha, Qatar,
June 3, 2015. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/events/2015/06/01-2015-us-islamic-world-forum/
060315brookingsdoha
6
U.S. Department of State, Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL webpage,
http://www.state.gov/s/seci/
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 2
September 2014 include Switzerland’s donation of $9 million in aid to Iraq, Belgium’s
contribution of 13 tons of aid to Iraq generally, Italy’s contribution of $2.5 million of weaponry
(including machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and a million rounds of ammunition), and
Japan’s granting of $6 million in emergency aid to specifically help displaced people in Northern
Iraq.
7
Military Aspects of the Coalition
Operation Inherent Resolve, the military component of the global coalition to defeat the Islamic
State, began on August 8, 2014. Subsequently, according to United States Central Command and
open source reporting, some 22 nations have joined the military coalition. The military campaign
has two primary elements – airstrikes and training and equipping of local forces – both of which
are designed to empower Iraqis and Syrians to take on the Islamic State while minimizing the
number of U.S. and coalition “boots on the ground.” According to the Department of Defense, the
coalition has conducted upwards of 8,125 airstrikes,
8
destroyed 16,075 targets as of November
13, 2015; as of October 31, 2015, the United States spent $5 billion on counter-IS military
operations.
9
In terms of the legal basis for the coalition, several United Nations Security Council
Resolutions—in particular, 2170, 2178 and 2199—call on UN member states to take a variety of
steps (to include coalition activities such as countering terrorist financing, assisting with
humanitarian relief, countering IS messaging and assisting with stabilization support), although
these fall short of explicitly authorizing the use of military force against the Islamic State. Some
coalition participants have cited the Iraqi Government’s letter to the United Nations Security
Council requesting defense assistance and stating that Iraq faces threats from IS safe havens in
Syria as a further legal basis for participating in the military coalition. With respect to the U.S.
contribution to the military campaign, some observers have argued that a new authorization for
the use of military force (AUMF) is required;
10
the Obama Administration maintains that it
already has the necessary legal basis to prosecute the campaign through the 2001 AUMF (P.L.
107-40), and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (2002
AUMF; P.L. 107-243).
11
Even so, U.S. Administration officials underscore that the military
campaign is only one part of the overall effort to counter the Islamic State, asserting that success
depends upon the ability to make progress in non-military areas.
12
On September 16, 2015, General Lloyd Austin, Commander of United States Central Command,
testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, noting that U.S. and coalition efforts to
train and equip Syrian soldiers to counter the Islamic State had produced only a handful of
troops
7
Sebastian Payne, “What the 60-plus members of the anti-Islamic State coalition are doing,” The Washington Post,
September 25, 2014.
8
Jim Garamone, “Wormuth Stresses Whole-of-Government Approach to ISIL,” DoD News, July 13, 2015.
9
U.S. Department of Defense, “Operation Inherent Resolve: Targeted Operations against ISIL Terrorists,” Available at
http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0814_Inherent-Resolve Accessed November 16, 2015.
10
See, for example, Richard Fontaine & Vance Serchuk, “Can We Finally Get An AUMF Right? As Congress debates
the war authorization against Islamic State, it should learn from past mistakes” Politico, February 15, 2015; Paul Kane,
“Congress Split Over Ways to Face the Islamic State,” The Washington Post, February 22, 2015.
11
For more information, see CRS Report R43760, A New Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic
State: Issues and Current Proposals in Brief, by Matthew C. Weed.
12
Jim Garamone, “Wormuth Stresses Whole-of-Government Approach to ISIL,” DoD News, July 13, 2015.
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 3
active on the battlefield.
13
Subsequently, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter decided to cancel the
Syrian train and equip program as it was configured.
14
Instead, the United States is currently
focusing on arming already existing anti-IS militias in Syria through, among other things,
airdropping ammunition and equipment,
15
authorizing the deployment of Special Operations
Forces to assist with logistics and planning, and coordinating U.S. operations with those of
opposition militia groups.
16
In late October, the Administration reportedly began considering a
number of different options for training and equipping local counter-IS forces.
