Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Al-Maliki Tensions Said Severe with Petraeus;
US Raid in Karbala



Steven R. Hurst and Qassim Abdul-Zahra of the Associated Press get the scoop that relations between Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and US Gen. David Petraeus are so tense that aides to al-Maliki say he has considered asking Washington to pull the general out of Baghdad. The two major sources of tension appear to be al-Maliki's continued lack of control over all Iraqi military units and operations, and Petraeus's policy of arming Iraqi Sunni Arab tribesmen willing to fight the foreign Salafi Jihadis. Al-Maliki fears that once the Sunni tribesmen have dispatched "al-Qaeda," they will turn on the largely Shiite government with their new American weapons.

Ironically, al-Maliki himself got called a collaborator with Sunni Arab 'terrorists' on Friday, himself. Sawt al-Iraq, writing in Arabic, says that after Friday prayers the Shiites of Khalis (a city in Diyala Province) demonstrated against the prime minister. Al-Maliki had just met in Diyala's capital, Baqubah, with the Sunni Arab leadership of the city, which the Shiites believe is full of al-Qaeda supporters (they mean Salafi Jihadis) who are implicated in the killing of Shiites.

The US military raided a rogue Mahdi Army cell in the Shiite holy city of Karbala on Friday. US troops captured the cell leader but then took small arms fire from his supporters, leading to a vigorous clash. Iraqi sources claimed that 9 militiamen and a civilian woman were killed and 25 persons were wounded, including women and children. The US maintained that the death toll was 6, all militiamen. Any foreigners fighting in Karbala are likely to raise tensions, but this action was almost certainly requested by the city's power elite, which sides with the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council and its Badr Corps paramilitary against the Sadrists and the Mahdi Army. US troops no longer routinely patrol downtown Karbala, but come in to the city from a base outside it when requested by Iraqi security forces.

US officials say that they are upset with Saudi Arabia for undermining the government of PM Nuri al-Maliki by charging him with being an Iranian secret agent and distributing faked documents to that effect.

On the other hand, I gather that the Bush administration is not too upset with Saudi Arabia, to which it is planning to sell billions of dollars of fancy new military equipment.

Tom Englehardt on how the idea of a US military withdrawal from Iraq became mainstream.

Shaikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbala'i, in his Friday sermon at the mosque attached to the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala, warned of a "humanitarian catastrophe" in Diyala province. Al-Karbala'i is the representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani and his sermons are thought to reflect Sistani's thinking. He said Friday that numerous Diyala residents had contacted him urgently for aid, saying that they lacked services, even water, and that thousands faced death or displacement from their homes. He asked the government to help them. He said he was amazed that the prime minister and the Iraqi officer corps seemed afraid of launching a military campaign against the terrorists to rescue them. He interpreted their timidity as a fear on their parts of being seen as Shiite officials attacking Sunnis on behalf of Shiites, i.e. of acting out of merely sectarian concerns. He suggested in response that a joint Diyala military command be formed with nationalist officers drawn from the Shiite, Sunni, Kurdish, and Turkmen communities, which would not feel similar compunctions.

Sadr al-Din al-Qubanchi, preaching at the mosque of the shrine of Imam Ali in Najaf, showered praise on the US-Iranian talks held this week in Baghdad. Al-Qubanchi is a member of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, headed by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, which is the closest of all Iraqi parties to Tehran but also among the closest allies of the Bush administration in Iraq. He also praised Syria for having cancelled a planned meeting in Damascus of the Iraqi Baath Party in exile.

Al-Hayat, writing in Arabic, reports that the bombings in the once upscale, Shiite district of Karrada in central Baghdad have left the inhabitants shivering with fear. The neighborhood is a sort of second 'Green Zone,' with major politicians and parties based there, along with newspaper offices. Some residents are warning that it could become an arena for clashes among warring militias, especially after armed groups threw up checkpoints on the grounds of checking cars for bombs.

In funeral processions for those killed in the bombings and mortar attacks on Thursday, which killed 60 and wounded 94, mourners attacked US troops and threw stones at Iraqi troops in the district [i.e. blaming them for not forestalling the bombings.] Karrada has been hit by bombings 10 times in July. These were not for the most part suicide bombings but were rather coordinated detonations. In the aftermath, armed Shiite militiamen have come in and set up checkpoints, and there is a danger they will clash with Sunni Arab guerrillas. Big party "offices" have proliferated, actualy HQs for militias. Most merchants have left Karrada and other nice neighborhoods, given the rise in harassment and kidnappings for ransom. Hundreds of residential buildings now sit empty, their residents having fled.

Oil Minister Hussein Shahristani says that Iraq's oil unions are not legitimate.

Labels:

5 Comments:

At 10:08 AM, Blogger eurofrank said...

Dear Professor Cole

Taking the report of Saudi Arms sales with the report of Maliki at loggerheads with General Petraeus, for selling guns to the Apaches, how long do you think it will be before the US army falls out with the Shiite Parties and lines up with the Apaches?

If that happens does the US Army start fighting the Iraqi Army, the shia militias, and the iranian volunteers?

That would be a nice mess to bequeath to the next president.

 
At 11:17 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

Little Bushie says we're supporting the democratic government of Iraq. I don't know about the "democratic" part, but government???

What government?


As U.S. Rebuilds, Iraq Won’t Act on Finished Work
NyT

Iraq’s national government is refusing to take possession of thousands of American-financed reconstruction projects, forcing the United States either to hand them over to local Iraqis, who often lack the proper training and resources to keep the projects running, or commit new money to an effort that has already consumed billions of taxpayer dollars.

The conclusions, detailed in a report released Friday by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, a federal oversight agency, include the finding that of 2,797 completed projects costing $5.8 billion, Iraq’s national government had, by the spring of this year, accepted only 435 projects valued at $501 million. Few transfers to Iraqi national government control have taken place since the current Iraqi government, which is frequently criticized for inaction on matters relating to the American intervention, took office in 2006.

 
At 1:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

McCutchen,

outside the Kurdish Region, I think it makes better sense to turn projects over to local or provincial governments.

These local institutions have the consent of the governed, even though they were not selected democratically.

Maintaining a water treatment plant, for example, is a long-term commitment. The so-called national government may not be around to see a long-term commitment through.
But as long as people live in a place, a community, there will be some local form of governance.
The authentic indigenous local authority has the capacity to see through what the central authority cannot.

If we leave behind any stability in Iraq when we leave, if we leave, it will be stability at the level of the individual community.
Petraeus' new initiative to empower local leaders to kill Salafi Jihadis tacitly recognizes our limited capacity to build a nation.
That is a job for Iraqis.
The best we can do is to encourage a foundation of stable communities on which a new nation can be built.

Avid Student, Model Communities advocate

 
At 2:22 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Seems that Maliki did more than "consider" requesting Petraeus's removal.


The Daily Telegraph reports from the Bush Totentanz**


Iraqi Leader Tells Bush: Get Gen. Petraeus Out


**How to Win in Iraq
William S. Lind

The Bush administration, consistent with its record of military incompetence, continues to pursue the folly of maximalist objectives. It still defines victory as it did at the war’s outset: an Iraq that is an American satellite, friendly to Israel, happy to provide the U.S. with a limitless supply of oil and vast military bases from which American forces can dominate the region. None of these objectives are now attainable. None were ever attainable, no matter what our troops did. And as long as those objectives define victory, we are doomed to defeat.

Fortunately, another objective, the one that actually matters most, may, with luck and skill, still be achieved. That objective—restoring a state in what is now the stateless region of Mesopotamia—must become our new definition of victory...

If our new strategy works and our withdrawal is followed by the restoration of a real Iraqi state, we will have learned our lesson about wars of choice, but avoided a catastrophe. If it fails and Mesopotamia remains a stateless region, Iraq is no worse off than it is now, and our troops will be safely out of the mess.

There is no chance the Bush administration, locked in a Totentanz with its dreams of world empire, will adopt this strategy.


Shall we dance?

 
At 3:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Neo-conservative movement is based on greed. Because its fundamental objectives are to control the resources of other countries for the benefit of the U.S., it is an immoral, unethical and delusional movement. Napoleon tried it and failed. Hitler tried it and failed. The Soviet Union had dreams of it, and fell apart. Yet, Bush and his ilk continue to ignore history, ignore the determination of those who feel oppressed, and believe that bullying, destroying, and fear-mongering will win the day. It will not happen. When Hitler invaded Russia, the people burned their crops rather than allow the Germans to win. In Iraq, young men blow themselves to bits rather than allow an aggressor to take over their country. Bush can call them insurgents, call them Al Quaeda, or call them whatever new nonsense he dreams up at the time, but most are Iraqis; and they see us as invaders. Which we are. Petraeus can plot and piddle all he wants, he will only dig a deeper hole. The civil war will rage on, and Americans will be caught in the middle. The one agreement any of the combatants may have is that they want the American troops to leave. They also agree that the United States and its self-serving legions of SUV drivers will not get Iraqi oil. And they won't. A mighty army, Agent Orange, and thousands of lives and millions of dollars spent did not conquer Vietnam. It will not conquer Iraq, nor Iran, nor Syria, nor Lebanon, nor any Islamic country. If the populace does not support the invasion, the invasion ultimately will fail.Harry Truman had sense enough to know that; and refused to go into China. Even a successfully repressed population will resort to guerilla warfare; and raise all manner of hell. If the Neo-conservatives are not just plain stupid, then they must be delusional. Again, I say they have become a cult; and reason and logic no longer play a role in their behavior.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home