The British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq

**Shek** · 02-24-2007, 08:09 AM

Cordesman has long been pessimistic on Iraq, although he always has a strong analytic chain for his reasoning. Even if you disagree with his conclusions, you will always learn something from his writings.

The British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/...tish_basra.pdf

glyn · 02-24-2007, 09:43 AM

Why am I so unconvinced at his reasoning?

T_igger_cs_30 · 02-24-2007, 10:15 AM

It is very easy to be pessimistic on the UK's decision to withdraw from Iraq, but given that it is already obvious why, the UK's resolve to also sort out the Afghanistan problem by reinforcing that combat zone because of the lack of willingness of other UN countries to add extra support, also our other commitments around the world which we are still honouring, and though not much has been said at this point, but Argentina and the "Malvina's" is being whispered again in certain quarters...........The UK is certainly not "running away" from anything" indeed she is "running to" ongoing commitments and preparing itself for other's....it is time that we had a Government who realised that it is time to "increase our strength" and stop the false economy that is going on.

Versus · 02-24-2007, 13:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shek

Cordesman has long been pessimistic on Iraq, although he always has a strong analytic chain for his reasoning. Even if you disagree with his conclusions, you will always learn something from his writings.

The British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/...tish_basra.pdf

Okaaay, lets make few assumptions.
First of all to define what is going on.
If we take the statement that the Middle East is widely populated by Muslim folks would it be true. I think so. There are few others too but Muslims are majority, right?. Yes that one is true.

The Muslim world is divided by two main religious movements or fractions.Shiites and Sunnis. I tend to compare that religious state of things with the Christian religion and the bias within, where you have two major blocks Catholic and Orthodox Christians and than you have further bias on each side. But in order not to make this post WAR and PEACE size, lets just say that within Muslim world there is a major bias. Would that be true? Ummm,yep.
In the past that region was subjected to various conflicts, conquests, bloody battles fought by many different sides and cultures.If we go one level up and try to look at it from a different perspective, with smaller resolution this time,we could see that on that specific point on Earth, the middle east, there was a lot of commotion and mixture over time.Simply there is so much history there...Ok, so now, if there was so much commotion in the past,would it be wise to assume that people whom live there know a lot since they came in contact with so many different cultures and civilizations? I guess so.

So to sum all this we have one dominant religion divided along one major bias, concentrated on the pretty busy place on Earth.

As any species, humans have an urge to dominate area that they populate. To control it in order to survive. So in the middle east they are fighting fiercely for a long time. Middle East became interesting to the Europe and to the, what later will be known as DA WEST,several times. First Macedonians, than Romans, than Crusaders and at the end British Empire and European Colonialism. So DA West came to DA East, searching for something. First and only reason why Europeans went to East was the over all economy. In order to progress and gain wealth, they went there to make money and to make money by all means. Including by waging wars and conquests. Big deal, everyone does it. Well it turned to be a big deal since Europeans didn't just came there saying let's trade and fight they came there also by saying in order to be with us you have to become one of us aka become Christians.
So not only that the Europeans took their money, their land, they also wanted to take their religion. And the Muslims replied with Jihad. A holy war. War fought for principles not for material things. War became spiritual, fought from a different dimension, from the soul. That made permanent mark in the relations between East and West. From that moment everyone whom is not Muslim, whom is not one of their kind is seen as someone that doesn't belong there, someone whom is infidel. A non believer. Someone that needs to be destroyed immediately and without remorse.

I was in Minneapolis when Operation Iraqi freedom started, in sport bar, watching the game on TV with my friends, just drinking beer and eating guacamole,chatting as usual. Before that I had many conversations with my friends whom also had their own view at the situation and we had many discussions about Iraq. I did expressed my doubts and fears and said that I'm afraid that this thing wont go at all. They said to me that I shouldn't worry since US military is strong and it will crush Iraqi military in no time. They were fully patriotic and me, whom was at the time FOB, didn't feel like arguing. I went home to my wife and watched the news. One thing that was mentioned on CNN was that Saddam has some old Russian military generals as advisers and from that point I knew that all I was feared of will actually happened. I knew that the Iraqi military offer small resistance to the US military. I knew that they will let US into the Iraq and that they will let US think that they won. And that the guerrilla tactic will follow after that. I knew all that cause same thing happened to me while I was in the army during the Kosovo campaign. The KLA offered little resistance, they let you in into the village, wait till dusk settles down and you start your dinner and than they attack with full force.
Basic guerrilla 101. How come that the US military and politicians didn't saw that? Why did the US thought that it will go smooth? And this wasn't just a case of securing one village along important communication route, this was securing the WHOLE country. My friends started to understand my fears when insurgency started and the body count among US forces started to climb.
All I could say to them than was the line from the movie Aliens when Ripley says to Newt that these people here are to protect you, they are soldiers. and Newt replies with something like:"It wont make any difference..."