17
Administration
officials have described their intended overall approach to the redesigned program as
“transactional” and performance-based, with Syrian beneficiaries receiving U.S. support as
opportunities present themselves and relative to their effectiveness on the battlefield and the
alignment of their actions with U.S. interests.
18
The failures of the initial DOD Syria train and equip program, combined with the November 13
attacks on Paris, have led observers to question the overall efficacy of the overall U.S. strategic
approach. While some analysts maintain that defeating the Islamic State will require, among other
things, the injection of significant numbers of U.S. and coalition ground troops,
19
the Obama
Administration maintains that doing so would be counter-productive.
20
Recent Significant Changes to the Counter-IS
Coalition
Coalition participation tends to be fluid, with each country contributing capabilities that are
commensurate with their own national interests and comparative advantage. Since August 2015,
several coalition participants have changed the roles, missions, and capabilities of the military
forces they are applying to counter the Islamic State. Russia also initiated military operations in
Syria, but it did not begin robustly targeting Islamic State forces until Russian authorities
concluded in mid-November that a bomb had brought down a Russian airliner in Egypt in
October 2015. Indeed, Russia’s military operations in Syria to support the Asad regime appear to
be independent of the global counter-IS coalition’s activities.
13
General Lloyd Austin, “Testimony Before the Senate Armed Services Committee: U.S. Strategy Against ISIS,”
September 16, 2015.
14
Michael D. Shear, Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt, “Obama Administration Ends Effort to Train Syrians to Combat
ISIS,” The New York Times, October 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/10/world/middleeast/pentagon-
program-islamic-state-syria.html?_r=0
15
Department of Defense Press Briefing by Secretary Carter and Press Secretary Cook in the Pentagon Briefing Room,
October 19, 2015.
16
Barbara Starr and Jeremy Diamond, “Syria: Obama Authorizes Boots on Ground to Fight ISIS,” CNN, October 30,
2015. http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/30/politics/syria-troops-special-operations-forces/
17
Christina Wong, “Pentagon Weighing Deeper U.S. Involvement in Iraq,” The Hill, October 26, 2015.
18
See CRS Report R43612, The “Islamic State” and U.S. Policy, by Christopher M. Blanchard and Carla E. Humud
19
Susan Heavey, “Bush, Other Republicans Back More Troops to Fight Islamic State,” Reuters, November 16, 2015.
20
The White House Office of the Press Secretary, “Press Conference by President Obama –Antalya, Turkey”
November 16, 2015. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/16/press-conference-president-obama-
antalya-turkey
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 4
France
France has conducted military operations alongside the United States to counter the Islamic State
for over a year. From February 23 to April 18, 2015, it deployed the aircraft carrier Charles de
Gaulle to the U.S. 5
th
Fleet’s area of operations, from which French Super Etendard and Rafale
fighter aircraft conducted airstrikes in Iraq.
21
It also used fighter aircraft forward deployed in the
U.A.E. and Jordan to conduct strikes.
22
However, during this period, France limited its operations
to Iraq, citing two primary constraints: the lack of a formal international legal mandate to pursue
operations in Syria, and a desire not to inadvertently support the Asad regime.
French leaders changed their position in fall 2015. Responding to the refugee crisis
23
as well as to
increased concerns that further attacks against France were being planned from IS strongholds, in
early September 2015 France initiated reconnaissance missions in Syria.
24
In late September,
citing France’s legitimate right to self-defense, French military forces conducted airstrikes against
targets in Syria,
25
focusing on training camps. In order to strike at an Islamic State source of
income, it also targeted an oil and gas depot.
26
In the wake of the November 13 attacks in Paris, President Hollande announced that France
would intensify its military campaign against the Islamic State. On November 15, French fighter
jets conducted their most aggressive airstrikes of the campaign thus far, striking a command
center and training camp in the Islamic State’s headquarters, Raqqa.
27
The airstrikes were
coordinated with the United States and facilitated by the provision of U.S. intelligence and
targeting information.
