Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
|
 |
09-12-2007, 13:06 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Postmaster General
Military Professional
Join Date: 08-20-03
Country: 
|
U.S. seeks pact with Shiite militia
Quote:
U.S. seeks pact with Shiite militia
By Ned Parker, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 12, 2007
BAGHDAD -- -- U.S. diplomats and military officers have been in talks with members of the armed movement loyal to Muqtada Sadr, a sharp reversal of policy and a grudging recognition that the radical Shiite cleric holds a dominant position in much of Baghdad and other parts of Iraq.
The secret dialogue has been going on since at least early 2006, but appeared to yield a tangible result only in the last week -- with relative calm in an area of west Baghdad that has been among the capital's most dangerous sections.
The discussions have been complicated by divisions within Sadr's movement as well as the cleric's public vow never to meet with Iraq's occupiers. Underlying the issue's sensitivity, Sadrists publicly deny any contact with the Americans or British -- fully aware the price of acknowledging such meetings would be banishment from the movement or worse.
The dialogue represents a drastic turnaround in the U.S. approach to Sadr and his militia, the Mahdi Army. The military hopes to negotiate the same kind of marriage of convenience it has reached in other parts of Iraq with former insurgent groups, many Saddam Hussein loyalists, and the Sunni tribes that supported them. Both efforts are examples of how U.S. officials have sought to end violence by cooperating with groups they once considered intractable enemies.
In 2004, U.S. officials branded Sadr an outlaw and demanded his arrest, sparking two major Shiite revolts in Baghdad and in the southern shrine city of Najaf that left more than a thousand dead. Last year, as the Bush administration developed its "surge" strategy, military planners said the campaign would also target Shiite militias involved in sectarian killings. U.S. commanders later accused Iranian-backed elements of the Mahdi Army of carrying out deadly bomb attacks against U.S. forces and spearheading sectarian violence.
U.S. officials now feel they have no choice but to talk to the militia. Despite its internal rifts, the Sadr movement is widely seen as the most powerful force in Baghdad. The Mahdi Army's grip is absolute on most of the capital's Shiite neighborhoods, where it sells fuel and electricity and rents houses, and it has reached deep inside the army and police. U.S. soldiers have marveled at the movement's ability to generate new leaders to replace almost every fighter they lock up.
U.S. officials fear that failure to reach a political compromise with the Sadrists could have severe consequences once U.S. forces begin to pull back from their current high levels.
"If there are no American troops and there is no American deal, the Mahdi Army seizes control of Baghdad. That's the vision. It's not a pleasant vision. It's a really bad vision. In situations like this, the most extreme elements tend to predominate," said a U.S. diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.
In his testimony to Congress on Monday, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, underscored the importance of reaching out to the Mahdi Army, deflecting a suggestion that the U.S. declare the movement a terrorist group.
"You're not going to kill or capture all of the Sadr militia anymore than we are going to kill or capture all the insurgents in Iraq," Petraeus said. "Some of this is a little bit distasteful. It's not easy sitting across the table, let's say, or drinking tea with someone whose tribal members may have shot at our forces or in fact drawn the blood -- killed our forces."
The White House is keen for a breakthrough. "There's a part of the Sadrist camp that is extremist and dedicated to killing us, and we need to kill them instead. But there are others who we think we might be able to work with," said an administration official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity.
Officials point to their negotiations with Sunni insurgents as a model. The Sunnis, however, cooperated in large part because they had split with Al Qaeda in Iraq militants and needed U.S. help to battle them. By contrast, the Sadrists have yet to decide that they want a clear break from their more radical and lawless elements.
Contacts with Sadr's followers have included clandestine meetings with U.S. Embassy officials in the fortified Green Zone and encounters on the street between low-level militia commanders and U.S. captains.
This month's breakthrough came when Lt. Col. Patrick Frank, responsible for west Baghdad's dangerous Bayaa, Jihad and Amal neighborhoods, met Sept. 3 with tribal leaders belonging to the Mahdi Army at Camp Falcon, a sprawling U.S. base.
To preserve the movement's posture of not negotiating with Americans, the tribal leaders did not discuss their affiliation, but their identity was well known. "The organization we are extending our hand to is the Jaish al Mahdi," Frank said, using the group's Arabic name. A Sadr follower in west Baghdad confirmed that Shiite and Sunni tribal leaders were in negotiations with the Americans for a truce in the area.
The session, which brought together commanders, community officials and mostly Shiite leaders, was the fruit of talks initiated by the Sadrists in late July, Frank said in an interview.
Moderate Sadrists involved in the Mahdi Army's social service network contacted U.S. forces through intermediaries, Frank said. The region was largely Sunni until the Mahdi Army began driving out residents and replacing them with Shiites last year.
