Sadr For “Open War if Gov’t Abandons Path of Peace”

Sadr is bluffing. He can’t risk taking on the entire IA, IP, the rest of the UIA, and the entire Najaf Marjya. Most Shia will blame him if he attacks the IA outright (the IA is quite popular among Muqtada supporters.)

My hope is that he disarms his militia (as Sistani has suggested), and joins the political process fully and nonviolently. This would increase his popularity, and help him perform better in the October provincial elections and the 12.09 national elections.

The IA now controls the vast majority of Basrah, and are slowly advancing in Thawra, Baghdad.

I think that Sadr will negotiate some settlement in Baghdad. It isn’t in his interests to be militarily driven out of Baghdad.

The 39th T72 brigade has been spotted in Sadr city (Thawra.) At least one 11th IAD battalion in Sadr city is confirmed as tracked mechanized (tracked APCs and IFVs . . . my suspicion is that the upgraded M60 and M48 tanks the IA takes this year will partly go to 11th IAD tracked mechanized units.)

Any serious clash in Sadr city could kill many civilians. Sadr politically can’t risk appearing the instigate it.

On the other hand, the IA is stretched by deployments elsewhere in the country, including Basrah and Ninevah. So the IA will wants a measured and gradual pace of operations in Sadr city for now.

Now, if I can change the topic a little, think about the IA’s objectives. It is to hold territory, not dismantle JAM that chooses not to attack it. Today many of the best quality IA units are in Basrah. And they have occupied the large majority of Basrah. Much of it without having to fight (thanks to the IRGC Kuds force negotiated cease fire.)

As long as the IA stays in its current positions, it cannot be dislodged. That is unless PM Maliki orders a redeployment of ISF elsewhere in the country.

And now for shot across the bow to all the Iraqi racists and Iraqi army haters out there. Find any evidence you can that the following Iraqi army brigades have performed poorly in Basrah:

1st Iraqi Army Division (IAD) Brigades
50th Brigade
40th T55 Tank Brigade
14th Brigade

The silence is deafening, isn’t it. Can’t say that I am surprised. The IA is fast becoming the best quality army in recorded Arab history. And jealousy among all of Iraq’s enemies is an ugly thing. And don’t go mentioning 52nd and 51st Brigade. That isn’t the question I asked, was it?

If anyone is the least bit interested in the truth, read this:
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/04/iraqi_security_force_12.php
http://www.longwarjournal.org/oob/index.php

Feel free to ask any questions you may have.

So, VS, what does a bearded and politically savvy Shia cleric do in these circumstance? His militia is about to be penned in by the American puppet with a wall like Gaza. The same was done to Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad until they were finally silenced. Does he acquiesce…lie low…let them build the walls…or does he ally himself with the Sunnis?

Together throw out the imperial army?

@anonymous #1

To know where Anand is coming from all you have to do is look at the source he cites for supporting his argument that the Iraqi army is doing so fantastically well: a “blog”, The Long War–actually a very polished website, published by one Bill Roggio,”adjunct fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies” and president of Public Multimedia Inc, which in their own words is a “nonprofit, 501(c)3 organization. All donations are 100% tax deductible.”

(VS, maybe you should take up collections, set up a “non profit corporation”, give yourself a mission statement like “political and strategic analysis unfettered by slavish mercenary and political considerations.” )

Their major accomplishment: “embedding” reporters with various US and Iraqi army units.

Can anyone believe that this guy is anything but a professional propagandist? Who actually thinks that Bill Roggio and his staff of embedded reporters are going to give accurate coverage?

Anand, who the F*&^k are you? And why do you persist in being an advocate for these propagandists?