28
France will also triple the number of fighter jets conducting airstrikes
against the Islamic State by redeploying the Charles de Gaulle into theater, although the decision
to do so was finalized before the attacks at a defense council meeting on November 5,
2015.
29
Canada
Since his Liberal Party won a parliamentary majority on October 19, Canada’s new Prime
Minister, Justin Trudeau, has reiterated his intention to augment the outgoing Conservative
government’s commitment to countering the Islamic State. On October 20, Trudeau announced to
the United States that Canada intended to withdraw its combat aircraft from the coalition, but that
it would seek to accommodate some 25,000 Syrian refugees.
30
The Trudeau government has not
21
United States Central Command, “French, U.S. Navies Integrate Under Operation Inherent Resolve,” April 10, 2015.
http://www.centcom.mil/en/news/articles/french-us-navies-integrate-under-operation-inherent-resolve
22
Frédéric Lert, “France to Deploy Charles de Gaulle Again for Anti-IS Strikes,” IHS Janes 360, November 12, 2015,
http://www.janes.com/article/55939/france-to-deploy-charles-de-gaulle-again-for-anti-is-strikes
23
CRS In Focus IF10259, Europe’s Migration and Refugee Crisis, by Kristin Archick and Rhoda Margesson
24
“France Could Launch Air Strikes on ISIS in Syria: Hollande” Reuters, September 7, 2015.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/france-could-launch-air-strikes-isis-hollande-n422871
25
Elaine Ganley, “France Carries Out Airstrikes In Syria Against Islamic State,” Associated Press International,
September 27. 2015.
26
Alissa J. Rubin and Anne Barnard, “France Strikes ISIS Targets in Syria in Retaliation for Attacks” The New York
Times, November 15, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/16/world/europe/paris-terror-attack.html?_r=0
27
President François Hollande, Speech before a joint session of Parliament, November 16, 2015, http://ambafrance-
us.org/spip.php?article7185.
28
Rubin & Barnard.
29
Lert.
30
DeNeen L. Brown, “Canada’s New Leader to Pull Planes from Anti-Islamic State Coalition,” The Washington Post,
October 20, 201. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/meet-canadas-new-prime-minister-justin-
(continued…)
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 5
indicated it will be reversing its decision in the wake of the Paris attacks. The timing of the
withdrawal of combat aircraft is currently unclear. On November 17, Trudeau announced that
Canada’s training mission will be expanded, surpassing the current contingent of 69 soldiers
based in northern Iraq. The details of that expanded mission are currently being coordinated with
the United States.
31
Russia32
On September 30, 2015, Russia officially entered the conflict in Syria, conducting airstrikes. It
had previously deployed some 600 marines to guard its air base in Lattakia, an Asad regime
stronghold.
33
Further, a press report citing an unnamed U.S. official said that recent Russian
shipments include tanks and artillery to protect the expanded Russian facilities, as well as
armored personnel carriers, hundreds of naval infantry personnel, modular housing units to house
about 1,500 people, and air traffic control equipment.
34
The entry of Russian military forces, and
in particular close air support and combat aviation capabilities, into theater led the Obama
Administration to conclude a detailed agreement on de-conflicting airspace between the two
countries.
35
Because of Moscow’s long history and relationship with the Asad regime, Russia’s strategic
priorities in Syria appear to fundamentally differ from those of the U.S.-led counter-IS coalition,
which has generally argued that Asad could not remain in power as a result of any settlement
arrangements. These strategic differences have been manifest in Russia’s military targeting
priorities to date. Through mid-November, Russia had largely struck what it referred to as
“terrorist” elements opposed to the Asad regime, including—but not limited to—the Islamic
State.
36
As the Secretary General of NATO stated on November 17, “But what we have seen so far
is that most of [Russian] military actions have been targeted at targets not in ISIL-controlled
areas.”
