This Week in Geopolitics

Taking Raqqa from the Islamic State

March 13, 2017

The United States, Turkey, and Russia have deployed forces to fight against the Islamic State in a run-up to the final battle for Raqqa. No one has made a definitive move. This is because the oncoming battle for control of the IS heartland is complicated by geography and the conflicting imperatives of regional and international actors expected to participate in the offensive.

Time is running out…

With a little over three weeks until our inaugural conference, excitement is building at Geopolitical Futures. The GPF analysts, Meredith, and I are very much looking forward to welcoming you to the Army and Navy Club in Washington, DC, on April 5, for a full day of measured debate and free-flowing discussion.

Don’t have a ticket for The Next 4 Years: The Role of the United States in the World yet? There are a few remaining. Please click this link to secure your ticket, find out more about the venerable panel of speakers, or ask us a question about the conference.

Now, let’s look at Raqqa. Until a decision is reached among all parties on the approach to Raqqa and how to proceed afterward, no meaningful moves can be made on IS. These four graphics show the complexity of the battle for Raqqa and why it will be a marathon rather than a sprint.

Spheres of Influence

Several spheres of influence exist within Syria. While the Islamic State has maintained control of Raqqa and surrounding areas along the Euphrates River since 2013, it recently suffered territorial losses to the east, west, and north as part of Operation Euphrates Wrath, led by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

The Syrian Arab Army, along with Hezbollah fighters and Russian air power, have retaken Palmyra to the west of IS’s core territory. The Kurdish-led SDF occupies territory directly to the northeast of Raqqa, and Turkish-backed rebels have taken control of the area northwest of the Euphrates River to block the Kurds from establishing a foothold on the Turkish border.

IS is now effectively surrounded on three sides by regional powers with international support. Jordan sits along IS’s southern outskirts. Though vast desert leaves IS with few gains to be made, it has not stopped the group from trying to expand its sphere of influence over its southern border.

While IS has been losing territory for over a year, most of that territory was not strategically important. Now, IS faces existential threats to its power, but a final blow can’t be struck without a cohesive plan of attack and a strategy for maintaining the territory post-IS.

Urban Combat

The fight for the IS stronghold will require large numbers of ground troops in concert with air power and artillery. Fighting through a city—particularly a city with a large civilian population—means a very high casualty rate for the assaulting force.

It is slow, dangerous work that must be done block by block rather than in large-scale air attacks. For example, Iraqi’s Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) led the “Golden Division” in the battle for Mosul, a large city center similar to Raqqa. Some CTS divisions suffered casualty rates up to 50% while fighting in the city.

Before we can discuss the battle for Raqqa, it is vital that we look at the city itself and the current thoroughfares running to and from the de facto IS capital.

The map above shows the main roads surrounding IS core turf with the capital city in the middle. Raqqa is located on the Euphrates River surrounded on all sides by desert. In 2012, the civilian population totaled about 200,000 (although that number has fluctuated). Raqqa has been the capital of the IS heartland since 2013.

Because IS essentially is fighting on its home turf, it has established defenses around the city and is aware of likely attack routes. This is why an invading force must match its relative gains to expected losses.

Conflicting Goals

Many regional and international actors have conflicting goals in Syria. The Turkish imperative is to halt the threat from the Islamic State while suppressing the Kurds. The Turks also are trying to limit their direct exposure to the conflict by supporting the Sunni Arab-dominated Free Syrian Army (FSA) to take the lead in advancing on the city.

The United States has backed the SDF throughout most of the conflict, but the group is beginning to outlive its utility in the face of the Turks, who are currently fighting to push the Kurds back to the eastern side of the Euphrates. This takes the Kurds out of the lead for the assault on Raqqa.

Russia has brought both air power and ground troops into Syria to support the Bashar al-Assad regime, but those troops lack the military capability to lead the charge. Russia’s forces in Syria were meant to prop up the Assad regime and were successful in doing so. But those forces are not significant enough to be decisive against IS.

Ultimately, the battle for Raqqa is a series of simple questions: Who will go in? Where will they come from? How will they get out? And who will remain?

This map represents the four main routes Geopolitical Futures previously identified as viable for an attacking force. The SDF can advance from its territory in the northeast (from Hasakah across the Euphrates to Deir el-Zour) though the Turks do not want any Kurdish forces to enter the city.

The Approaching Army’s Strength

The Russian-backed Syrian Arab Army can move on the southern part of the IS heartland (from Homs by way of Palmyra), which the army currently controls. Assad’s forces can attack from the northwest through the checkerboard of forces occupying the area around Aleppo. Finally, the Turkish-backed FSA can approach from directly north of Raqqa, across the Turkish border from the town of Tal Abyad.

