Critics of the Bush Administration's policies in Iraq have charged that the Bush Administration's "surge" policy has failed, since its stated intention was to improve security to create the political space for "national reconciliation" in Iraq. Since national reconciliation has not taken place in Iraq, the surge has failed.
But after this week's US-assisted Iraqi government assault on neighborhoods in Basra controlled by Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, I fear that this criticism praises with faint damnation. I fear that it could be construed to accept the premise that the Bush Administration is trying to produce national political reconciliation in Iraq, while arguing that it has failed to achieve its goal.
After this week, I regard this premise to be a clear fraud.
While President Bush says the Iraqi government offensive showed that the prime minister believed "in evenhanded justice" - presumably because the government was showing that it would attack Shiite as Sunni militias - supporters of the Mahdi Army claimed that it was a political attack on their movement to weaken it prior to regional elections scheduled for October. But this interpretation of events is by no means limited to Iraqis.
The Washington Post reports:
Some [U.S] officials have concluded that [Iraqi Prime Minister] Maliki himself is firing "the first salvo in upcoming elections," the administration official said. "His dog in that fight is that he is basically allied with the Badr Corps" [a rival Shiite militia, associated with a rival Shiite political party that is part of the U.S.-backed government] against forces loyal to Sadr, the official said. "It's not a pretty picture."
U.S. officials claim that Prime Minister Maliki "decided to launch the offensive" without consulting U.S. officials. This is an incredible claim, when you consider that the U.S. is participating in - and now in some places leading, the Post reports - the offensive:
U.S. forces in armored vehicles battled Mahdi Army fighters Thursday in the vast Shiite stronghold of Sadr City, and military officials said Friday that U.S. aircraft bombed militant positions in the southern city of Basra, as the American role in a campaign against party-backed militias appeared to expand. Iraqi army and police units appeared to be largely holding to the outskirts of the Sadr City fighting, as U.S. troops took the lead.
Whatever one thinks of Moqtada al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army, they are hardly a marginal political force in Iraq. In 2006, the New York Times noted, supporters of Sadr constituted the largest bloc in the Shiite parliamentary alliance.
Not surprisingly, the majority of casualties in Basra have been civilian, according to hospital officials.
How, exactly, will this assault contribute to "national reconciliation"? Why are U.S. soldiers killing and dying in this operation that was decided, supposedly, without consultation with U.S. officials? Members of Congress should be asking. It's one thing if the train from New York to Washington is late. It's quite another story if we discover that the train is headed to Chicago.
Robert Naiman is Senior Policy Analyst and National Coordinator at Just Foreign Policy.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
26 Comments so far
Show AllAny country that doesn't have nuclear weapons and a way to send them anywhere on the planet will end up like Palestine.
When the US was going through their Civil War, there wasn't another country wanting to take the cotton of the South and the Mills of the north. There wasn't another occupation army trying to divide up the country into smaller areas so their corporations could buy-out the two main industries-- first helping one side with death squads, and then the other, and then playing them both against each other for the gain of the occupation forces as Belgium did in Rwanda. There wasn't an occupation army during our Civil war that over the years intentionally destroyed the drinking water, that even caused deaths among the occupation soldiers. There wasn't an occupation army arresting young men over 14, and below 60, who might father children. Moslems rarely rape women, because their lives would be in danger from the woman's relatives. The civil war was painful enough, and hard enough for the American people without having an occupation army as we are in Iraq, that covets every resource the war-torn people have. 1,190,000 Iraqis dead + 2mil displaced in other countries, and 2mil displaced within Iraq from their own homes, besides the many detention centers, is enough for a country that did nothing to us. If America really cared about women, they would get them out of the prisons that they have been held (to keep the guards happy) Many having never been charged with anything, and get a law passed that those children of guards and their raped mothers must be recompensed--not destroyed for family honor. American needs to leave immediately, and completely, and before we start talking anymore about torture in Tibet, we need to think about Bush's borrowed planet prisons, the planned pipeline in Kosovo, and the planned pipeline in Afghanistan, that have been on the books long before 9/11.
thank you folks- this discussion is enlightening.
