From October 16, 2016 to January 4, 2017, US-backed Iraqi security forces conducted a
full-scale city attack to liberate Mosul from the Islamic State. The operation was the
largest conventional land battle since the attack on Baghdad during the US-led invasion in
2003 and one of the most destructive urban fights in modern history involving Western
forces. The battle saw a force of over one hundred thousand attacking somewhere
between five and twelve thousand enemy fighters defending the city. The nine-month
battle is reported to have killed over ten thousand civilians, caused an estimated two
billion dollars in damage to the city, created ten million tons of debris, and displaced over
1.8 million of the city’s residents.
This type of high-cost, high-risk operation—the city attack—will continue to increase in
frequency unless the rules of modern urban warfare are addressed in a deliberate manner.
In other words, the limitations characterizing the conduct of urban warfare must be
overcome.
Modern urban warfare can entail many types of missions along the spectrum of military
operations. If one were to develop a scale of urban conflict, on one extreme end would be
total war. This is when two combatants, possibly near-peer militaries, wage war in urban
terrain with little regard for any humanitarian laws of war or concerns about collateral
damage. In total war, tactical nuclear weapons and the complete destruction of cities
through aerial bombardment are both possibilities.
