Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Sunday, March 26, 2006

69 Killed in Separate Outbreaks of Violence

All hell broke loose in Iraq on Sunday, but I'm darned if I can figure out most of what happened or why. It seems possible that the US committed two major military blunders that will worsen its relationship with Iraqi political forces.

So they found 30 decapitated bodies near Buhriz, an old Baath stronghold in Diyala northeast of Baghdad. Those killed were a mix of Shiites and Sunnis.

Then a mortar shell landed near the house in Najaf of Muqtada al-Sadr, the nationalist Shiite cleric whose followers are already upset with Sunnis over the blowing up of the Askariyah Shrine in Samarra. There were casualties, but Muqtada wasn't harmed. Everyone just dodged a bullet along with Muqtada, since if the mortar had killed him, Iraq would have been thrown into even greater chaos.

As it is, Muqtada implied that the US was responsible. He called on his followers, according to al-Hayat, to "exercise self-restraint and to remain calm, so as to foil the plots of the Occupation authorities to provoke armed conflict, and rather to practice political resistance in order to expel the foreigners from Iraq."

Then the US and Iraqi forces say they raided a terror cell in Adhamiyah. Adhamiyah is a Sunni district of Baghdad and is still Baath territory.

But somehow the joint US-Iraqi force ended up north, at the Shiite Shaab district. They say that they took fire from Mahdi Army militiamen. But there aren't any such Mahdi Army men in Adhamiyah. I have a sinking feeling that instead of raiding a Sunni Arab building in Adhamiyah, they got disoriented and attacked a Shiite religious center in nearby Shaab instead. Iraqi television angrily showed twenty unarmed corpses on the floor of the religious center, denouncing the US for killing innocent worshippers. The US military is now saying it did not enter any mosques and that anyone killed was killed by Iraqi special ops.

The Mustafa Husayniyah, however, is not a mosque and may not have been distinguishable as a religious edifice to non-Shiites. Shiites mourn their martyred Imams, the descendants of the Prophet, in centers called Husayniyahs after the Imam Husayn, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. As for the killing being done by Iraqi troops, if it was a joint mission, then the US forces are going to take some of the blame.

At least one of the dead was a member of the Dawa Party, the party headed by Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari. Official Iraqi television coverage was also uncharacteristically anti-American.

Since the US has been trying to unseat Jaafari, in concert with the Kurds and Sunni Arabs, he responded to the attack testily.

The incident has yet again postponed negotiations on the formation of a new government, since the Iraqi Shiites are universally extremely angry over it. Member of parliament and aide ot Prime Minister Jaafari, Jawad al-Maliki, demanded a full investigation of "this crime," according to al-Hayat.

If the US/Iraq force actually did accidentally hit a Shiite Husayniyah instead of a Sunni Arab terrorist cell, it was a horrible mistake.

Then US forces raided a secret prison of the Ministry of the Interior.

They captured 17 Sudanese inmates. After an investigation, the US finally acknowledged that the assault had made a mistake. The 17 Sudanese really were guerrillas or in any case legitimately held.

In other words, the jail raid was based on poor information and false premises. It is possible that our troops also messed up indirectly.

Al-Hayat reports that Hazim al-Araji, a Sadrist leader of nearby Kadhimiyah, said [Ar.]: "American forces attacked the Mustafa Husayniyah, which belongs to the Sadr Movement, and killed approximately 20 persons inside it . . . An American force surrounded the Mustafa Husayniyah in the Ur district and opened fire on more than 20 persons, killing them."

Jalal Talabani, president of Iraq, and other high politicians have succeeded in putting on hold direct US-Iran talks on Iraq. The Iraqi politicians complained about two foreign countries discussing Iraq with no Iraqi government representative present. But the problem is that there is no Iraqi government, since the haggling elected politicians haven't formed one. So, upshot: US-Iran talks are postponed until after there is a new Iraqi government.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the Iraqi Shiite cleric who heads the largest bloc in the elected parliament, denied Sunday that Iran is directly intervening in Iraq. He said that no proof has ever been presented of these allegations. It doesn't help Condi Rice to make her case when a close US ally like al-Hakim directly contradicts her.