“1) are you a NCRI supporter.” No.
“2) MEK member or supporter” No.
“3) Mossad supporter re. 1) or 2)” No more than I support the intelligence agency of any country in the world, Brazil for instance. Although I admit that when Mossad goes after Takfiri, that is a good thing. I wish the Mossad when after Takfiri more than they do. I also hope Israel and Hezbollah can become allies and attack the Takfiri together.
“4) If the Iraqi toad succeeds in being the new power in Iraq, does this mean the US gets to stay forever, as a welcome guest of course.” I don’t support that. Most GIs don’t support that . . . I think. There were some back in 2002, early 2003 who favored long term bases in Iraq with about 5,000 troops. Lily Pods if you will. Storage facilities that require a tiny footprint most of the time, but could be quickly expanded should the need arise. But these thinkers do not reflect the majority within the US military. The last thing the US military needs is more bases that tie down limited resources on a permanent basis. Bringing the MNF-I size down sharply is a high short term priority. Current operations cost $10 billion a month.
“5) Do you think that the final surrender of Iraq to the US occupation will allow the US to forever menace Iran and Syria from a comfortable military forward deployment status?” What? I hope that Iran and Syria become free democracies. Free democracies generally want economic prosperity and peace. They most decidedly don’t like Takfiris, organized crime, and other trouble makers. I think the Iranian people are close to taking their country back peacefully. I very much hope that a military conflict with Khamenei is avoided. (Not many American Iranians or their families like Khamenei.) The nonviolent resistance in Syria has a much tougher road. But I hope a prosperous and successful Iraq might change the dynamics in Syria. I know it sounds strange, but I am surprised by how optimistic individual Iraqis are. Maybe I have a selection bias issue going on, and anecdotes are not the same as survey data. Opinion polls, however, also bear out this optimism. My suspicion is that a lot of it comes from love of country and faith in country. But it is heartening none the less. I really hope that Iraq makes it, and success in Iraq benefits Iraq’s neighbors.
“6) Is (5) the reason you care which faction in Iraq prevails.” I am agnostic about who wins Iraq’s October provincial elections and 12.15.09 national elections. I just hope Iraqi voters choose competent leaders. I admit that I was happy the UIA beat Allawi (too close to KSA, the Jordanian royals, Arab League for my tastes.) But the UIA hasn’t had a stellar record. So I am no longer sure which political parties are best for Iraq.
“7) Can you understand that as an American who does not wish to be used to fight Israeli strategic battles, that my only interest in Iraq is to get out of the Iraq and avoid wars in the Middle East, and to that end, am disappointed at the prospect of a permanent US presence int Iraq? If we stay in Iraq, it’s only a matter of time before we have a regional war with Iran.” I don’t understand what you are saying. An American alliance with a democratically elected Iraqi government will push America closer to Iran. Any democratically elected Iraqi government will likely want good relations with both Iran and America, and try to bridge the differences between both countries. If Iraq becomes successful, it is likely to become a powerful advocate for Palestinian rights. A good thing in my book.

Now let me share some speculation on my part. The aspect of the Petraeus testimony that most disturbed me was how most Congress people in both parties wanted to cut off aid to the ISF (down to $2.7 billion in 2008 from $5.1 billion in 2007.) This is a betrayal of American troops on the field in Iraq. Especially when many Iraqi army units have consistently fought so well. Many GIs in Iraq are quite unhappy about this. So are many friends of Iraq. Why is Congress doing this? Could it be that some friends of Israel see a successful Iraq as a potential threat? I don’t know this to be a fact, but it deserves further analysis.

Here is another observation. Iraqi Army generals and MNF-I are very reluctant to talk about Iraqi tank purchases. The quiet implied reason is regional sensitivities. I use to think Syria, Jordan, KSA, maybe Iran. But could another country with this concern be Israel? I wonder.

Israel might be uncomfortable that Maliki has been a close friend of Nasrallah for so long. Maliki helped run part of the Iraqi resistance from Syria for many years. Nasrallah and him go far back. Maliki was furious about Israeli operations in 2006. I fear that Israelis may not trust the Iraqi government that is likely to be elected next year.

Again, this is speculation on my part, and might be dead wrong.

To get back to the question of Sadr, let me mention the following:
1) many of the most loyal and effective IA soldiers are from Thawra (Sadr City)
2) the IA is popular among most Iraqis, including Muqtada supporters. Their popularity has been enhanced by recent successful operations against AQ, Takfiri, and Sunni Arab militia, as well as improved security—for which Iraqis give their army substantial credit.
3) Looking at the most recent Iraqi public opinion poll, Maliki has the support of about 2/3s of Iraqi Shia. Many of Maliki’s supporters simultaneously back his UIA allies Muqtada, ISCI, Fadheela. To the degree UIA are seen as causing intra-Shia fights, it hurts the entire UIA. This backlash could lead to gains by non-UIA political parties. Perhaps this is one reason why the entire Marjya is so unhappy about JAM clashes with the IA. Muqtada is under immense pressure to reach a negotiated settlement with the GoI.
4) Muqtada could benefit politically by disarming his militia and placing his bets fully with the political process. Whoever wins the 2009 national elections will get the Iraqi Army. However, no party is likely to be able to get more than 40% of the vote. So, any Iraqi government will have to be a coalition government. But it is possible that Muqtada could lead that coalition government.

AA, do you want Muqtada to do poorly in October?

There has been a backlash against the entire UIA. Intra-Shia fighting just turns Iraqi Shia further against the UIA. The beneficiaries might be tribal groupings (somewhat popular in Wasit) and other more secular groups.

