Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Bombings Kill dozens in Street Crowds
Sunni Arabs threaten withdrawal from Parliament



Iraqis were unified for a brief period on Wednesday as they came out in the streets from the north of the country to its south, from Irbil to Baghdad to Basra, to celebrate the country's soccer (football) victory in the Asian Cup. People danced in the streets, sang, waved Iraqi flags, and drove with car doors open and passengers celebrating. Iraqis have constructed a powerful nationalism during the 20th century that Western observers now often discount, but those celebrations were a glimmer of the pre-Bush Iraq.

Sunni Arab guerrillas must have been planning for these street celebrations, since they hit them powerfully and effectively in Baghdad, with two car bombs, killing 55 and wounding 135 according to late reports. There were other bombings and mortar attacks in the capital, and 18 bodies were found in the streets. A vehicle with Iranian pilgrims was attacked.

The Sunni Arab Iraqi Accord Front is threatening once again to suspend participation in parliament. This development would be a severe blow to PM Nuri al-Maliki, who is trying to put together a new political bloc of 'moderates'.

The US House of Representatives voted on Wednesday overwhelmingly to bar permanent US military bases in Iraq or any attempt to control Iraqi petroleum. Some Republicans apparently voted for the measure somewhat insincerely, arguing that there are no such things as permanent US military bases abroad, because bases require the consent of the host country. The Republicans may feel that the vote will nevertheless give them some cover in the 2008 elections. House members have to contest elections every 2 years, and the American public is clearly becoming impatient with the war.

Work began on the joint US-Iranian-Iraqi committee on security in the wake of Tuesday's meeting. The Iranians are also considering higher-level talks.

Catch Farideh Farhi's important discussion of the talks between US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and his Iranian counterpart at our group blog. She argues that Crocker's show of pique with the Iranians was designed to mollify US rightwingers who oppose such talks, while we should keep our eyes on the substantive outcome of the negotiations, i.e. the joint committee on Iraqi security that targets "al-Qaeda in Iraq."

Fred Kaplan reviews the leaked Crocker-Petraeus security plan covering through 2009 and finds it unlikely to succeed. Kaplan is skeptical about the ability of Iraqi security forces to "hold" neighborhoods in Baghdad. And, he cannot see how a temporary alliance of convenience with fractious, Shiite-hating Sunni tribesmen of al-Anbar Province against al-Qaeda in Iraq can produce a stable partnership or end sectarian fighting. He quotes military historian Stephen Biddle giving the plan only a 1 in 10 chance of success.

The military historian Tom Collier here in Ann Arbor wrote me on this plan,

" In its schools, the Army teaches a format for the study of any problem. It starts with "1. Assumptions," and then goes on to facts bearing on the problem, conclusions, and recommendations. Students are taught that if the assumptions are incorrect, then the rest of the study will be invalid.

The "detailed plan" that Michael Gordon reported seems to be based on two shaky assumptions:

1. U.S. troops can use force to create "sustainable security" for the Iraqi government to function, and

2. Given that security, the Iraqi government *will* function and will reach "political reconciliation" among "disparate factions," provide basic services, and stop the violence.

In other words, 1. we hope that we can put wings on a frog and, 2. we hope that the frog will then fly to paradise. And based on those assumptions, the "detailed plan" calls for U.S. troops to fight and die "until at least '09." Wow!!!" --Tom Collier


An audit has shown that only 42% of Bechtel's reconstruction projects in Iraq was completed. Bechtel maintainst that changing priorities of key funder, the US Agency for International Development, caused 10 of 24 projects to be abandoned.

I wrote Wednesday about the disappointing harvests in the southern province of Dhi Qar, which the Arabic press attributed in large part to soil salinization.

Here are expert comments I received on this issue, which profoundly affects Iraqi food security. Not my field, and I did not realize how full of salts fresh water is, such that if it isn't drained properly it salinizes the soil, too. I think I was probably misled by what I had read on Egypt, because its peasants and government appear to have been much more expert in dealing with this problem even after the Nile was dammed. So my correspondent wrote:

"Salinization of the soils in southern Iraq is very severe, perhaps even more severe than the Indus basin in Punjab or Sindh. The reason is the combination of poor drainage in the southern part of Mesopotamia and reduced flow of water due to damming of the rivers upstream. There are huge tracts of land in Dhi Qar, Basra, Missan, Babil, Diwaniyah and even Najaf and Karbala that are white with salt and thus unsuitable for agriculture. The fix, install good drainage and flush the soil of salt, will require large sums of money and a deliberate and thoughtful plan. The money at least theoretically exists but thoughtful planning is no where to be found.