Some 20% of Iraqis are living below the poverty line and their access to food has declined in the past 3 years, according to the Iraqi government.

20 Comments:

At 1:52 AM, Blogger eurofrank said...

Dear Professor Cole

I find it ominous to see the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff meddling in yet another country's internal affairs.

http://www.thenewanatolian.com/tna-3447.html

I wonder if the Kurds in Iraq will see this as notice of an imminent betrayal.

Is Kirkuk the price of the Turkish Army's support against Iran?

 
At 9:47 AM, Blogger John Koch said...

What of J. Gettleman's remarks that the Madhi Army functions as a death squad? In the 27-Mar-06 NYT he writes:

"Shiite militias have been accused of running death squads that kidnap and brutalize Sunni men, and on Sunday the American military said the cell its forces raided had kidnapped Iraq civilians."

What credence should one attach to Muqtada's pleas for forebearance? Recall Argentina's Admiral Massera, who charmed many in the press to believe he was the "good cop" moderate, while in fact directing death squads during the "dirty war" of the late 1970s.

In any case, it appears the US military can no longer figure out which Iraqis to defend or dispatch. To advise Iraqi army units (Sunni or Shia?) must present US staff some rather stupefying dilemmas. Can the mantra of "training" mean a thing is half the recruits are either agents or sympathizers of sectarian militia? Can counterinsurgency work if the intelligence which guides the commands comes from sectarian operatives with scores to settle? It would seem that Vietnam presented a much more lucid strategic and tactical situation.

 
At 10:33 AM, Blogger InplainviewMonitor said...

What wiki does to WaPo?

Just compare wiki entry and WaPo article on Abdul Rahman. Wiki current event coverage appears to be much better than that of WaPo. IMO, it is much more informative, timely and structured.

What is also important, wiki is apparently much better as far as ideological bias is concerned. According to NPOV principle, they present different POVs instead of promoting soft neoconservative ideology as WaPo does.

So, instead of talking about "Muslim extremists" in general as WaPo, wiki informs about concrete views of concrete clerics on the issue.

 
At 10:35 AM, Blogger sherm said...

More of the truth about the Bush invasion. It keeps trickling out. Bush had Saddam in a corner. The ultimatum was to disarm or else, but since he had no WMD to give up, he couldn't disarm.

 
At 10:56 AM, Blogger Nell said...

This is a day I am more than usually grateful for your blog, as the news reports are extremely confusing and leave out crucial details.

Does the Dawa Party have a militia? There are never any reports on it, if it exists, but surely at this point no major party is without one.

 
At 11:51 AM, Blogger Jeff (no, the other one) said...

"You didn't say anything about all the schools we've painted!"

Awful. Bad news is mostly what you get from war, at any time; but all this is simply horrifying.

 
At 12:47 PM, Blogger eurofrank said...

Dear Professor Cole

I despair

Now we are going to war to defend our values.

http://tinyurl.com/sy8zd

I suspect honesty, efficiency, competence and getting it right are numbered among our values.

 
At 12:49 PM, Blogger InplainviewMonitor said...

According to Russian Dni.ru, mayor of Baghdad refused to cooperate with the US troops in protest against the recent Shia killings in the city.

I can't find this info anywhere else, but it looks perfectly authentic.

 
At 1:11 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

"If the US/Iraq force actually did accidentally hit a Shiite Husayniyah instead of a Sunni Arab terrorist cell, it was a horrible mistake."

and such mistakes are routine and to be expect in any war



"In other words, the jail raid was based on poor information and false premises."


our troops have been fed false information by the Iraqis all along... also a common and to be expected event in a war with an invading army. And it does not take much brains at all to see the underlying motivations for feeding the US troops bad intelligence so that they will go and attack whomever.