Note that Muqtada’s followers have 6 GoI ministries, including Health, Education and Transportation. To the degree Muqtada executes his ministries better, it is good for Iraqis, the GoI, UIA, Maliki and Muqtada. Therefore, I hope that Muqtada succeeds in improving the performance of his ministries.

Many of the JAM that claim to follow Muqtada de facto follow special groups, IRGC Kuds, and through the chain of command Khamenei. Other JAM are more loyal to Muqtada.

The JAM that scares me are the ones more loyal to Khamenei (in parts of Thawra they are quite strong.)It is also in Muqtada’s interests that these rogue JAM are taken out. They give Muqtada a bad name (they shell other parts of Baghdad with artillery and kill many Iraqi civilians.) Muqtada’s popularity benefits from quietly observing rogue JAM being taken out.

Moreover the primary purpose of JAM in 2003 and 2004 was to defend the people (mostly Shia in practice) against attacks by the resistance, Baathists, and Takfiri. Enormous numbers of poor Shia were killed by terrorist attacks against Iraqi population centers. Enormous numbers of IP and IA were killed in 2003 and early 2004 (many of which were from Sadr city.) There was a systematic assassination campaign against Shia clerics, as well as doctors and nurses that served Shia.

Muqtada angrily railed against this in 2003 and 2004. His followers angrily noted that February 2004 had fewer multilateral forces casualties than any other month (until the last few months that is) since March 2003. At the same time there were record numbers of Iraqi casualties (including hundreds of Iraqi police and army.) Muqtada said that the foreign forces weren’t trying to protect the Iraqi people from the resistance. He further argued that the reason the resistance attacked Iraqis far more than foreign troops was because the resistance was in cahoots with the occupation. He even dismissed the idea that there were any American troops dying in Iraq. He asked for the proof. Maybe all the American troop deaths were propaganda to give the false impression that America was fighting the resistance rather than being in cahoots with it.

This is what sparked his violent attacks starting March 30, 2004 (and possibly quiet manipulation by Dawa and ISCI to use America troops to cut Sadr/Chalabi down.) Although most Iraqis did not believe that America was in cahoots with the resistance the way Muqtada did, most were very upset that American troops didn’t seem to be trying hard enough to protect them from the resistance. This included many Iraqis who liked America. I think they had a point, and was very upset about this as well.

The point of all this to mention that the resistance has mostly (although the resistance remains a powerful force) been defeated or co-opted. The Iraqi army has demonstrated its combat effectiveness, and is much beloved by most Iraqi Shia. Under these circumstances, there is no need for JAM. Moreover, the ISF are much closer to being able to take over all security responsibility from the MNF-I. If Muqtada does well in the 12.09 elections, he will get control over the ISF, and be able to secure Iraq without MNC-I combat troops.

Muqtada’s stance on MNSTC-I remains less clear. Muqtada’s followers frequently talk with MNF-I. Muqtada, as well as his parliamentarians, frequently say that MNSTC-I should do much more to train and equip the ISF. In any case, Muqtada will likely ban all MNF-I activity in Iraq except for training and equipping ISF (maybe support, logistics, and air as well.) Muqtada will also likely phase out the combat advisor program except with respect to the IZAF (Iraqi air force.) My feeling is that he will keep MNSTC-I as long as they are willing to train and equip the ISF. The question is whether the next Congress and President will be willing to train and equip ISF under those circumstances, given American public opinion. I don’t know.

Another article for Anand.
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17209

@Ananad: listen, why don’t you sign up and join the US military in Iraq or, at the very least, take a job as a mercenary (oops, I meant a “civilian contractor”) in Iraq? It just makes no sense to cheer from the sidelines. Put your actions where you money is and go to Iraq!

@Anand: either that, or stop trying to impersonate an American by being a cheerleader for war (and realize that most real Americans don’t buy into that shit, only the lower 25% of inbred bible-thumping rednecks do).

Your behavior makeSS you look silly and dishonor you. Stop it.

Peace,
Hope you are well Saker.

If what Sadr has said takes effect then expect a big all out war in which the US army will lose considerably. Moqtada and his men showed great strength in the Basra conflict and the fact that the Iraqi army had to call for back up in the form of airstrikes by the occupational forces displays that the Iraqi army is not ready to handle such a big conflict. More over even if the Iraqi Army was aided by the US forces in Iraq the situation will be a stalemate with long periods of fighting such as that of 2004.

And the visit of Condalezza Rice could not have come any sooner. The political game in Iraq is reaching its climax very rapidly. Confrontation between the Shias and the US is coming and that will be the turning point of this whole US invasion. This whole media effect by the US to blame Iran is a tactical approach to cover up their losses and the diseaster of a situation they have created. I am going to digress a bit to display what I mean.