The Ministry of Science and Technology worked with the Ministry of Agriculture and an American group to test a salt tolerant wheat variety in areas south of Baghdad. Farmers who participated were able to reap an economic crop for the first time in many years, some noted that it was magic. What happened to that variety is anybody's guess. The chaos that engulfed the south and which paralyzed the government after 2005 ruined plans for large scale reproduction of the seed. Thus what you report in Dhi Qar is really nothing new. Agriculture in the southern part of Iraq was ruined long ago by poor stewardship of resources and deliberate destruction.

In Egypt, rice production in the delta is promoted to guard against salt water intrusion. The construction of the Aswan High Dam has compelled farmers and authorities to be watchful of creeping salinization all along the Nile basin because the Nile does not act as the ultimate drain it once was. But the issue with respect to salt is minor compared with Iraq and it is under control. "


At the Napoleon blog, Bonaparte's letters to his brother Joseph in spring-summer 1798.

Labels:

9 Comments:

At 3:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How can Iran help the US against the al-Qaeda in Iraq in practice? Do they have more presence than the Americans? Better relationship with the Sunnis to get leads? It is ridiculous.

To find out what is going on, read Henry Kissinger recent commentary, in, for example:

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/ColumnistHomeNew.asp?section=henryakissinger

Excerpt:
" Second, the US will need to put forward a diplomatic position that acknowledges the legitimate security interests of an Iran that accepts the existing order in the Gulf rather than strives to overthrow it."

The US wants to trade-in its stupid regime-change. The contacts are about the guarantees.

 
At 5:24 AM, Blogger eurofrank said...

Dear Professor Cole

Just an observation on popular culture.

As I was reading the Telegraph this morning I noticed Tom Cruise playin Graf von Stauffenberg in the film of the Military plot to assasinate the Fuehrer before he lost the war for them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/23/wcruise123.xml

Thomas Harris latest bestseller novel is about Cicero foiling the Cateline Conspiracy to take over Rome and turn its government into a state run by a party with a perpetual majority beholden to the extremely rich.

Do you think somebody is trying to tell us something?

 
At 6:21 AM, Blogger John Koch said...

Salinization has been the bane of societies based on river irrigation. This goes back, well, to ancient Sumer. Wheat yields declined. Barley, which is more salt resistant, could only make up some of the difference. Some speculate that the rise and fall of various city states or empires was more a function of the soil condition than the prowess of generals. Ancient Mesopotamia, the Indus, the Mayans, the US Great Plains, and other places all incurred variants of salinization, errosion, or other soil wastage.

True desalinization depends on rainfall. In dry places, it may take centuries to flush out salts from topsoils. If drainage is not good, the salts can reside indefinitly, since they will survive in whatever residue remains when a puddle dries up.

Control of salinization is a challenge to keep the salts at the surface. Any river water must be used sparingly so that the surface crust snares most of the salts, leaving the deeper topsoils relatively unaffected. Then the grower has to wash away the salty stuff at the top from time to time. Of course, some topsoil gets lost as decades roll by. Prevention of salinization becomes harder as more of the cleaner snowmelt or rainy season waters are captured upstream for urban or industrial use. Witness the fate of agriculture near the mouth of the Colorado. Even the best salt control practices cannot prevent some saliniation, but anything less lax can cause a chronic, sometimes actue, downturn in productivity.

 
At 6:27 AM, Blogger Christiane said...

I wonder whether this threat of the Iraqi Accord Front to suspend its participation in parliament couldn't result from the fact that they weren't able to prevent the passing of
a new law concerning the privatization of oil refineries ?

Also, I've some difficulties to read the new US politic of alliances in Iraq. Some week ago, as the US military told they were making alliance with Sunnis tribal sheiks in order to fight Al'Quaeda and arming them, I wondered whether we weren't seeing a change of alliances in Iraq ? This could go thusly :

1) The US see a need to compromise with the Sunni, both because of their main allies in the Region (Saudi Arabia, Jordania and Egypt) are Sunnis and won't easily accept a complete sidelining of the Sunnis in Iraq and because they realize that they won't be able to stabilize Iraq without an agreement with the main component of the Sunni in Iraq.
2) The US is actually going after Al'Sadr militiae because they are the Shiites holding the street. They hope to overcome their disorganization both militarily and politically by making as if the puppet forces participating in the puppet government they have installed (Dawa and SCIRI) was really representing all the Shiites.
3) After almost five years of war, the time factor become important : if the US is weary of that war at home, the Iraqi who is the only one really suffering from the war are even more weary of it. So the US may be hoping that the Iraqi are more ready to accept a settlement suiting its interests (the passing of this first law concerning the privatization of the refineries, if it isn't denied or blocked again show the road).
4) The main obstacle to US goal now is the refusal of the Shiites to compromise with the Sunni : aka to change the debaathification law and the distribution of oil (and the federalism problem which is linked to oil distribution). So how to they get this result ? I think that the answer is in Tehran. It the SCIRI is pressed by Teheran to compromise, then things may go forward in the sense fo the US interests.. But the Iranians wants something in exchange..
5) In this context the Anonymous comment made at 6.42PM and quoting Kissinger is entlightening..