I will call the white house comment line 202-456-1111 and tell them as a ordinary citizen- let Moctada win the elections in October and let him rule the country rightfully via his elections and he wants the Americans to get out
We are happy to oblige.
What's the surprise? The war is a lie? The surge isn't working? Iraq is not at one with itself? Wow!
http://www.ryanhartman.wordpress.com
The questions of sovereignty over oil will not go away just by installing a puppet government in the green zone. Obviously the guerrilla campaigns by the various tribal, regional and religious factions all want a say in their future too. The current outbreak is a result of greed. The US of Z , and the Iraqi puppets want winner take all, are not happy to dole out enough profits to support the rest of the nation, and so they are prepared to murder every last opposing citizen to increase their share. So the bombing is directly related to the extortionate oil contracts, drawn up by the oil mafia, and enforced on the people of Iraq by the US of Zionism. There has been no compromise, nor plans for supporting the former state of Iraq and its people with the revenues. Every death is caused by US greed and religious hatred, supported by Israeli Zionism. Every drop of blood now falling is because oil-man Bush is personally responsible for blasting each each man, women and child, with his apocalyptic fascist state apparatus of Weapons of mass destruction. He and his oil cronies are covered in blood and dead human flesh, and their words are excrement. This Mr Tony Blair, is what you meant, when you said publicly that the Oil would be safeguarded for the people of Iraq. You meant that death and extortion will bring their future to an end. Just one more black lie from another oily Western Politician.
Iraqi journalist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad's blows the doors off the US military surge by traveling into the belly of Baghdad: an open air prison which divides Sunni and Shia populations behind 12ft high walls.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2008/mar/17/baghdad.city.of.walls
Those concrete walls in Baghdad are dwarfed by the 30ft high concrete ones in the 'Holy' Land; which is in pieces, Bantustans. Both builders of those walls claim to be democracies and that the walls are for Security. Both builders of those walls exhibit the schizophrenic discipline of thinking two contradictory truths at the same time. Coined by Orwell as doublethink, the Ministry of Peace wages war, the Ministry of Truth fabricates lies and the Ministry of Love tortures and kills any it deems threatening. Most threatening for Big Brother are those with independent thought....
.....After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Israel's economy was devastated, but then came 9/11, and "suddenly new profit vistas opened up for any company that claimed it could spot terrorists in crowds, seal borders from attack and extract confessions from closed-mouthed prisoners…Many of the country's most successful entrepreneurs are using Israel's status as a fortressed state, surrounded by furious enemies, as a kind of twenty-four-hour-a-day showroom--a living example of how to enjoy relative safety amid constant war…Israel now sends $1.2 billion in "defense" products to the United States—up dramatically from $270 million in 1999…That makes Israel the fourth-largest arms dealer in the world…Much of this growth has been in the so-called "homeland security" sector. Before 9/11 homeland security barely existed as an industry. By the end of this year, Israeli exports in the sector will reach $1.2 billion--an increase of 20 percent. The key products and services are …precisely the tools and technologies Israel has used to lock in the occupied territories. Israel has learned to turn endless war into a brand asset, pitching its uprooting, occupation and containment of the Palestinian people as a half-century head start in the "global war on terror… Israel's policy of erecting walls and checkpoints to seal off the occupied territories are also "laboratories where the terrifying tools of our security states are being field-tested Palestinians--whether living in the West Bank or what the Israeli politicians are already calling "Hamasistan"--are no longer just targets. They are guinea pigs…" [2]
The Rest:
WAWA Blog March 30, 2008: Orwell meets Vanunu and The Industrial Military Media Security/Surveillance Complex
Actually, this shia versus shia struggle is much more based on CLASS ISSUES ...
And, hats off to Al Sadr for calling a truce ....