Nobody does it like Challabi and Miller did though. They're pros.



oh, and the ONLY way to stop such "mistakes" and "bad intelligence" is to get the foreign troops out of there.


of course, a large number of Americans are too stupid to know history and see what is happening right in front of their eyes. If they could, they would know ALL WARS START WITH LIES and the ones starting the war ARE THE LIARS. They would have recognized that Bush & company were lying in 2002 and STOPPED IT THEN.

TOO DAMN LATE NOW, AND TOO DAMN BAD FOR ALL THE DEAD PEOPLE.





war is just a big pile of dead bodies that succeeds in solving one problem while simultaneously creating even more problems... and the fat cats what all the stupid people to support these wars because that makes them RICH, which is all they really care about.


I hope the stupid Americas wake up one day, but I don't think it really will happen. Too many war-promoters and war-supporters feeding them a line of shit.

 
At 1:12 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

"What of J. Gettleman's remarks that the Madhi Army functions as a death squad? In the 27-Mar-06 NYT he writes:

"Shiite militias have been accused of running death squads that kidnap and brutalize Sunni men, and on Sunday the American military said the cell its forces raided had kidnapped Iraq civilians."

Madhi army is not the only Shiite militia. Don't jump to conclusions......

THINK, THINK, THINK, THINK


we need to do more of that


seriously.

 
At 1:15 PM, Blogger James-Speaks said...

Have we considered the possibility that the real mission in Iraq is to screw things up totally?

 
At 1:16 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

"What credence should one attach to Muqtada's pleas for forebearance? Recall Argentina's Admiral Massera, who charmed many in the press to believe he was the "good cop" moderate, while in fact directing death squads during the "dirty war" of the late 1970s."


and then, maybe the trained death squads are from Negroponte's visit to Iraq..... he has a history.

"In any case, it appears the US military can no longer figure out which Iraqis to defend or dispatch. To advise Iraqi army units (Sunni or Shia?) must present US staff some rather stupefying dilemmas."



again, to be expected.... happens in every occupation. And you had better believe this is an OCCUPATION not a quest for "freedom and democracy" for the Iraqis and the Middle East. That claim is again a pack of lies.

 
At 1:23 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

"Bush had Saddam in a corner. The ultimatum was to disarm or else, but since he had no WMD to give up, he couldn't disarm."


Saddam could have surrendered or left the country (and then get caught by the US authorities). Yes, he might have been killed, but he would have taken away the stated reason for an invasion and saved his country.


we all die someday.

 
At 5:13 PM, Blogger Bravo 2-1 said...

The latest on this attack is not promising:

Iraq’s ruling Shia alliance accused the Americans of trying to foment civil war today after a joint US-Iraqi raid on a Baghdad mosque in which 16 people were killed.

 
At 5:29 PM, Blogger Garry said...

Is it not possible that the attack on the Mustafa Husayniyah was connected to Khalilzad's statement about the Mahdi Army last week? At the time, it seemed odd, particularly as he highlighted them rather than the Badr Brigade. As you said, the Iranian connection to the Badr Brigade has a long history and is more substantial than their connection to the Mahdi Army. At the time, I did wonder whether Khalilzad's statement was intended to pave the way for more "robust" action against the militias and the Mahdi Army in particular.

The US military says it was targetting "insurgents" but then don't they say that about everyone killed during military actions?

My fear is that this was a deliberate attempt to confront the militias head on. They need to be disarmed, yes, but not like that.

Here's an Alertnet article on the likely result of the attack.

 
At 6:09 PM, Blogger Christiane said...

Concerning the members of the Iraqi Army who attacked the Shiite Hussania, it would be useful to knwo who they were ? Badr recruitees ? Kurds ?
I wonder whether that wasn't a calculated error in order to see how the Iraqi street and the different factions would respond to another attack against Muktada Al'Sadr ? Or is could also be an attempt of intimidation ?