Iraq geographically has Iran, Turkey, Kuwait, Syria, Jordon and Saudia Arabia as its neighbouring countries. Kuwait, Jordon and Saudia Arabia dance to the US tune no matter how awful it is hence you would find no condemnation of the US policies by these states. Turkey was the same until recently when the whole genocide issue came up and that made a crack in their relation with US. Regardless of that it still supports the invasion and hence keep a quiet tone. That leaves Iran and Syria, the two states which oppose US openly and are defiant in their stance against US and their allies. Notice how in the media there is no mention of the suicide bombers and weaponary being imported into Iraq from the states such as Saudia Arabia, Jordon and even Kuwait to an extent, only Iran and Syria are dragged through the mud with the same rhetoric why? Because they require something to cover up the mess they are in and take it away from the limelight. When the Shias were openly collaborating with the US personnels, Al Qaeda was calling for the blood of the Shias only and only because of their collaboration however when Moqtada rose up and opposed the occupation, Al Qaeda had to remove themselves from Iraq because it would mean that they would lose face because the stance on which they were killing Shias is no longer there. US required Al Qaeda to remain in Iraq because it worked in their favour but given the obstacle Moqtada has created Al Qaeda had to bite the bullet and US played the other card that is to take out Moqtada, which failed in 2004 and now the designs are on the wall again of the same situation.

Given that Saudia Arabia is funding terrorism and aiding the extremists yet there is no condemnation from the US against their friends simply because it works in their interest. Iran and Syria are targetted because US knows in the long terms they could seriously hamper their plans. Iran supporting the movement of the Mahdi army keeps Al Qaeda out of Iraq which exposes the US failure and at the same time leaves two political players in the region; The Shias and the US. US is trying it utmost to cause disruption by involving the Iraqi Government to play the Shias against the Shias as well as go as far as maybe to ignite a civil war of some sort so that they can install their own puppet to rule. As the days go on and Moqtada gains more power in terms of numbers and aid from Iran it will eventually lead to a point where the conflict will become between the Shias and the US and the growing resistance to the occupation will leave no option for US but to leave or face a greater number of deaths.

The Shias of Iraq will never go as far as shedding the blood of their own. 1300 officials of the Iraqi Army did not raise their weapons against the personnels of Moqtada sends a resounding message to Washington and to the Government. That is why Condalezza Rice is in Iraq and she is there only for one thing to ensure that Maliki takes the US line on this matter and nothing else. Maliki would not be elected again, the Hakims might come in but then even Moqtada remains a powerful broker in all this.

The other people of Iraq namely the Sunnis and the Kurds would not involve themselves as much. The Kurds would sit out the Shia and US conflict or maybe even support the Shia because of the canvassing from Iran to Talabani. The Sunnis will be in a dilemma because they at first were against the occupational forces and sided with the Al Qaeda ideology now that the Al Qaeda are gone or phased out rather they are silent because they cannot side with the US as it would make them lose face and they cannot go against US because of their leaders in Saudia Arabia, Jordon and Kuwait hence when the time comes they will have to pick a side.

So there you have it. If all goes the way it is going then it is leading to a big confrontation however there is a big risk here too. Any failure would mean virtually US occupation for decades hence the success rate is a must in this situation otherwise there will be grave consequences for the people of Iraq. And quite frankly I have a feeling that someone will back away either Hakims, Maliki or Moqtada.

And lastly to the person who said that Saker should put his faith in the Shia leaders of Pakistan, India and Afghanistan it would be worth looking up how many leaders does Pakistan have now who are Shia and not assissinated? Shaheed Arif Hussaini and Shaheed Hasan Turabi were two of the greatest Shia leaders who were assissinated by the likes of Al Qaeda and since then there has been none. As for the opposing or rather rival clerical schools of Ayatollah Khamenai again there is none. Those who have an anti Khamenai stance do not live in Iran rather live out of Iran and the Najaf marjiyyah are very much aligned and have good relations with the Marjiyyah in Qum as many of its greatest gems are now living in Qum and have a very high level of correspondence with one another.

Sorry for writing long again.

Peace
Ayaz

Ayaz, your comments are very perceptive. I agree with the Saker on that.

The Najaf Marjya is very upset that JAM is fighting the IA, and are united in calling on JAM to end all attacks on the IA.