Each of these options provides challenges and opportunities for the force that moves on the city, but each actor has the ability to change the calculus for the other forces. For example, the SDF proved in January that it was possible to blend these routes of attack by taking and holding Tabqa Dam west of Raqqa. This effectively shuts off that route to the west for anyone who is not working with the SDF. At the end of the day, the deciding factor in the battle for Raqqa is the relative strength of the approaching army rather than the route they use.

The above graph shows the estimated power of forces in the area. The largest force is the Syrian Arab Army to the west and northwest, with about 70,000 troops. The SDF to the northeast is estimated at 55,000–80,000 soldiers, though they are constrained by Turkish ambitions. Russia has deployed an additional 10,000–15,000 troops. Turkey commands an estimated 8,000 troops that include the FSA, who were deployed for Operation Euphrates Shield. The US has about 1,400 special operators in the battlespace to act in an advisory and assistance capacity.

Though actual numbers for IS are unknown, GPF estimates that 10,000–15,000 IS fighters are in Raqqa. Though IS troop numbers are lower, its entrenched position in the city’s center and fighting experience give it an advantage over any force trying to dislodge its fighters.

The Islamic State has a formidable force of experienced soldiers who have shown themselves to be adaptable to a changing battlefield. They will not be dislodged from Raqqa easily or quickly. Regardless of relative troop size, defenses, and civilian population, the cost of clearing IS militants from their core turf will be extremely high for whichever force attacks the city.

George Friedman
George Friedman


Prepare Yourself for Tomorrow with George Friedman’s
This Week in Geopolitics

Geopolitical Futures To learn more about George Friedman and Geopolitical Futures, click here. »

Discuss This

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.


There are no comments at this time.

Use of this content, the Mauldin Economics website, and related sites and applications is provided under the Mauldin Economics Terms & Conditions of Use.

Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited

The information provided in this publication is private, privileged, and confidential information, licensed for your sole individual use as a subscriber. Mauldin Economics reserves all rights to the content of this publication and related materials. Forwarding, copying, disseminating, or distributing this report in whole or in part, including substantial quotation of any portion the publication or any release of specific investment recommendations, is strictly prohibited.
Participation in such activity is grounds for immediate termination of all subscriptions of registered subscribers deemed to be involved at Mauldin Economics’ sole discretion, may violate the copyright laws of the United States, and may subject the violator to legal prosecution. Mauldin Economics reserves the right to monitor the use of this publication without disclosure by any electronic means it deems necessary and may change those means without notice at any time. If you have received this publication and are not the intended subscriber, please contact


The Mauldin Economics website, Yield Shark, Thoughts from the Frontline, Patrick Cox’s Tech Digest, Outside the Box, Over My Shoulder, World Money Analyst, Street Freak, ETF 20/20, Just One Trade, Transformational Technology Alert, Rational Bear, The 10th Man, Connecting the Dots, This Week in Geopolitics, Stray Reflections, and Conversations are published by Mauldin Economics, LLC. Information contained in such publications is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The information contained in such publications is not intended to constitute individual investment advice and is not designed to meet your personal financial situation. The opinions expressed in such publications are those of the publisher and are subject to change without notice. The information in such publications may become outdated and there is no obligation to update any such information. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments.
John Mauldin, Mauldin Economics, LLC and other entities in which he has an interest, employees, officers, family, and associates may from time to time have positions in the securities or commodities covered in these publications or web site. Corporate policies are in effect that attempt to avoid potential conflicts of interest and resolve conflicts of interest that do arise in a timely fashion.
Mauldin Economics, LLC reserves the right to cancel any subscription at any time, and if it does so it will promptly refund to the subscriber the amount of the subscription payment previously received relating to the remaining subscription period. Cancellation of a subscription may result from any unauthorized use or reproduction or rebroadcast of any Mauldin Economics publication or website, any infringement or misappropriation of Mauldin Economics, LLC’s proprietary rights, or any other reason determined in the sole discretion of Mauldin Economics, LLC.

Affiliate Notice

Mauldin Economics has affiliate agreements in place that may include fee sharing. If you have a website or newsletter and would like to be considered for inclusion in the Mauldin Economics affiliate program, please go to Likewise, from time to time Mauldin Economics may engage in affiliate programs offered by other companies, though corporate policy firmly dictates that such agreements will have no influence on any product or service recommendations, nor alter the pricing that would otherwise be available in absence of such an agreement. As always, it is important that you do your own due diligence before transacting any business with any firm, for any product or service.

© Copyright 2018 Mauldin Economics