Operation Featherweight: Month 3, Week 1, Day 3.

Over the past 24 hours the balance in the battle for Kobane/ Ayn al-Arab - the strategically important Syrian Kurdish city that sits just 1km (0.6miles) from Syria's border with Turkey - has shifted back in favour of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

It appears that ISIL's decision yesterday to withdraw fighters from the southern and western sectors of the city was not a retreat but a tactical withdrawal which allowed ISIL to focus its efforts on seizing the eastern sector of the city. That effort seems to have been successful with the eastern section of Kobane now falling silent after a night of fighting and ISIL seemingly in complete control of the eastern third of the city from north to south. ISIL now appear to be focusing on entering Kobane from the south-west corner in an effort to gain control of either the southern or western section.

One of the main advantages that ISIL fighters have over Kobane's Kurdish defenders that they have been supplied with Night Vision Goggles (NVG's) and other forms of non-lethal support such as body armour which allow them to fight at night whilst reducing their casualty rate. However a problem that can be more immediately solved is that ISIL's main tactic appears to be to pack cars and trucks with explosives which are then driven by suicide bombers into Kurdish positions. ISIL infantry then advance on those positions behind tanks and other armoured vehicles which protect them from Kurdish small arms fire while firing on Kurdish infantry with artillery. The fact that ISIL are still able to get armoured vehicles and explosive laden trucks into Kobane is testament to how ineffective the US-led coalition's air campaign to defend the city has been.

If the US led coalition was being serious in its efforts to defend Kobane they would have already deployed Predator-type Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV/Drone) over Kobane. These Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) drones would be used from the purpose that they were originally designed for - flying over a target area for long periods in order to provide real-time information about troop movements on the ground.

If and when these drones identified tanks or other vehicles operating to the east, south or west of Kobane (only ISIL operate in those areas) they could then pass the real-time co-ordinates of those targets on to the 2 or possible 4 F/A-18 type aircraft which would constantly be on stand-by to destroy such targets around Kobane. As the Israelis recently demonstrated during "Operation Protective Edge" drones armed with Hellfire-type missiles can also be hugely effective at surgically destroying vehicles within urban streets. However Hellfire-type missiles tends to lack the punch needed to destroy armoured vehicles so I think the drones main priority here should be a surveillance role.

Despite not being prepared to mount a properly organised air campaign to defend Kobane the coalition has conducted 6 air-strikes close to the city overnight. Two of those strikes destroyed unarmed ISIL vehicles. The other 4 were more effective with 2 destroying ISIL infantry units - 1 large and 1 small. The remaining 2 strikes were used to destroy an ISIL building that is being described as a "training camp" although I suspect it was really being used as a barracks where fighters were being prepared to be sent into Kobane and what is being described as an ISIL support building. If that support building was being used as I suspect as a facility to prepare ISIL's vehicle bombs these were both highly worthwhile targets because they cut off ISIL's supply of fighters and weapons at source. However the question remains why it took the coalition 3 days to strikes what were clearly high priority targets.

On the diplomatic front the US still seems more focused on preparing the US public for the fall of Kobane rather then trying to defend the city. The main part of this has been claims that air-strikes alone cannot save they city without - and I quote - "competent ground forces." The obvious response to that is that no ground force will be able to defend the city without a competent air campaign which is something that is clearly still missing. There are though problems with the Kurdish forces defending Kobane because unlike the Peshmerga in Iraq they are simply poorly trained volunteers who are severely lacking in heavy weapons and - by this point - even ammunition for the light weapons they do posses. Fortunately though they are quite clearly committed to defeating ISIL and the Peshmerga do have heavier weapons and skilled commanders that they are prepared to send to Kobane. The problem continues to be Turkey which is still refusing to allow those weapons and skilled fighters to be sent to Kobane.

Turkey of course is still labouring under the mis-impression that the fall of Kobane is going to result in Turkish troops being sent into Syria to create a buffer zone between Turkey and ISIL territory. Their latest play today has been to claim that Turkish forces alone won't be enough to fight ISIL which seems to be a precursor to it refusing to send in any troops. The fact that Turkey still views that as a threat indicates that US President Barack Obama has yet to make it abundantly clear to Turkish President Reccep Tayyip Erdogan that Turkey's only role in the coalition will be to allow coalition aircraft to fly from United States Air Force (USAF) base Incirlik in Turkey and a refusal will have consequences.

Presumably later today the White House will be providing a read out of a telephone call between the two in which this mis-understanding was cleared up.


15:00 on 9/10/14 (UK date).