Breaking Defense contributor James    Kitfield spokewithGen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the    Joint Chiefs of Staff, during Dunfords swing    throughJapan, Singapore, Australia, Wake Island, and    Hawaii. BD readers know that Defense    Secretary Jim Mattis promised Sen. John McCain yesterday that    America would get a new    Afghan strategy by mid-July. In this second part of    Kitfields interview, Dunford talks Turkey, Kurds, Daesh (ISIS)    and whether the US will boost the number of troops stationed in    Afghanistan. Read on! The    Editor.  
    BD: Just while you were meeting with your    Asian counterparts in Singapore and Sydney, Australia, there    were terrorist attacks claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and    Syria    (ISIS) in London, Melbourne, and Kabul. What are we and our    allies doing to try and contain the threat from ISIS foreign    fighters returning to their home regions and launching    attacks?  
    Dunford: One of the issues we talked about    with our allies is that there are three pieces of connective    tissue that unites these terrorist groups: the flow of foreign    fighters, the flow of resources, and a common ideology. And we    need to cut that connective tissue. A primary way we are doing    that is through a broad intelligence and information sharing    network that we have established with the members of the    anti-ISIS coalition, who all share a common view of this threat    of ISIS foreign fighters.  
    A critical part of that effort is    Operation Gallant Phoenix, an intelligence sharing arrangement    that started out with eight or so countries, and has since    expanded to 19nations who have committed to sharing this    intelligence. Were in the process of trying to expand that    initiative to even more countries. Gallant Phoenix allows    allied nations not only to share intelligence on the foreign    fighter threat, but also to get that information back to their    law enforcement and homeland security agencies so they have    visibility on the movement of foreign fighters in order to deal    with this challenge.  
    BD: Is the United States annihilation    battle plan in Iraq and Syria that youve spoken of also    designed to contain the foreign fighter threat?  
    Dunford: Yes. When Secretary Mattis looked    at our anti-ISIS campaign, he concluded that in some instances    we were essentially just pushing the enemy from one location to    another. He asked me and the military chain-of-command to make    a conscious effort not to allow ISIS fighters to just flee from    one location to another, but rather to deliberately seek to    annihilate the enemy. That was the commanders intent, and    our commanders on the ground have tried to meet that goal of    annihilating the enemy in order to mitigate the risk of these    terrorists showing up someplace else.  
    BD: Has that worked in the battles to retake    Mosul and Raqqa, the twin capitals of ISIS self-proclaimed    caliphate in Iraq and Syria?  
    Dunford: Were certainly emphasizing it to    a greater degree, and having some success. But I would never    claim that means that all enemy fighters are being killed. One    tactic they have adopted is to mix in with the civilian    population, and that makes targeting them very difficult. We    cant just indiscriminately bomb people who are leaving these    cities. Even with this annihilation battle plan, we have to be    very careful about civilian casualties.  
    BD: How do you see ISF and coalition    operations unfolding after Mosul is recaptured?  
    Dunford: Well, we will obviously take our    cue from [Iraqi Prime Minister Haider] Abadi, who will decide    on the sequence of operations after Mosul is recaptured. But    there are some major areas where ISIS is still present that are    under consideration. Iraqi Security Forces will still need to    clear ISIS out of territory west of Mosul to the Syrian border,    for instance, and there are also pockets of ISIS fighters    southeast in Kirkuk Province and in the middle Euphrates River    Valley. Of course its going to take the Iraqis some time to    regenerate their forces after the battle for Mosul, so our plan    is to continue keeping pressure on those ISIS forces until the    main ISF forces are ready again.  
    BD: How have you handled Turkeys objections    to the U.S. decision to arm the SDF, which include Kurdish    forces that Ankara views as terrorists?  
    Dunford: I will tell you that the    coalition is also enthusiastic about the growth of the SDF.    [U.S. special envoy Brett] McGurk has led the effort to empower    an Arab component of the SDF that will provide security and    governance in Raqqa after the operation to recapture the city    is finished, which answers some of Turkeys    concerns.  