I'm not trying to play some smart a** here and say that I know everything.But I do know that in order to make statement like we are losing or winning, you need to know first what your objective is. For me, the objective for the "coalition of the willing" is still a mystery.

**Shek** · 02-24-2007, 13:57 PM

Versus,

Sorry, but your post, besides rambling on aimlessly, is just plain wrong on most accounts.

1. Saddam believed that the US could not defeat the Iraqi military.
2. The general strategic objectives have been stated time and time again. How you don't know these, I don't know, but it is a strong indicator. They may be tough to "operationalize," but they are pretty clear to anyone who has ever watched or read a transcript from a speech from most anyone in the administration on Iraq.

Anyways, keep watching Aliens. I'm sure it will provide you with more insight.

Cheers.

Versus · 02-24-2007, 15:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shek

Versus,

Sorry, but your post, besides rambling on aimlessly, is just plain wrong on most accounts.

1. Saddam believed that the US could not defeat the Iraqi military.
2. The general strategic objectives have been stated time and time again. How you don't know these, I don't know, but it is a strong indicator. They may be tough to "operationalize," but they are pretty clear to anyone who has ever watched or read a transcript from a speech from most anyone in the administration on Iraq.

Anyways, keep watching Aliens. I'm sure it will provide you with more insight.

Cheers.

Well, yes...My approach wasn't exactly accurate. What I was trying to say is that any form of foreign influence,in the middle east, will be highly questioned by the local structures and more likely to be opposed to. It may not look like it, but I think that the middle eastern people will never accept any form of western values or views at the world.

Of course that I know what the goals are in Iraq. My previous post doesn't mean that I would like US to fail, I would like it to succeed, but that just looks highly unlikely to me right now. I'll try to dig up some more info and make my post more accurate.

**Shek** · 02-24-2007, 15:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Versus

Well, yes...My approach wasn't exactly accurate. What I was trying to say is that any form of foreign influence,in the middle east, will be highly questioned by the local structures and more likely to be opposed to. It may not look like it, but I think that the middle eastern people will never accept any form of western values or views at the world.

Agreed. Democratization as a top down process was fraught with the potential for failure, as we are seeing the results of this in Iraq right now. If we had framed it through traditional power structures from the bottom up, its potential for success would have been greater. Would it have blossomed into a Western liberal democracy? No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Versus

Of course that I know what are the goals in Iraq. My previous post doesn't mean that I would like US to fail, I would like it to succeed, but that just looks highly unlikely to me right now.

I wasn't to imply that you weren't wishing success, if that is what prompted you to post the above. I do agree with your sentiment that our ability to accomplish the goals as stated by the administration is unlikely.

TheChosenOne · 02-25-2007, 06:40 AM

Quote:

but I think that the middle eastern people will never accept any form of western values or views at the world.

This statement is correct and inherently wrong from it's concept. It is correct in the fact that many, especially older individuals, will resist change. That just appears to be human nature, the older we get, the less change we like in our lives. But it is also wrong because change occurs whether you want it to or not.

Have you been to Iraq? For example, the region I'm in, the Babil province, it is mainly rural with the exception of a few larger cities. It has been common practice for first cousins to marry each other for over a millienium. Since we have came, rid Iraq of a brutal dictatorship and brought with us our ways of life, things have changed. This tradition is slowing changing and women are finally getting the chance to say "NO" to marrying someone they were betrothed to at birth. Go to Baghdad and you'll see muslims that dress just like any westerner. The culuture of the west is far reaching and penetrates the most remote areas as with the areas, like the middle east, that resist it. In the end, our culture has more projection then any hard power we can throw at someone. For the life of me I can't find the picture on the website I'm lookin on right now but I know it's there. It's another example. It's a picture of a Army Soldier with two Iraqi IA's and they are all flippin' off the camera. The Iraqi's, especially the younger generations, since they are more impressionable, pick up on our values and culture like they eat candy.

crooks · 02-25-2007, 11:57 AM

Isn't the UK only withdrawing 1,600 troops?

Since when is leaving well over half your troops in a battlezone defeat?

Versus · 02-25-2007, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheChosenOne

This statement is correct and inherently wrong from it's concept. It is correct in the fact that many, especially older individuals, will resist change. That just appears to be human nature, the older we get, the less change we like in our lives. But it is also wrong because change occurs whether you want it to or not.