Since then, residents had grown unhappy that their neighborhood was the stage for shootouts and bombings. Some Sadr loyalists started passing tips to the Americans on militants.
An opening for wider talks came with Sadr's announcement nearly two weeks ago that his militia would halt operations for six months to give it time to weed out alleged rogue elements. That call was in response to fighting between Sadr's followers and another Shiite militia in the holy city of Karbala that left 52 dead.
"Once Muqtada Sadr issued his call for six months of nonviolence, we thought that went hand in hand with the initiative we were attempting to start," Frank said. "It did give us an opportunity that was very helpful to the discussion effort."
When they met, Frank proposed the Sadrists stop attacks for two weeks. In exchange, he said the Americans would consider reducing their raids in the district. The Sadr representatives relayed the plan back to Mahdi Army brigade and company commanders and violence dropped last week, the commander said.
Frank has no illusions that peace is suddenly at hand. "We understand that it may be cyclical. Reconciliation efforts may occur many times. We may see a spike in contact between militant Jaish al Mahdi, Iraqi security forces and the coalition forces and then move back into a reconciliation process.
"We have to craft a way ahead. We have to find a workable solution with the community leaders, the religious leaders and essentially the local political leaders within Jaish al Mahdi," he added.
As in the talks with Sunni sheiks and armed groups in Anbar province, in western Iraq, U.S. officials who have met with Sadrists and their intermediaries have sought to convince them that the United States has no interest in occupying Iraq and that cooperating with the military will expedite its departure.
"The idea was clearly, 'Your violence is increasing the time we will be here . . . if you want to stop this, lets talk,' " a second U.S. diplomat said. "With the Sunnis, it took over a year and a half for it to generate the kind of momentum it has."
How far the contacts with the Sadrists can go may depend on a debate that militia members say is raging within their movement. Lawmaker and Sadr loyalist Qusay Abdul Wahab said the truce aimed to make a clear distinction between the Mahdi Army and fighters who had used the group as a cover for killings and other crimes.
"Those who do not obey the Sadr office will surface. The Iraqi security forces will go after them," he said, adding it was acceptable for U.S. forces to do the same.
A street commander in Sadr City put the policy this way: "Anyone who fights the Americans now is not from the Mahdi Army. Muqtada Sadr sent this order to freeze the Mahdi Army for just one reason: to distinguish between good and bad Mahdi Army members."
The fighter vowed that the militia would punish anyone who took advantage of the militia's name. "If we catch any of them, they will be tried, interrogated and they will be punished and treated as bandits," he said, adding that the militia recently captured 10 Iranians with Al Qaeda operatives in eastern Diyala province and punished them. "We dealt with them," he said, smiling and refusing to say what they had done.
The fighter's next remarks, however, were a quick reminder of the long road the Americans have to travel before they enjoy a partnership with Sadr's movement.
"Anyone who collaborates with the Americans will be considered a traitor," the fighter warned.
ned.parker@latimes.com
Times staff writers Doyle McManus and Julian E. Barnes in Washington and special correspondents in Baghdad contributed to this report.
Sign Up
|
Maybe this is a part of the success plan for Iraq and part of the new confidence that Gen Patreaus and Ambassador Crocker has exhibited.
Al Sadr is being recognised as a partner in the stabilisation programme and plan.
There are those who feel one should not negotiate with a terrorist and there are those who feel that one should talk to all concerned.
Personally, I feel uncomfortable to recognise a terrorist and negotiate with such people who make gruesome murder, mayhem and beheading their business. If Saddam was bad, so is Al Sadr and the whole terrorist gangs both sides of the terrorist spectrum, Shias and Sunnis!
However, Iraq has become such a tiresome episode, that maybe one should even be ready to negotiate with the Devil, if that helps.
Even so, I feel it still to be a trifle queasy!
If one goes by the media, the Administration's comments and also what one heard in the proceeding of the Congress, the Maliki govt is not pulling its weight and is partisan. Therefore, unless the Federal govt becomes politically representative, there is every chance that Iraq would become a surrogate of Iran and that would not be in the interest of the US or of those who are worried about Iran's nuclear ambition and hegemonic plans.
The drawdown envisaged is not much, maybe a Brigade to assuage ruffled feathers. But will it satisfy those who want their boys back in the future thereafter? Anbar cannot be taken as representative because Iraq is Shia majority and though it is not said, the Iraqi Sunnis are under serious pressure of the Sunni Arab nations to behave, lest the US hands over Iraq to the Shias. That would be a serious blow to the Arab Nations and to the Sunnis in Iraq.
__________________
"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."
I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.