37
This targeting disposition may change; on November 17, Alexander Bortnikov, head of
the Russian FSB stated that “we can unequivocally say” that the bombing of an Airbus A321 that
carried Russian holidaymakers from Sharm el Sheikh to St. Petersberg “was a terrorist act.” An
(…continued)
trudeau/2015/10/20/41dea584-772a-11e5-bc80-9091021aeb69_story.html
31
Bill Curry and Steven Chase, “Canada to send More Military Trainers to Iraq in Battle against IS: Trudeau,” The
Globe and Mail, November 17
th
, 2015. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-to-increase-number-of-
military-trainers-in-iraq-trudeau/article27291475/
32
For more information, see CRS Insight IN10360, Russian Deployments in Syria Complicate U.S. Policy, by Carla E.
Humud et al.
33
Steven Lee Myers and Eric Schmitt, “Russian Military Uses Syria as Proving Ground, and West Takes Notice,” The
New York Times, October 14, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/world/middleeast/russian-military-uses-syria-
as-proving-ground-and-west-takes-notice.html
34
Agence France Presse, “Russia Sends Tanks, Artillery to Syria: U.S. Official,” September 14, 2015.
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-sends-tanks-artillery-syria-us-official-190705106.html
35
Helene Cooper, “A Semantic Downgrade for U.S.-Russian Talks about Operations in Syria,” The New York Times,
October 7, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/world/middleeast/a-semantic-downgrade-for-us-russian-talks-
about-operations-in-syria.html
36
Michael Kofman, “The Russian Intervention in Syria: Policy Options and Exit Strategies” War on the Rocks, October
21, 2015.
37
“Doorstep Statement by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Upon His Arrival at the European Council,” 17
November, 2015. http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_124518.htm
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 6
Islamic State-affiliated group claimed responsibility.
38
The next day, Russian long-range bombers
and sea-based cruise missiles attacked Raqqa.
39
Turkey40
In July 2015, Turkey expanded its participation in the coalition by taking direct military action in
Syria and allowing other coalition planes to utilize Turkish airspace and bases to conduct strikes
on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Shortly after Turkey commenced military strikes against
the Islamic State in Syria in late July, Turkey resumed hostilities with the Kurdistan Workers’
Party (PKK), ending a cease fire that had been in place since March 2013. As Prime Minister
Davutoglu said in September 2015, “by mounting operations against [IS] and the PKK at the
same time, we also prevented the PKK from legitimizing itself.” Turkey is reportedly worried
about recent gains by the People’s Protection Units (Kurdish acronym YPG), and about increased
YPG closeness with the United States because of the YPG’s emergence as arguably the most
capable anti-IS ground force in Syria. Some observers speculate that Turkey is more concerned
about containing Kurdish political aspirations (with their potential cross-border implications) than
countering Islamist extremism at and within its borders.
41
Possible Enhanced NATO Involvement?
On July 31, 2015, at the request of the Iraqi government, NATO agreed to launch a military
assistance program for Iraq, which will be based out of Jordan and Turkey, and “includes
measures of support in seven priority areas: advice on security sector reform; countering
improvised explosive devices, explosive ordnance disposal and de-mining; civil military
planning; cyber defense; military medicine and medical assistance; military training; and civil
emergency planning.”
42
Teams are presently being sent to assess Iraqi needs.
43
NATO also
deployed six Patriot missile defense systems to Turkey,
44
although they are scheduled to be
withdrawn in December of this year unless NATO authorizes their continued presence.
The Paris terrorist attacks have raised the question as to whether the Alliance’s “Article V”
collective defense provision—which states that an attack on one NATO ally is an attack on all—
should be invoked.
45
At present, this appears unlikely, especially given other NATO priorities,
including combating Russian aggression in Central and Eastern Europe. Further, as one unnamed
38
Andrew Osborn, “Putin Vows Payback After Confirmation of Egypt Plane Bomb,” Reuters, November 17, 2015.
39
Adam Withnall, “Russia Launches Cruise Missiles at ISIS Raqqa Stronghold in Syria,” The Independent, November
18, 2015.
