The Surge's Failure
A cease-fire critical to the improved security situation in Iraq appeared to unravel Monday when a militia loyal to radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al Sadr began shutting down neighborhoods in west Baghdad and issuing demands of the central government.
. . .
The freeze on offensive activity by Sadr's Mahdi Army has been a major factor behind the recent drop in violence in Iraq, and there were fears that the confrontation that's erupted in Baghdad and Basra could end the lull in attacks, assassinations, kidnappings and bombings.
Eric Martin, doing double-duty at The Newshoggers and American Footprints, has been keeping a close eye on the Sadrist cease-fire and the American (and Iranian) –backed Shiite militias that are al Sadr’s rivals. He’s noted that with provincial elections coming up, and facing a loss of influence, ISCI may be trying to tilt the playing field to their advantage by moving aggressively against the Mahdi Army with US backing to make up for their disadvantages in popularity.
Today, McClatchy is running down the negative consequences of breaking that cease-fire in terms of reversing the fragile and temporary successes of the “surge”.
On Sunday, a barrage of at least 17 rockets hit the heavily fortified Green Zone and surrounding neighborhoods, where both the U.S. and Iraqi government headquarters are housed, according to police. Most of them were launched from the outskirts of Sadr City and Bayaa, both Mahdi Army-controlled neighborhoods.
On Monday, the Sadrists all but shut down the neighborhoods they control on the west bank of Baghdad. Gunmen went to stores and ordered them to close as militiamen stood in the streets. Mosques used their loudspeakers to urge people to come forward and join the protest.
Fliers were distributed with the Sadrists' three demands of the Iraqi government: to release detainees, stop targeting Sadrist members and apologize to the families and the tribal sheiks of the men.
The Iraqi security forces issued a statement promising to deal with those who terrorized shopkeepers and students.
The article also notes that US troop and Iraqi civilian deaths appear to be increasing again, particularly in the Baghdad area where the troops sent in for the “surge” are now being withdrawn, something also noted yesterday but mostly lost in the noise of the 4,000 death milestone coverage.
American forces have just experienced the most violent two-week period in Iraq since September 2007. Unfortunately, I'm afraid this fact will be lost in the media coverage over the number 4,000 during the next several days. Of the two significant numbers this week--4,000 killed during war and 25 in the last two weeks--the latter figure is far more significant with regard to the current situation on the ground.
We hear talk of attacks against Americans "ebbing," ceasefires holding, and of the situation in Iraq being "not that fragile," but this is all a bunch of happy-talk nonsense. Between March 10 and March 23, 25 American soldiers were killed in Iraq. The last two-week period in which U.S. forces sustained similar losses was between September 14 and September 27, when 26 were killed--a period that capped off the bloodiest summer of the war.
This morning comes reports of heavy fighting in Basra between the “government”, read ISCI, forces and Basra miltias:
Heavy fighting has been raging in Basra as thousands of Iraqi troops battle Shia militias in the southern city.
. . .
British forces carried out air strikes to support embattled Iraqi army tanks and artillery on the ground.
Oil-rich Basra is in the grip of a bitter turf war between armed groups, including the Mehdi Army, say analysts.
The Mehdi Army - which supports radical Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr - called for a nationwide campaign of civil disobedience
. . .
Some of the fiercest fighting in the operation - dubbed Saulat al-Fursan (Charge of the Knights) - has focused on Mehdi Army strongholds.
All of this points to the fact that the “surge” has been a strategic failure. It's stated purpose, which few of those crowing about it's "success" seem to remember, was to provide the Iraqi government breathing room to hammer out a political compromise to the issues that were driving the insurgency.
As noted repeatedly about the "awakening councils", Just because some people have agreed to stop shooting at you for piles of cash doesn't mean they like you any more than they used to. A large part of the "success" of the surge can be attributed to many of the combatants simply laying low and rearming for the next round of fighting.
The warfloggers pointed to the decrease in attacks in Baghdad as proof the surge was working, but now that the troops are leaving, the attacks are again rising. The successes were tactical, not strategic. This explains why both the British and US forces are planning to "pause" their withdrawal of troops. With the underlying situation unchanged, when the troops leave, so do the security gains.
With the added pressure of the new elections coming up in the fall, the temptation for the various groups to begin competing and consolidating their power bases will grow. The fighting in Basra is likely a harbinger of things to come.
