SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Citing US Airstrikes, Reports Indicate Some Militia Forces May Abandon Battle for Tikrit
The reluctance of key Shiite militias to fight alongside US in Iraq contradicts Pentagon's official version of events
Mar 27, 2015
Marking another twist in a faltering offensive on Tikrit, key Shiite militias involved in the operation expressed anger that the U.S. is launching air strikes to back the operation, and according to reports, thousands of combatants are boycotting the fight on those grounds, with some threatening to attack U.S. forces.
McClatchy reported
One Iraqi security official said three major Shiite groups - the League of Righteousness, the Kateb Hezbollah and the Badr Organization, already had withdrawn their forces. The official, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive military matters, said he had been told that the militia commanders were meeting late Thursday to decide whether to remain or return to Baghdad, where many had mustered last summer in response to the Islamic State advance.
Launched over three weeks ago, the operation on the hometown of Saddam Hussein is the largest counter-offensive against ISIS yet, involving tens of thousands of Iraqi and Shiite militia fighters. This force is dominated by Shiite militias, which outnumber Iraqi troops 6 to 1 around Tikrit, according to the Washington Post.
The U.S. initially did not take part in the attack, with Iranian advisers playing a much more visible role, including Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's overseas unit.
As the offensive stalled, the U.S. began launching air strikes to back the operation late Wednesday night.
Pentagon officials have sought to publicly downplay--and even deny--de-facto U.S. collaboration with Shiite militias and Iran.
"Currently, there are no Shia militia and as reported by the Iraqis today, no PMF [Popular Mobilisation Forces] in that area as well," Central Command's leader, Army General Lloyd Austin, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.
Speaking Wednesday, Pentagon spokesperson Army Col. Steve Warren attempted to spin U.S. involvement in the offensive as a show of U.S. strength and power, contrasted with Iranian humiliation. "When Tikrit operations kicked off...we heard quite a bit from the Iraqis and some even from the Iranians, some fairly high-confidence statements about how rapidly the operation in Tikrit would go," he said. "Obviously they were incorrect."
However, numerous reports contradict this version of events. The Huffington Post reports that, "on Thursday afternoon, after U.S. airstrikes had pounded ISIS-held positions the night before, Shiite paramilitary forces held many of the towns, roads and military positions leading from Baghdad to Tikrit, with Shiite fighters still inside the city."
In other words, there are signs that the U.S. is still collaborating with at least some Shiite militias.
Juan Cole argued that, despite U.S. claims, the reluctance to collaborate came from Shiite militias--not the U.S. He wrote:
US air intervention on behalf of the Jerusalem Brigades of the IRGC is ironic in the extreme, since the two have been at daggers drawn for decades. Likewise, militias like Muqtada al-Sadr's "Peace Brigades" (formerly Mahdi Army) and League of the Righteous (Asa'ib Ahl al-Haqq) targeted US troops during Washington's occupation of Iraq. But the fight against the so-called "Islamic State group" or Daesh has made for very strange bedfellows. Another irony is that apparently the US doesn't mind essentially tactically allying with Iran this way- the reluctance came from the Shiite militias.
However, as the U.S. tactically allies with Iran in Iraq, in Yemen it is collaborating with Iranian rivals, including Saudi Arabia, in an anti-Houthi, large-scale invasion and bombings campaign.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Marking another twist in a faltering offensive on Tikrit, key Shiite militias involved in the operation expressed anger that the U.S. is launching air strikes to back the operation, and according to reports, thousands of combatants are boycotting the fight on those grounds, with some threatening to attack U.S. forces.
McClatchy reported
One Iraqi security official said three major Shiite groups - the League of Righteousness, the Kateb Hezbollah and the Badr Organization, already had withdrawn their forces. The official, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive military matters, said he had been told that the militia commanders were meeting late Thursday to decide whether to remain or return to Baghdad, where many had mustered last summer in response to the Islamic State advance.
Launched over three weeks ago, the operation on the hometown of Saddam Hussein is the largest counter-offensive against ISIS yet, involving tens of thousands of Iraqi and Shiite militia fighters. This force is dominated by Shiite militias, which outnumber Iraqi troops 6 to 1 around Tikrit, according to the Washington Post.
The U.S. initially did not take part in the attack, with Iranian advisers playing a much more visible role, including Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's overseas unit.
As the offensive stalled, the U.S. began launching air strikes to back the operation late Wednesday night.
Pentagon officials have sought to publicly downplay--and even deny--de-facto U.S. collaboration with Shiite militias and Iran.
"Currently, there are no Shia militia and as reported by the Iraqis today, no PMF [Popular Mobilisation Forces] in that area as well," Central Command's leader, Army General Lloyd Austin, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.