As I hope I have made clear, I have no problem with Muqtada winning a plurality of the vote in the next election (the most he could probably win would be about 50% of the Shia vote or 30% of the national vote, so at best he would have to lead a coalition government . . . Muqtada has many bridges to heal with other Iraqi Shia.) As the father of a friend of mine insists to the many Iraqi Shia who do not like Muqtada, most of his followers are poor, haven’t had the opportunity to go to college, and have been disrespected by other Iraqis for a long time (they often call them Shruug and other negative words.) It is time for all Iraqis to reach out to Muqtada’s followers with humility.

Ayaz, only 500 IA soldiers from one battalion in the 52nd IA brigade broke (which means the brigade broke. It has been taken offline.) The brigade only graduated from field training on February 18, 2008, and were thrown into a heated battle on March 25, 2008, over the objections of the IA general staff by PM Maliki. It might be that they broke only because of harsh combat conditions and immature officers. They were a nationally recruited brigade with may non-Shia, and many non-Muqtada supporting Shia.

Many Muqtada supporters within the IA (many carry Muqtada’s picture) stayed loyal to the IA. I think that is the main story. This doesn’t mean that they won’t vote for him. But the fact that the entire Iraqi parliament and UIA (excluding Muqtada), and Najaf Marjya supported this operation, meant that they followed the chain of command.

The orders to the IA were only to attack those who attacked the IA. The IA didn’t aggressively attack JAM. As long as that is the case, there is no reason to think the IA will not remain loyal.

The 800 others who deserted were IP. But that is no surprise. Most of the IP close to JAM have been known for some time. They were initially hired as a SOP to Muqtada.

Another point to consider is that most of the militias fighting the IA deserted. They didn’t want to fight their Shia brothers in the IA.

Your points on the Shia leadership in Pakistan are unfortunately correct. This said, Khamenei is not popular among most of the world’s 150 million Shia.

Ayaz, thanks for your insights. My understanding is that the Marjya has said that there should be only one security force in Iraq. But they also won’t order JAM to be disarmed, saying that they didn’t order JAM to be formed in the first place.

They seem to want the fighting to stop in the south. If Muqtada is seen as picking a fight with the IA, he will be politically damaged and isolated.

I don’t understand why Muqtada won’t disarm his militia, at least to the extent that Badr has. Muqtada could offer to fully disarm JAM provided some of his JAM fighters are allowed to join the ISF.

What purpose does his militia now serve? His future lies in the ballot box, and nonviolent political activism. Especially since the IA can now hold back the Baathists and Takfiri, increasingly independent of the MNF-I.

How much support do you think Khamenai has among the world’s 150 million Shia? Among India’s 15-20 million Shia? Pakistan’s 15 million Shia? Afghanistan’s 6 million Hazara Shia? Inside Iran and Iraq? Elsewhere?

Ayaz, I have not heard about a single Shia suicide bomber in Iraq. Most are non-Iraqi Sunni Arabs. I suspect that a lot of the animus against Iran is engineered by the “Arabist lobby” (Saudi Arabia) and the friends of Israel.

It is stunning, that even after the 1998 embassy bombings and 9/11, and the many attacks in Europe, that the Saudi Royals remain so influential in North America and Europe (and India, China, South East Asia and the rest of the world.) It is amazing that they are getting away with it (and with killing so many Iraqis inside Iraq, Afghans inside Afghanistan, Pakistanis inside Pakistan, and Indian muslims inside India)

Ayaz, the influence of the Saudis is unnerving.

Regarding Iran, many Iraqis insist that Abu Deraa was and is supported by Khamenai. Do you think this is true?

Syria is playing a major role in the violence in Mosul. It seems that Syrian senior officers are organizing many violent attacks against the Iraqi Army, IP, and GoI up there. Who knows, Arab Advocate might be one Syrian close to the effort? I told him to go down to Ninevah and try his worst against Mouttah (2nd IAD commanding brig gen) and Kirshad (3rd IAD commanding maj gen.) He didn’t like the suggestion. :LOL:

I will note that there aren’t many MNC-I combat troops in the North. The IA and IP are handling the Syrians, Baathists and Takfiris on their own; remarkably well I think. Asad is making a terrible mistake. The Iraqis will remember what he is doing now and respond at a time of their choosing.

The IA has a huge shortage of armored vehicles (tracked and wheeled.) Thousands of their vehicles have been severely damaged by the resistance and need to be replaced. I hope they get additional funding soon. The GoI might spend $13 billion on the ISF this year. I don’t think that is enough. But Iraqi friends argue (with me) that the GoI is spending as much on the ISF as it can afford given Iraq’s other priorities. And the American Congress won’t give the ISF more money (thank you peace movement and stingy hawks, {sarcasm.}) So the ISF is going to have to fight with the resources that they have.

Ayaz, I really appreciate your insights. Your words remind me of other Iraqis.