The ball is in his corner (again)
Malaki is entirely under the control of Bush and Cheney, IMO. They'll do to Basra what they did to Fallujah - over 5,000 civilians killed!
Canuckchuck has it right, "keep them killing each other while he steals the oil."
"Chaos" has been the only game plan of the Bush administration, foreign or domestic, and there never was an exit strategy. Bush has made the military industrial complex very, very wealthy on a strategy of "chaos", to say nothing of his oil industry friends. "Let the good times roll.", as long as the caissons roll.
War-ning:
This fascist Reich will be voted out,..but it will lay dormant for decades or centuries until it finds a way back to power. Eternal vigilance is no joke. That is why I fully endorse Sen. Gravel's call for a national initiative amendment to the Constitution. Citizens must be empowered in every jurisdiction to vote more often on more issues of our governance. As it stands, citizens get to give away their vote every 2-4 years to someone who "promises" to represent their interests, if we don't like them later, we can protest. We don't have time to wait 2-4 years!
Look at where "follow the leader" has gotten us. The people will "take back" this country from the abusers of the public trust when we take a more direct hand in the decisions our leaders must abide by. I've had it with protests, I want the dignity of a vote. Please visit www.vote.org and www.nationalinitiative.us
Where religion becomes involved, and it obviously is in Iraq! Because Sunni's and Shiites are two different sects of the same Islamic religion. But they are all the same ethnic group. There is no simple answer to such religious differences. It's something the Bush Administration should have saw coming. If he would have had one gram of knowledge of the region. Cheney saw it in 1992 at the end of the Gulf War. He knew it would be a disaster to fight a guerrilla war in Iraq's cities.
Most of us knew it would explode into a full scale religious war. Bush continuing on with this farce of his isn't going to change any of the facts any. There are centuries of bad blood between the two. If he thinks he can unite people like this by sheer will power he is insane. There isn't anything short of another Saddam Hussein that's going to unite the country! Or something similar to what Afghanistan and Iran has. So where was the point in getting rid of Saddam?????? It was a ego trip for Bush and nothing more!
Reading the article and the comments, my reaction was, Wow,these are things you don't get to hear much on the 'mainstream' media, including the 'more reputable' ones such as the BBC. An average person would only hear news stories that talk about some Shia Vs. Shia fighting and is bound to comment, 'why can't these people get along with each other! To think that America can bring them democracy (and possibly civilization?)' or something like that. I was one of those making that kind of comments. There's always more to these events than meets the eye, it appears.
When the Iraq "government" starts calling in US airstikes against the other half of the iraq "government", you KNOW Cheney is behind it.
keep them killing each otehr while he steals the oil
"We'll stand down when they stand up."
It seems that the Iraqis are 'standing up' to Bush's Quislings - can we call it Miller Time and come home now?
Any halfway informed person knows the Sadrists represent millions of Iraqis and are expected to win the elections in Basra this fall, but George continues to lie in our faces by saying the surge must now turn against these "terrorists" and "criminals", as tho most Iraqis side with Cheney-Bush, just a little mopping up of a few dissidents. It ain't small. Basra police are refusing to fight the Sadrists and joining up with them. Moqtada al Sadr is a holy man in Iraq, a powerful man by now possibly more powerful than Sistani, and every Iraqi home has a weapon. The move to consolidate Maliki's govt and secure the oil grab in the south is going to be costly.
The objective of this offensive is to encourage Iran to increase its support for al-Sadr, and then to create an incident to justify an invasion of Iran. Watch for an incident in which American troops are dramatically killed, and responsibility for those deaths then laid at the door of the Iranian Republican Guard. Then girded by Kyl-Lieberman Iran amendment the Senate passed in September, which was passed to
"...support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments," as part of our drive to "combat" Iran's "destabilizing influence."
This will be mere preamble, though. Israel will make the airstrikes into Iran, backed by the US Navy. Probably about the time that the Dems force Hillary to withdraw from the race.