Speaking Wednesday, Pentagon spokesperson Army Col. Steve Warren attempted to spin U.S. involvement in the offensive as a show of U.S. strength and power, contrasted with Iranian humiliation. "When Tikrit operations kicked off...we heard quite a bit from the Iraqis and some even from the Iranians, some fairly high-confidence statements about how rapidly the operation in Tikrit would go," he said. "Obviously they were incorrect."
However, numerous reports contradict this version of events. The Huffington Post reports that, "on Thursday afternoon, after U.S. airstrikes had pounded ISIS-held positions the night before, Shiite paramilitary forces held many of the towns, roads and military positions leading from Baghdad to Tikrit, with Shiite fighters still inside the city."
In other words, there are signs that the U.S. is still collaborating with at least some Shiite militias.
Juan Cole argued that, despite U.S. claims, the reluctance to collaborate came from Shiite militias--not the U.S. He wrote:
US air intervention on behalf of the Jerusalem Brigades of the IRGC is ironic in the extreme, since the two have been at daggers drawn for decades. Likewise, militias like Muqtada al-Sadr's "Peace Brigades" (formerly Mahdi Army) and League of the Righteous (Asa'ib Ahl al-Haqq) targeted US troops during Washington's occupation of Iraq. But the fight against the so-called "Islamic State group" or Daesh has made for very strange bedfellows. Another irony is that apparently the US doesn't mind essentially tactically allying with Iran this way- the reluctance came from the Shiite militias.
However, as the U.S. tactically allies with Iran in Iraq, in Yemen it is collaborating with Iranian rivals, including Saudi Arabia, in an anti-Houthi, large-scale invasion and bombings campaign.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Marking another twist in a faltering offensive on Tikrit, key Shiite militias involved in the operation expressed anger that the U.S. is launching air strikes to back the operation, and according to reports, thousands of combatants are boycotting the fight on those grounds, with some threatening to attack U.S. forces.
McClatchy reported
One Iraqi security official said three major Shiite groups - the League of Righteousness, the Kateb Hezbollah and the Badr Organization, already had withdrawn their forces. The official, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive military matters, said he had been told that the militia commanders were meeting late Thursday to decide whether to remain or return to Baghdad, where many had mustered last summer in response to the Islamic State advance.
Launched over three weeks ago, the operation on the hometown of Saddam Hussein is the largest counter-offensive against ISIS yet, involving tens of thousands of Iraqi and Shiite militia fighters. This force is dominated by Shiite militias, which outnumber Iraqi troops 6 to 1 around Tikrit, according to the Washington Post.
The U.S. initially did not take part in the attack, with Iranian advisers playing a much more visible role, including Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's overseas unit.
As the offensive stalled, the U.S. began launching air strikes to back the operation late Wednesday night.
Pentagon officials have sought to publicly downplay--and even deny--de-facto U.S. collaboration with Shiite militias and Iran.
"Currently, there are no Shia militia and as reported by the Iraqis today, no PMF [Popular Mobilisation Forces] in that area as well," Central Command's leader, Army General Lloyd Austin, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.
Speaking Wednesday, Pentagon spokesperson Army Col. Steve Warren attempted to spin U.S. involvement in the offensive as a show of U.S. strength and power, contrasted with Iranian humiliation. "When Tikrit operations kicked off...we heard quite a bit from the Iraqis and some even from the Iranians, some fairly high-confidence statements about how rapidly the operation in Tikrit would go," he said. "Obviously they were incorrect."
However, numerous reports contradict this version of events. The Huffington Post reports that, "on Thursday afternoon, after U.S. airstrikes had pounded ISIS-held positions the night before, Shiite paramilitary forces held many of the towns, roads and military positions leading from Baghdad to Tikrit, with Shiite fighters still inside the city."
In other words, there are signs that the U.S. is still collaborating with at least some Shiite militias.
Juan Cole argued that, despite U.S. claims, the reluctance to collaborate came from Shiite militias--not the U.S. He wrote:
US air intervention on behalf of the Jerusalem Brigades of the IRGC is ironic in the extreme, since the two have been at daggers drawn for decades. Likewise, militias like Muqtada al-Sadr's "Peace Brigades" (formerly Mahdi Army) and League of the Righteous (Asa'ib Ahl al-Haqq) targeted US troops during Washington's occupation of Iraq. But the fight against the so-called "Islamic State group" or Daesh has made for very strange bedfellows. Another irony is that apparently the US doesn't mind essentially tactically allying with Iran this way- the reluctance came from the Shiite militias.
However, as the U.S. tactically allies with Iran in Iraq, in Yemen it is collaborating with Iranian rivals, including Saudi Arabia, in an anti-Houthi, large-scale invasion and bombings campaign.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.