Have you been to Iraq? For example, the region I'm in, the Babil province, it is mainly rural with the exception of a few larger cities. It has been common practice for first cousins to marry each other for over a millienium. Since we have came, rid Iraq of a brutal dictatorship and brought with us our ways of life, things have changed. This tradition is slowing changing and women are finally getting the chance to say "NO" to marrying someone they were betrothed to at birth. Go to Baghdad and you'll see muslims that dress just like any westerner. The culuture of the west is far reaching and penetrates the most remote areas as with the areas, like the middle east, that resist it. In the end, our culture has more projection then any hard power we can throw at someone. For the life of me I can't find the picture on the website I'm lookin on right now but I know it's there. It's another example. It's a picture of a Army Soldier with two Iraqi IA's and they are all flippin' off the camera. The Iraqi's, especially the younger generations, since they are more impressionable, pick up on our values and culture like they eat candy.

I hope you are right. I really do.

Ray · 02-25-2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:

When the Ba’ath Party took control in 1968, one of its proclaimed goals was equality of men and women. Women’s inclusion was a key component of the social revolution. Women were given the right to vote, receive an education, and work outside the home. Education was mandatory for both girls and boys up to the age of 16. Women were strongly encouraged to attend universities and acquire professional skills.

The need for women to play a central role in the workforce during the exodus of men to fight in the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88) drew women into formerly male-dominated positions, such as career military officers, oil-project designers, and construction supervisors, scientists and engineers, doctors, accountants and jobs in general administration. In 1989, 27 women were elected to Iraq’s 250-seat national assembly – at 10.8%, a higher ratio than the British House of Commons had at the time, with 41 women out of 650 seats (6.3%).
Iraq’s war on women Lesley Abdela - openDemocracy

That should indicate Iraq' situation in Saddam's time.

Western dresses and makeup was also much in vogue during Saddam's time, though the Islamic law did influence the lives of the Iraqis as it does even now.

They were the most liberal and modern of Islamic society in the Middle East, even though Saddam was repressive. Saddam was well aware that if Islam was given a free rein, it would go berserk and topple him from power. He placed himself above Islam and was ruthless on the religious leaders.

Islam being an autocratic religion has a psyche where the adherents require a dictate to conform, rather than have a democratic dialogue. Therefore, democracy, as is known in the world, cannot flourish in an Islamic country unless it has a ruthless dictator or the high handed military leader at the helm

One doesn't have to go very far to observe this.

Pakistan is one of the most modern countries, in an Islamic manner of speaking. Its women wear westernised clothes, they all don't wear the burkha, the women wear makeup, they have a liquor industry even though technically they cannot imbibe and they also have a Parliament.

Yet, inspite of being an modern Islamic country and though they have the resemblance of a democracy, the same failed on many occasion and required the heavy hand of the military which seized power through coups. It may be of interest to note that Pakistan made progress under the military dictatorship of Ayub Khan and Musharraf, while during the 'democratic phase' of civil political leadership, it floundered.

This indicates the Islamic people can only be taken to greater heights under a strong leadership that brooks no dissent.

Ray · 02-25-2007, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crooks

Isn't the UK only withdrawing 1,600 troops?

Since when is leaving well over half your troops in a battlezone defeat?

It is not the numbers, it is whether the numbers left behind are equipped for the task.

From the American point of view, it appears that it is not!

The whole problem has been a case of biting more than one chew. Even before Afghanistan was brought to a logical conclusion, Iraq was addressed, based on a fallacious premise that Iraq would capitulate and the people would be delighted to have their freedom from the suppressive regime of Saddam.

The problem that was not addressed was that the Shias would wreak vengeance against the Sunnis and that would lead to a insurgent situation and the whole situation would snowball uncontrollably; and the Kurds would chip in for their pound of flesh! To make matters worse, the administration and the Army was sent packing by Bremmer, for reasons that only the US Administration knows. It appears that the US was so charged against Saddam, that anything associated with Saddam appeared to them as a red rag.

Ray · 02-26-2007, 13:57 PM

Quote:

IRAQ TROOP WITHDRAWAL
British Leaving Basra to the Mahdi Militia

By Bernhard Zand

Southern Iraq is relatively secure. But the British have not taken advantage of the four years of occupation to develop this bleak region. Now that they are pulling out, the Shiite Mahdi militia are standing by to take over.

When Hussein Ali Kassim left a friend's house a few nights ago in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, the midnight scene was quite unlike what one might expect to see in war-torn Baghdad: Drivers were out and about and fruit sellers plied their sweets beneath street corner lamp posts. There were neither car bombs bursting nor the kind of strictly enforced night-time curfews common in Baghdad.