Thank you all, for all the links provided. The report concerning Bush/Blair talks in 2003 were well worth the reading. Blair is a real liar : I can remember his vibrant call to topple Saddam the evil dictator, something which made all the liberal anti-war feel uneasy. But at the same time he was just there talking with Bush : could we replace Saddam by another dictator ? oh no this wouldn't be understood by the opinion. It says it all.

Nevertheless, Blair can't understand this wave of AntiAmericanism in the EU !! Yeah.. they should be able to raid all the other weak nations they dislike, but we should thank them for it and if possible pay for their reconstruction.

 
At 8:53 PM, Blogger InplainviewMonitor said...

revised...

Don't mess with Sadr

Juan Cole writes: all hell broke loose in Iraq on Sunday, but I'm darned if I can figure out most of what happened or why. It seems possible that the US committed two major military blunders that will worsen its relationship with Iraqi political forces.

Well, when Cole makes remarks like this, one thing is for sure - something especially wrong happens in Iraq. So yes, it turns out that neocons forgot who Sadr is and tried to remind him who is 800 lb gorilla in Iraq. So, not surprisingly, it turned out that Muqtada has nothing to do with what happened, but occupation forces killed a number of civilians. Who in the world can check this?

However, now Russian Dni.ru reports that mayor of Baghdad refused to cooperate with the US troops in protest against the recent Shia killings in the city. Although I can't find this info anywhere else, it looks authentic.

Further, Aljazeera says that a senior spokesman of the Shia Islamist Alliance and ally of Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the prime minister, said: "The alliance calls for a rapid restoration of security matters to the Iraqi government." After a confusing 24 hours following the bloodshed around Baghdad's Mustafa mosque in which the US military restricted itself to issuing a somewhat opaque statement, US officials distanced themselves from the operation, calling it Iraqi-led.

The conclusion is, you better don't mess with Sadr, it is simply counterproductive.

 
At 10:25 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

"Have we considered the possibility that the real mission in Iraq is to screw things up totally?"


yes, and it is a real possibility. but I suspect in Iraq they want compliant stability, so they can get the oil.... in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan and Iran and Syria.... they just want to screw things up and create turmoil.

or at least, that seems like the most likely explanation.


To believe that they went in there to get the WMDs took real stupidity, but I do think there are Americans who decide, every morning, to stay stupid no matter what.....

and to believe that Bush is there for "freedom and democracy" also takes concentrated stupidity.


They are bringing the Iraqis the freedom of the grave and the democracy of death.

 
At 10:53 PM, Blogger Hans Wall said...

Professor Juan,
I missed your comment on the business news of the day:
(BBC) Gunmen have kidnapped 16 employees of the Saeed import and export firm in the exclusive Mansour neighbourhood of Baghdad.
The interesting question is which Saeed Company was targeted: the Saudi owned Abdul Khaliq Saeed Group for Trade or the Yemen based Hayel Saeed Anam Group who supplied hundreds of millions of dollars of goods to Saddam's regime via oil for food.
Also: what happened to the kidnapped personell of the Al-Rawafed security firm?

 
At 3:54 AM, Blogger Rob Price said...

"U.S. military spokesmen declined comment on the accusations but issued a statement describing a raid by Iraqi special forces, with U.S. advisers, on a building that was not a mosque in roughly the same area. It said 16 insurgents were killed." (IRAQ WRAPUP 5-Amid confusion, Iraq Shi'ites accuse US troops. Reuters, Sunday 26 March 2006, 5:44pm EST. Linked in OP.)


Footnote: I was under the impression the Pentagon wanted to steer clear from using the term "adviser". If connections are made to the past, the negative history that comes with the word could be too much for the USMIL Public Affairs to keep a wrap on (See Vietnam, El Salvador).

US "trainer" is the intended replacement.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home