40
For more information, see CRS Report R41368, Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations, by Jim Zanotti, and CRS
Report R44000, Turkey: Background and U.S. Relations In Brief, by Jim Zanotti
41
Orhan Coskun and Dasha Afanasieva, “Turkey stages first air strikes on Islamic State in Syria,” Reuters, July 24,
2015.
42
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, “NATO Secretary General Statement on Defense Capacity Building Package for
Iraq” July 31, 2015.
43
Interview with DOD official, 16 November 2015.
44
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, “NATO Support to Turkey.” http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/
topics_92140.htm
45
Krishnadev Calamur, “Will NATO Respond to the Attacks on Paris? If France invokes Article 5 of the alliance’s
charter, it will launch a joint response against the Islamic State” The Atlantic, November 15, 2015. Available at
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/11/nato-paris-attack-article-5/416097/ Note: Article V was
invoked after the September 11
th
, 2001 attacks on the United States.
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 7
official observed, if France intended to request Article V support, it would have already done so.
46
According to the NATO Secretary General, while NATO allies are working to counter the Islamic
State, much of that work falls outside NATO’s purview:
There has been no request for invoking Article 5. But many NATO Allies have offered
France support and help. And we are doing so in many different ways, not least by
sharing intelligence, working more closely with France in their efforts to fight ISIL.
47
Challenges to Coalition Coherence
Organizing and prosecuting a coalition campaign presents a variety of challenges in addition to
the military task of defeating an opponent. In the first instance, without a single authority
responsible for prioritizing and adjudicating between different multinational civilian and military
lines of effort, different actors often work at cross-purposes without intending to do so. These
coalition coordination challenges were demonstrated in recent military campaigns (particularly in
Afghanistan). Exacerbating matters, other actors in the region—some of whom are coalition
partners—have different, and often conflicting, longer-term regional geopolitical interests from
those of the United States or other coalition members. This, in turn, may lead nations
participating in the coalition to advance their goals and objectives in ways that might contradict
each other. Finally, different participants in the coalition have different tolerances for risk, and
therefore will determine “rules of engagement” (ROE), or “caveats” that can constrain the ability
of military commanders from employing military force as they see fit. While navigable, all these
factors can make it considerably more difficult to consolidate gains and achieve campaign
success.
This brief report offers two figures. The first is a chart depicting participants in the military
campaign, and what specifically each country is contributing in terms of military forces,
according to open source data compiled by CRS and information provided by United States
Central Command at the time of writing. The second maps the training and capacity building
bases across Iraq, and key nations operating out of those bases as reported by United States
Central Command and supplemented with open source reporting.
This report update reflects significant changes regarding the coalition’s composition since August
3, 2015.
46
Euractive.com “France ‘at war’ Inaugurates EU’s Mutual Defense Clause,” November 17, 2015.
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/global-europe/france-war-inaugurates-eus-mutual-defence-clause-319531
47
“Doorstep Statement by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Upon His Arrival at the European Council,” 17
November, 2015. http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_124518.htm
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 8
Table 1. Contributions to the Military Coalition to Defeat IS,
by Country and Capability
TRAINING
MISSION
CONTRIBUTIONS
AIRSTRIKE
CONTRIBUTIONS
COUNTRY
FOR
IRAQ
FOR
SYRIA FOR IRAQ FOR SYRIA
Australia 500a N/A
6 hornet fighters, a
tanker aircraft, and
airborne control
plane
N/A
Bahrain N/A N/A N/A
Unspecified number
of planes
Belgium 35 N/A Mission discontinuedb N/A
Canada 69 N/A
Announced withdrawal of 6 CF-18 Hornet
fighter jets, although timing unclear. Also
unclear whether1 CC 150 Polaris Air
Transport, 2 CP-140 Aurora surveillance
aircraft will remain in theater.
Denmark 120 N/A N/A N/A
France 200 N/A
6 Dassault Rafale M multi role fighters,
6 Mirage 2000D aircraft, 1 Ravitailement C135
aircraft, 1 Atlantic 2 Maritime Patrol aircraft, 1
cassard-class air defense frigate. Charles
DeGaulle aircraft carrier includes 26 additional
fighter aircraft (pending arrival).