Quote: "Critics of the Bush Administration's policies in Iraq have charged that the Bush Administration's "surge" policy has failed, since its stated intention was ...".
EMPHASIS: "its [stated] intention".
That's all it ever is with the Bush-Cheney cabal and their likes; 'stated', while not or never reflecting the real and underlying truth. Their 'stated intention' was to bring peace, justice, democracy, 'liberation', ... to Iraq and for Iraqis; but only 'stated', not true, was it. It obviously was not what they ever and really intended. In the perverted, psychopathic, sense, they did bring 'liberation'; from life, sovereignty, .... After all, they did not precisely describe what they meant by 'liberation'.
As for the likely outcome of the upcoming elections, when Sadrists are supposed to also run, I'm not God, so can't be sure; however, my hunch (and hope) is that either the Sadrists or the sound Sunnis will win. Assuming this is the outcome, then my only other hope is that they won't make the govt theocratic; definitely not with the brutal and insane injustices of Sharia Law anyway.
The Sadrists, so their Mehdi army, will hopefully win in the present situation; and regardless of the upcoming elections. Those are important, but they don't need to be considered in terms of simply hoping that they win, or else do not really lose, in the present conflict.
Now, and given some people posted, above, about Iraq's OIL; yes, the war on Iraq obviously enough is for the OIL, including even if Big Oil (the industry) does or did not consitute a portion of the group wanting this war for Oil. I recently read an article saying that the war's for oil, but not at the behest of Big Oil, which purportedly was against the war. I never heard or read of Big Oil opposing the launching of this war early on; but this article I'm referring to says the Big Oil would've been or simply was against the war. But Big Oil will certainly move in as soon as it has a chance to do so, to grab whatever it can.
Cheney and others behind this war have made it clear that they're after Iraq's oil; if not in verbal statements, then still in documents.
Some, including Ray McGovern, still claim that the war's for Israel, some people even saying that it's only or wholly for Israel. McGovern did the former in an article posted here just a few days ago.
Those people don't alter my view at all, for they strike me as speaking of appearances; strong as they are, but still only. There's some cause to be fooled by such appearances, for the Zionist league in the USA has real and very detrimental, caustic influence in the USA; and the U.S. govt is Israel's big protector, etc. We cannot deny that these are true; we couldn't deny it while also being able to prove that we'd then be right, anyway. However, it's obvious that these are true only due to U.S. politicians, university deans, etc., being spineless, too soul-less, ..., and much too prone to folding to evil; very weak. After all, they could easily tell AIPAC to, f.e., F*CK OFF!, go jump off of high cliffs overlooking sharp, jagged rock!, go get yourselves checked into psychiatric asylums!, etc.
Satan can't make a person do something when the person refuses to do so. Similarly, AIPAC, which is of much less power than Satan is, can't make anyone do anything when the person says 'NO!'. AIPAC could secretly arrange to have such people fired, or perhaps even assassinated, but that's not making the person do anything that he or she is not in agreement with. After all, the person would not then be committing such actions to him- or her-self.
Israel pervertedly "benefits", but the war is for oil; although, for also MORE.
It's geo-strategic establishment of a permanent U.S. military stronghold, and the geo. to be considered includes even relatively distant Russia and China; though not very distant with missile tech. of today. If not, if I'm mistaken about this, then great; but it also and certainly would not do any harm to keep this geo-strategic plan in mind. They, the commanders, are employing geo-politics with geo-strategic application, including with the means known as 'military'.
Remember PNAC and Zbigniew Brzezinski's 'The Grand Chessboard'?!? They're very broad in span or reach; as planned and hopefully never achieved, anyway.
Also remember Elaine Brower's article on the 'Winter Soldiers' testimonies recently posted here at CD, too? Excellent article and statement, and what's described therein continues to reflect reality; ongoingly.
We can remember more facts, but I'll leave off now.
DUDE!......it's all about the CRUDE !