"The security situation in Basra is good," says Kassim, a local pharmacist. "It's still worse than before the war, but it's improving every month."

That is exactly the conclusion that the British Prime Minister Tony Blair reached this week. On Wednesday, he announced the withdrawal of 1,600 of 7,000 British soldiers stationed in southern Iraq, citing an improved security situation in the town and a drop in murders to 30 in December. Sectarian violence in Basra has fallen "enormously," Blair said.

Compared to the 50 daily murders common in Baghdad, this is indeed an improvement. Reconstruction aid is flowing into the city, and while Iraqis in other parts of the country are battling it out with extremists, Basra's people have been spared the headline-making horrors.

"There is real progress there and we don't want to get in the way of that progress" by staying too long in the country, Blair noted.

Indeed, the situation couldn't be more different in Baghdad. President George W. Bush has begun sending an additional 20,000 troops to the Iraqi capital despite opposition from the US congress.

But does the fact that the British are sending troops home mean "mission accomplished" in southern Iraq? Not really.

Kassim, the pharmacist in Basra, is reluctant to talk candidly about the situation. Why is everything really so quiet in Basra? Who exactly controls the streets?

And who really takes care of imposing order? The police? The British? The Iraqi army? The militias?

"I can't say anything about that at the moment. I'm surrounded by people here. Let's talk about it later," he says.

British fail in Basra

The strategic advantage that the British had from the very beginning was that Basra, unlike other parts of Iraq, boasts a relatively homogeneous population sharing similar religious beliefs. The sectarian wars plaguing the rest of the country never spread here. Shiite-dominated southern Iraq suffered under Saddam, and for this reason, there was less resistance to the presence of foreign troops than was the case in central Iraq.

Added to this, Sunni extremists, al-Qaida in Iraq, and Fedayeen units loyal to the former regime, never gained a foothold in southern Iraq, which meant that Basra was spared the devastating bomb attacks responsible for hundreds of deaths elsewhere in the nation.

The British faced a different set of challenges in their sector, namely to recapture state authority, to mute the influence of Iranian-backed militias, and to focus on fixing war damage inflicted upon this country's poorest region.

Did they succeed? Despite the number of troops deployed here, the answer is no.

Today many parts of the city lack running water. Blackouts are a daily occurrence. Many seriously ill people have to reckon with taking a dangerous journey to Baghdad when they need anything other than aspirin or charcoal pills.

"Before the war we would ask for leukaemia medicine and know that the wait to get it could be long," says an oncologist at Basra's university hospital. "Today, when we make requests, we are pretty certain nothing will arrive."

Even though southern Iraq's oil industry is producing and exporting less oil than it did before for the war, its pumps and pipelines are actually operating at capacity -- aging, damaged valves, and insufficient storage make production increases impossible. There is scant discussion -- on the British side, anyway -- of how this critical economic jewel might one day fuel Iraqi's economic recovery. It would not be unfair to say that the British missed their chance to build a much-needed infrastructure here in this relatively peaceful region where such projects might have been successful.

75 percent of the police are loyal to Sadr

To be sure, the British have neither improved security in the region nor rebuilt a functioning state apparatus independent of Iranian influence. Thus, while the British army officially handed over power to the 10th Division of the Iraqi Army this weekend, locals like Kassim the pharmacist and others are not sure they are up to the task.

The town's police is efficient, albeit dominated by members of the Mahdi, a Shiite militia loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr. According to journalist Ghalid Khazal, 75 percent of the city's police officers follow orders from Sadr headquarters. That number is roughly the same as that mentioned by General Major Hassan Sawadi, the former police chief of Basra, one and a half years ago, when he said. "I estimate that 80 percent of the force's members do not obey my orders."

Tony Blair said that George W. Bush was completely satisfied with British plans to withdraw troops from Iraq. One man, however, is even more pleased by the move, for the British retreat means a gain for his group. Abd al-Karim al Insi, the Basra representative of Shiite ruler Moqtada al-Sadr, sees the departure as affirming an adage popular among Arabs during British colonial exploits in the region 100 years ago: "Nobody knows Mecca better than the people from Mecca."

"Since the invasion, we have pushed for the occupiers to leave Iraq," al Insi said. "Nobody can protect our country better than we can. We welcome this first step in the British withdrawal. Hopefully the Americans will present a timetable soon."

Iraq Troop Withdrawal: British Leaving Basra to the Mahdi Militia - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

The Mahdi will run a riot.