 
At 8:52 AM, Blogger Chuck Jones said...

For the long view on salinization in lower Mesoptamia see:
"Salt and Silt in Ancient Mesopotamian Agriculture: Progressive changes in soil salinity and sedimentation contributed to the breakup of past civilizations", by Thorkild Jacobsen and Robert M. Adams.
Science 21 November 1958: Vol. 128. no. 3334, pp. 1251 - 1258

 
At 9:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aren't some of Egypt's temples experiencing problems due to the Nile being dammed? I thought that many of the painted and inscribed surfaces were flaking and falling away due to the salts in ground water. The water table remains high year round due to the Aswan dam and the moisture and salts are drawn upward in the limestone of the columns and structures, causing the surfaces of the stone to deteriorate. At least I think I have read that.

 
At 10:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agriculture in the southern part of Iraq was ruined long ago by poor stewardship of resources and deliberate destruction.

I do not think your expert has it right. In fact I am certain he has the wrong take. His last sentence sounds like the finger-wagging of a colonial 'expert'. Only whites know how to run things. I thought we had got beyond such things, and certainly on this blog.

The fact is that southern Iraq is a much more difficult problem than the Nile Valley. Any extensive amounts of water and you will almost certainly get salinisation under those environmental conditions. Any ancient empire would want to develop irrigation in Iraq - the combination of heat and water is ideal for massively increasing agricultural production and thus state revenues. However no-one knew in ancient times the inevitable environmental consequence: salinisation of the land. It was ignorance and not 'poor stewardship'. They were ignorant because the salinisation comes decades even centuries after the magnificent schemes of irrigation are put in place. The greatest schemes of irrigation in Iraq were put in place by the Sasanian Persians (AD 226-637). Iraq has never recovered from their magnificent schemes.

'deliberate destruction': is that Saddam drying out the marshes or what? It sounds like the traditional complaints made against governments in Iraq, which go back to medieval times, the Abbasid Caliphs, the Saljuqs and the Mongols were all accused of that. I have my doubts.

The point that your expert does not comment upon is that the area of land cultivated has massively increased in recent years, as can be seen from the latest satellite imagery (Google Earth will do). Large areas of land which they didn't bother with before, and which must be marginal for supplies of water, have been put under cultivation. I get the impression this took off after 1991, but has accelerated since 2003. The reason is obvious; less possibility to import food, and since 2003, no local government control over what a farmer does.

This also must play a big role in the problem in Dhi Qar. Though I haven't checked out the comparative areas under cultivation in that district.

 
At 11:09 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

The alacrity with which the media dispatched Bush's latest AQ lies impressed me. CNN's correspondent for instance followed his Monday speech noting that he'd mentioned AlQaida 23 times in 32 minutes and then disputed the contention that AQ and the Iraqi jihadis were the same. Former CIA DDI John McLaughlin followed to second the analysis.

These recent bursts of honest reporting followed the NyT's Public Editor's Op-Ed upbraiding reporters for uncritically reporting the Bush propaganda line on Iran.



Now US News and World Report:



As President Bush continues to stress al Qaeda as the chief threat to Iraq's stability--a reprised effort to establish a link between al Qaeda in Iraq and the 9/11 attackers--U.S. military forces on the ground in Iraq are fighting a complex war in regions with vast networks of overlapping loyalties--and few foreign fighters. Most members of al Qaeda in Iraq, say commanders on the ground, are local Iraqi outcasts.



"I can count them [foreign fighters] as a total I have engaged, dead or alive, in the 10 months I've been here on one hand," says Col. David Sutherland, the U.S. commander of coalition forces in the hotly contested area of Diyala province....

The problem in Iraq, Byman says, is not so much that it has an insurgency than that it is a failed state. "It's not just bad guys shooting the government, but in many parts you have no government authority whatsoever." This means that in addition to civil violence in regions, there is also crime. "To fight this, you need to build a strong state--police, courts." But often, he says, the enemy of this approach can be the same local groups that might be needed to fight against al Qaeda.


The bottom line, says Byman, is that "if you just focus on building the state, you don't have the Anbar awakening. But if you do the Anbar awakening again and again" by teaming up with local sheiks and their tribes, "you have too many armed groups."

 
At 1:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do you think will happen to Iraq if US troops leave?

Bush says, Al Queda might win.

I read that military simulation exercise says the country will break up into 3.

I think however, violence will go down because there will be less funding as those who give money now do so because these insurgents are appealing to their benefactors as victims of American occupation. So once US leaves, funding will dry up, because the US is not there anymore so donors are not anymore interested, and the insurgents will now have to find real work to feed their families. I think Sunnis will be realistic that they have to make peace with Shiites. Sadr will call for reconciliation since the country has to move forward and they are in power too.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home