The only "national reconciliation" allowed is capitulation to endless occupation and the relinquishing of oil and sovereignty to US corporate domination.
There is no problem with oil at 100 or more a barrel, it means more profit for oil companies and their rich brothers. Only the poor and middle class suffer. The rich don't care much about the price of gas, they can afford it, it is a small expense. The world is for the clever to take advantage of the fools. The high price of oil means a transfer of money from the average person to those who sell oil, therefore it is good. Higher would be better. 50% of the oil consumed in the US is produced in the US. Say hello to making lots and lots of money. Cheers!
Ah Mordechi, you speak like a true American.
Hoa binh
S.U.R.G.E. is an acronym for Shit Under Republican Government Everywhere. Venezuela, take heed! since1492 is right. You're next! When John Wanker McCain said there will be more wars, that was the signal that the upstart communist degenerate and terrorist Chavez will be facing American army bullets not long after his inauguration.
Iraq is going the way of another former Ottoman dominion, Yugoslavia. What is going on now is fight for control of the southern oil fields & the main export point. It is no surprise that Dubya, Cheney, & Co.'s propaganda would eventually fail as it was dreamed up by hacks, who if they weren't Republican cronies, would have a hard time finding a real job.
There will be a national reconciliation, but it will come after Basra has been destroyed. A few puppets will be allowed to control the locals. But America will control the flow of their oil. Nothing is getting in the way of the expansion of the empire that America directs today. In Africa, the same empire is satisfying its oil needs at the expense of local people. The people of Venezuela have every reason to be afraid. They are sitting on top of what the empire needs to fuel its destructive imperial decline.
Hoa binh
Almost wonder if Cheney and Maliki believed their own P.R. wrt the Iraqi Army ...
Since there was no apparent precipitating EVENT ... and Americans says they expected "something" but just not this big or this soon... I am inclined to believe the Cheney gave Maliki some sort of April Gillaspie go-ahead ... however short of some disastrous Dresden/Guernica aerial assault which would almost certainly bring down the Maliki Government, this appears more to have been a dreadful miscalculation than some deliberate humiliation ...
The criticism of Maliki by Team Bush has been ongoing and disturbing (to me anyway), but it's hard to know who needs who more and/or who hates who more. Of course Team Bush criticises from the comfort and safety of massively secured locatations in the United States while Maliki negotiates the thankless task of being frontman for a integrally and hopelessly flawed faux-democracy.
The legislations we are so impatient for parliament to pass for the most part centers on issues which could not be agreed upon during the constitution writing process 3 years ago ... quel suprise.
alternet has a short article worth a look, imho:
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/80580/?page=entire
yes, it is about oil and sovereignty and nationalism, and a unified Iraq ... and yes, we're supporting the wrong side, as usual.
Iraq apparently has two sets of elections coming up - one provincial and one in October to decide whether Iraq remains a united, sovereign nation or three independent (but perhaps loosely federated?) ones.
Those who favor the three-state solution AND PRIVATIZATION OF IRAQ'S NEW DRILLING are Maliki and the US. Those who favor a united Iraq AND NATIONALIZATION OF ALL OIL include most of Iraq's parliament and, guess who, al-Sadr and his followers.
The so-called "oil law" includes not just the sharing of oil profits but 20-25 year leases to US and British oil giants who would get most of the profits from all new drilling, would not have to hire Iraqis or buy goods and services from Iraqi companies.
Motive? What it's always been, oil. And creating enough instability to drive the price to almost $110 per barrel doesn't seem to bother the Bush administration. Are they now trying for $125?
(Maliki did not seek his parliament's approval before launching a way against his own people. Wonder if the parliament has a way to depose or impeach him.)
Cheney--he's the man that put this operation on when he visited Iraq the other week.
The Sadr party looked like it might win the upcoming election and they want the US out. So the Chenyman told Maliki to destroy the Sadrists. Easier said then done!
We live in one crazy humongous hegemonic empire. As the apocalypse nears consider your options.