Finland 47
N/A N/A N/A
United Kingdom 275 N/A
630 personnel;
unspecified number
of Royal Air Force
Tornado GR4
Aircraft
Unspecified number
of planesd
Germany 100 N/A N/A N/A
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 9
TRAINING
MISSION
CONTRIBUTIONS
AIRSTRIKE
CONTRIBUTIONS
COUNTRY
FOR
IRAQ
FOR
SYRIA FOR IRAQ FOR SYRIA
Italy 350e N/A
190 Air Force
personnel, 4
Tornado IDS
(Intelligence,
Surveillance,
Reconnaissance), 1
Boeing KC-767A
(Air-to-Air
Refuelling), and 2
Predator UAV
(Intelligence,
Surveillance,
Reconnaissance).
N/A
Jordan N/A
Training
grounds
Unspecified number
of planes
20 F-16 aircraftf
NATO
Unspecified
number of
troops
N/A N/A N/A
New Zealand 143 N/A N/A N/A
Netherlands 130 N/A
250 personnel,
6 F-16 aircraft (plus 2
reserve aircraft)g
N/A
Norway 120 N/A N/A N/A
Portugal 30 N/A N/A N/A
Qatar N/A
Training
grounds
N/A
Unspecified number
of planes
Saudi Arabia N/A
Training
grounds
N/A
Unspecified number
of planes
Spain 300 N/A N/A N/A
Sweden 35h N/A N/A N/A
Turkey N/A
Training
grounds
N/A
Long-range artillery,
unspecified number
of planesi
United Arab
Emirates
N/A N/A N/A 8 F-16 aircraftj
United States 3,550 700k
Unspecified, but largest number of aircraft
and personnel
Total: 5,954l 700
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 10
Sources: United States Central Command data, augmented by data gathered through open source reports.
Notes: Country contributions are approximate due to rotations in and out of theater. These numbers are
subject to rapid change based on changing circumstances.
a. Australia recently announced that it would send 330 extra troops on a two year mission to train Iraqi
soldiers, with about 200 soldiers in Iraq prior to that announcement.
b. Belgium’s contribution to the airstrikes against ISIL ended June 30, 2015, due to financial constraints. Six
Belgian F-16 fighters spent nine months in Jordan.
c. France began conducting ground-based airstrikes against Syrian targets in September 2015. France’s capacity
to conduct airstrikes will increase when the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier arrives in theater.
d. On July 17 2015, the Ministry of Defense confirmed that British pilots had taken part in military strikes in
Syria, despite the fact that Parliament voted two years ago against military action there.
e. These Carabineri troops perform police training tasks.
f. Up to 20 F-16 aircraft participated in airstrikes against ISIL in response to the killing of a Jordanian pilot. It is
unclear if this many F-16’s participate in regular airstrikes against ISIL.
g. It is unclear if all of these aircraft are for combat sorties against ISIL or if they are force protection for
Dutch ground forces.
h. The Swedish Parliament approved 35 troops to be sent to Iraq, but have stated that they are willing to raise
that number to 120.
i. Based on a recent agreement struck between the United States and Turkey on July 23, 2015.
j. The number of F-16’s is based off of press photos of the UAE squadron deployed in Jordan.
k. The United States has pledged 400 to 700 troops to train Syrian forces. It is unclear how many forces are
currently in place.
l. Based off of the data in this chart; not including the unspecified number of troops contributed by NATO.
m. Seven Danish F16 aircraft were redeployed to Denmark for refitting and refurbishment in late August 2015.
It is unclear whether, and when, they will be sent back to theater. Denmark also contributes a C-130J.
n. According to press reports, Canada will be increasing its troop levels for the training mission.
Coalition Contributions to Countering the Islamic State
Congressional Research Service 11
Figure 1. Country Participation at Training and Capacity Building Bases in Iraq
Source: United States Central Command and Open Source Reporting.
Author Contact Information
Kathleen J. McInnis
Analyst in International Security
kmcinnis@crs.loc.gov, 7-1416