HAKUNA MATATA
|
|
|
|
09-12-2007, 13:11 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Postmaster General
Military Professional
Join Date: 08-20-03
Country:
|
Quote:
The 'proxy war': UK troops are sent to Iranian border
British soldiers return to action as tensions between US and Iran grow
Exclusive by Kim Sengupta in Baghdad
Published: 12 September 2007
British forces have been sent from Basra to the volatile border with Iran amid warnings from the senior US commander in Iraq that Tehran is fomenting a "proxy war".
In signs of a fast-developing confrontation, the Iranians have threatened military action in response to attacks launched from Iraqi territory while the Pentagon has announced the building of a US base and fortified checkpoints at the frontier.
The UK operation, in which up to 350 troops are involved, has come at the request of the Americans, who say that elements close to the Iranian regime have stepped up supplies of weapons to Shia militias in recent weeks in preparation for attacks inside Iraq.
The deployment came within a week of British forces leaving Basra Palace, their last remaining base inside Basra city, and withdrawing to the airport for a widely expected final departure from Iraq. Brigadier James Bashall, commander of 1 Mechanised Brigade, based at Basra said: "We have been asked to help at the Iranian border to stop the flow of weapons and I am willing to do so. We know the points of entry and I am sure we can do what needs to be done. The US forces are, as we know, engaged in the 'surge' and the border is of particular concern to them."
The mission will include the King's Royal Hussars battle group, 250 of whom were told at the weekend that they would be returning to the UK as part of a drawdown of forces in Iraq.
The operation is regarded as a high-risk strategy which could lead to clashes with Iranian-backed Shia militias or even Iranian forces and also leaves open the possibility of Iranian retaliation in the form of attacks against British forces at the Basra air base or inciting violence to draw them back into Basra city. Relations between the two countries are already fraught after the Iranian Revolutionary Guards seized a British naval party in the Gulf earlier this year.
The move came as General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Iraq, made some of the strongest accusations yet by US officials about Iranian activity. General Petraeus spoke on Monday of a "proxy war" in Iraq, while Mr Crocker accused the Iranian government of "providing lethal capabilities to the enemies of the Iraqi state".
In an interview after his appearance before a congressional panel on Monday, General Petraeus strongly implied that it would soon be necessary to obtain authorisation to take action against Iran within its own borders, rather than just inside Iraq. "There is a pretty hard look ongoing at that particular situation" he said.
The Royal Welsh battle group, with Challenger tanks and Warrior armoured vehicles, is conducting out regular exercises at the Basra air base in preparation for any re-entry into the city. No formal handover of Basra to the Iraqi government has yet taken place and the UK remains responsible for maintaining security in the region.
The Iraqi commander in charge of the southern part of the country, General Mohan al-Furayji, said he would not hesitate to call for British help if there was an emergency.
While previous US military action has been primarily directed against Sunni insurgents, it is Shia fighters, which the US accuses Iran of backing, who now account for 80 per cent of US casualties.
For the British military the move to the border is a change of policy. They had stopped patrols along the long border at Maysan despite US concerns at the time that the area would become a conduit for weapons into Iraq.
The decision to return to the frontier has been heavily influenced by the highly charged and very public dispute with the United States. British commanders feel that they cannot turn down the fresh American request for help after refusing to delay the withdrawal from Basra Palace. They also maintain that the operation will stop Iranian arms entering Basra.
Brigadier Bashall said: "We are not sitting here idly at the air bridge. The security of Basra is still our responsibility and we shall act where necessary. We are also prepared to restore order in Basra City if asked to do so."
The US decision to build fortifications at the Iranian border, after four years of presence in Iraq, shows, say American commanders, that the "Iranian threat" is now one of their main concerns.
Maj-Gen Rick Lynch, commander of the US Army's 3rd Infantry Division, said 48 Iranian-supplied roadside bombs had been used against his forces killing nine soldiers. "We've got a major problem with Iranian munitions streaming into Iraq. This Iranian interference is troubling and we have to stop it," he told The Wall Street Journal this week.
Meanwhile at a conference in Baghdad on regional co-operation, Iran claimed the US was supporting groups mounting attacks from Iraqi territory in the Kurdish north.
Said Jalili , Iran's deputy foreign minister, last night said: "I think [the US and its allies] are going to prevaricate with the truth because they know they have been defeated in Iraq and they have not been successful. And so they are going to put the blame on us, on the other side."
The 'proxy war': UK troops are sent to Iranian border - Independent Online Edition > Middle East
|
This is also pertinent.
It will ensure that the Iranian trickle into Iraq is reduced, but how would Al Sadr and the Shias take to it?
It would seriously affect their logistics and 'volunteers'. |
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
 Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:59 AM.
|
| 
Similar Threads