The influence of Iran will 'permeate' this area and it will become a stronghold of sectarian elements and the fountainhead of the spread of the Shia gangs all over Iraq!

Difficult times ahead!

xerxes · 02-27-2007, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shek

Versus,
1. Saddam believed that the US could not defeat the Iraqi military.

Mr shek, if i may intrude. ... here

I find it inresting that you mention that Saddam actually thought that he can stand against US conventional might???

xerxes · 02-27-2007, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheChosenOne

Have you been to Iraq? For example, the region I'm in, the Babil province, it is mainly rural with the exception of a few larger cities. It has been common practice for first cousins to marry each other for over a millienium. Since we have came, rid Iraq of a brutal dictatorship and brought with us our ways of life, things have changed. This tradition is slowing changing and women are finally getting the chance to say "NO" to marrying someone they were betrothed to at birth. Go to Baghdad and you'll see muslims that dress just like any westerner. The culuture of the west is far reaching and penetrates the most remote areas as with the areas, like the middle east, that resist it. In the end, our culture has more projection then any hard power we can throw at someone. For the life of me I can't find the picture on the website I'm lookin on right now but I know it's there. It's another example. It's a picture of a Army Soldier with two Iraqi IA's and they are all flippin' off the camera. The Iraqi's, especially the younger generations, since they are more impressionable, pick up on our values and culture like they eat candy.

I can tell u easilly that American culture influence was there before OIF and the fall of Saddam. I dont even know why are u relating them together sense Saddam was secular and he had as part of his collection the movies like Scareface, Godfather etc, etc. and considering the way his sons dressed, what you have said IMO is wrong. As far as inter-marrying cousins, that practice as you said has always been there, however I do believe that existed on smaller communities that kept to themselves, rather then cities.

02-24-2007, 08:09 AM	#1 (permalink)
Shek *Military Professional* Moderator Join Date: 02-23-05 Location: Krblachistan Posts: 7,629 Country:	The British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq Cordesman has long been pessimistic on Iraq, although he always has a strong analytic chain for his reasoning. Even if you disagree with his conclusions, you will always learn something from his writings. The British Defeat in the South and the Uncertain Bush "Strategy" in Iraq http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/...tish_basra.pdf __________________ "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

02-24-2007, 09:43 AM	#2 (permalink)
glyn *Military Professional* Join Date: 09-15-06 Location: Penzance, Cornwall UK Posts: 6,545	Why am I so unconvinced at his reasoning? __________________ Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

02-24-2007, 10:15 AM	#3 (permalink)
T_igger_cs_30 *Military Professional* Join Date: 01-04-07 Location: Canada Posts: 1,943 Country:	It is very easy to be pessimistic on the UK's decision to withdraw from Iraq, but given that it is already obvious why, the UK's resolve to also sort out the Afghanistan problem by reinforcing that combat zone because of the lack of willingness of other UN countries to add extra support, also our other commitments around the world which we are still honouring, and though not much has been said at this point, but Argentina and the "Malvina's" is being whispered again in certain quarters...........The UK is certainly not "running away" from anything" indeed she is "running to" ongoing commitments and preparing itself for other's....it is time that we had a Government who realised that it is time to "increase our strength" and stop the false economy that is going on. __________________ $<img src=http://C:\Documents and Settings\Wayne Smith\My Documents\002...My Pictures border=0 alt= />$ FEAR NAUGHT I don't work here ...I am an analyst!

02-24-2007, 13:57 PM	#5 (permalink)
Shek *Military Professional* Moderator Join Date: 02-23-05 Location: Krblachistan Posts: 7,629 Country:	Versus, Sorry, but your post, besides rambling on aimlessly, is just plain wrong on most accounts. 1. Saddam believed that the US could not defeat the Iraqi military. 2. The general strategic objectives have been stated time and time again. How you don't know these, I don't know, but it is a strong indicator. They may be tough to "operationalize," but they are pretty clear to anyone who has ever watched or read a transcript from a speech from most anyone in the administration on Iraq. Anyways, keep watching Aliens. I'm sure it will provide you with more insight. Cheers. Last edited by Shek : 02-24-2007 at 14:00 PM.

02-25-2007, 11:57 AM	#9 (permalink)
crooks Green, White 'n Orange *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 10-17-06 Location: Blarney, County Cork, Ireland Posts: 1,291 Country:	Isn't the UK only withdrawing 1,600 troops? Since when is leaving well over half your troops in a battlezone defeat? __________________ 'Liberty - it is newly strung and shall be heard.' - Motto of the United Irishmen.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: