AIR power can be enormously effective in damaging a group, but in the case of Isis that might not be enough. Modern airpower can obliterate almost any target it can see. As had recently been seen in the case of Jihadi John, if an Isis vehicle or military force is caught out in the open, air power can destroy it in seconds.
However, damaging Isis is very different from destroying Isis. The organisation’s great strength has been its ability to exert political control in a large area of eastern Syria and western Iraq. This control of a physical space lets it raise funds and recruit new members, including from Britain, far more easily than if it was always moving or on the run.
And that is where air power will face limitations. While it can damage Isis greatly in its area of political control, it cannot provide a replacement political authority. That will only happen if a force on the ground can physically occupy that space and asserts political control. That means a significant western force with outside Allies, perhaps including Iraqis and Saudis. But there seems little appetite for this. The Americans, French or British have little desire to send their own ground forces into another Middle Eastern country.
So as this seems an unlikely option, the ground troops with have to come from indigenous sources in Syria – a combination of the rebels fighting Assad, Kurds and other opposition forces. So far such forces have shown themselves only moderately capable. They have won some battles with Isis, but lost others. And they have already had air support in the past.
This is why so many people believe airpower alone will fall short. It has already been used in combination with forces fighting Isis, and it hasn’t triumphed. If it will be stepped up in use now, allied leaders will have to come up with a more intelligent and incisive plan of action. Saying what that plan of action is, will be very difficult.
Dr Phillips O’Brien is the director of the Scottish Centre for War Studies at Glasgow University
Does Syria need our bombs? Sturgeon says they will bring chaos Daesh wants
Labour rebels told air strikes will kill countless civilians and lead to second referendum
Alison Phipps: More tears will be shed when The Story of Exile gets worse
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here