    Weve made other assurances to    Turkey, including making sure the arming and equipping of    the SDF is done in a way that is narrowly focused on its    ability to recapture Raqqa. Were also helped the Turkish    military rebuild after the challenges theyve faced in recent    months, and were sharing intelligence with Ankara about the    [Iraqi Kurdish terrorist group] PKK. Secretary Tillerson is    also working very closely with his Turkish counterpart to make    sure that the Geneva Process is front and center in our    negotiations about Syrias future, which also addresses Turkish    issues. So we have done everything we could to address Turkish    concerns, and I personally have made on the order of nine    visits to Turkey to speak with my counterpart there. I think    the Turks appreciate that.  
    BD: What is the status of the Astana Plan that    Turkey signed last month with Russia and Iran, which calls for    the creation of four de-escalation zones in Syria?  
    Dunford: Well, the United States was an    observer at those talks, but we decided not to formally    participate in a process which includes Iran as a guarantor.    Secretary Tillerson has said publicly that we welcome any    agreement that results in a cessation of hostilities, but we    believe the Geneva Process  and not Astana  is the right    vehicle for reaching a political solution in Syria. And while    there was some indication of reduced violence in some areas    after the Astana Plan was signed, we also saw the Syrian regime    conduct major offensive operations in one of the de-escalation    zones just in recent days. So its fair to say that    negotiations for a ceasefire remain a work in    progress.  
    BD: Speaking of Iran, have you seen any letup    in its destabilizing activities in the region?  
    Dunford: No, I havent seen any change    in Irans    behavior. The Republican Guards Quds Force continues to    exert a malign influence in Iraq and Syria through proxy forces    and militias, and in Lebanon through Lebanese Hezbollah. Irans    support for [Shiite rebels] in Yemen has also been unhelpful,    and Tehran continues to pose a threat to close allies like    Israel and Jordan. So mitigating the malign influence of Iran    remains a major U.S. objective in the region.  
    In talking about Iran its also important    to zero in on one of the most important issues for the United    States, and thats freedom of navigation in the Straits of    Hormuz and the Bab-el-Mandeb. By harassing U.S. and    international maritime activities in the Persian Gulf and    supplying advanced anti-ship cruise missiles to Houthi rebels    in Yemen on the Red Sea coast, Iran is posing a threat to two    waterways that are absolutely crucial to global commerce. Since    the 1970s and [President Jimmy Carters Carter Doctrine], the    United States has been committed to keeping those vital    waterways open.  
      Jim Mattis testifies before SASC    
    BD: Will you recommend a troop increase for    Afghanistan to President Trump, and why is Afghanistan still    important after U.S. forces have spent more than 15years    fighting there?  
    Dunford: Because there are still roughly    17 extremists groups operating in and around Afghanistan. From    personal experience, and from reading the intelligence and    talking to my commanders on the ground, I have absolutely no    doubt that, if given the space to reconstitute and grow    stronger, those organizations will follow through on their    intent to attack the United States and the West. They are    already doing it inside Afghanistan. So we continue to need an    effective counterterrorism platform and posture in that region,    and the Afghan government has proven to be a good    counterterrorism partner. The United States, our NATO allies    and coalition partners, and the Afghans themselves are fighting    together against a common enemy.  
    As for troop numbers, were analyzing what    is necessary to enable the Afghan Security Forces to take the    fight to the enemy. One of my greatest concerns is the number    of casualties that they experienced in 2015 and 2016. They need    additional medical personnel and medevac capability. They also    need additional airpower, because that is the greatest    asymmetric advantage they have over the Taliban. We need to    help the Afghan Security Forces be able to deliver aviation at    the right time and place. They also need more trainers and    educators and help with maintenance. So those are the areas we    are looking at to possibly prop up our support, based on the    lessons of 2015 and 2016.  
    BD: It sounds like you are going to support    General Nicholsons request for more forces (in    Afghanistan)?  
    Dunford: I havent taken a public position    yet because I havent had a chance to talk with the president    on the issue. So Ill make my recommendation to him first. But    its fair to say that based on what weve learned in the past    two years, I believe we need to make some adjustments to our    force posture.  
Read the original here:
CJCS Dunford Talks Turkey, Iran, Afghan Troop Numbers & Daesh - Breaking Defense