Washington, al-Maliki and the Militias

By RON JACOBS

Recently, the Green Zone parliament in Baghdad drafted a law that would forbid any political party that has an armed wing from participating in the upcoming regional elections in Iraq. This law comes on the heels of an announcement by the Green Zone leader al-Maliki stating very similar terms. The obvious target of this law are the forces behind al-Sadr known as the Mehdi Army. Other factions in Iraqi politics that might be affected include the various Sunni groups that maintain an armed wing not approved by the US and those few secular parties that remain in Iraq and feature armed elements.

Despite any proclamations to the contrary claiming that Iraqi groups other than the aforementioned will also be affected, the reality is that other political parties that have so-called militias are the forces of Dawa and SCIRI, and the Kurdish parties. The first two groups have, for all practical purposes, integrated their militias into the official security forces and the Kurds are very unlikely to dismantle their Peshmerga merely because the Green Zone government asks them to. After all, it can be reasonably argued that the Green Zone parliamentarians and their US sponsors need the Kurds more than the Kurds need either of them.

As for those Sunni groups, popularly known as the Awakening Councils, their existence as legitimate armed forces exists primarily at the whim of the US. This means that at any time, they too could become outlaw forces and the target of the Green Zone government.

No matter what happens in this most recent power struggle between the US-sponsored regime in Baghdad and the forces arrayed against it, the political situation will likely become more inflammatory. If al-Sadr's movement and other anti-occupation elements stand down their militias, they stand to command a large minority if not an outright majority in the Green Zone legislature. If that happens, then Washington's plans will suffer immensely and legislative calls for a withdrawal of all US forces will increase in strength and frequency.

If the opposition groups that are also armed refuse to turn in their arms and stand down, the fighting will most likely increase as Green Zone forces and their US backers intensify their military campaign to defeat them. Either way, the political tenor will probably become more radical on the Iraqi street and Washington and its occupier government will grow weaker and less legitimate than it already is.

Why should these militias stand down? If events both recent and not-so-recent are any indication, the political decision by parties opposed to the US occupation to give up their arms only means that the occupiers and their client forces can attack them with even greater impunity. In other words, if they give up their guns, the political resistance faces the very real possibility of both figurative and literal obliteration. Already, the occupier's forces have used the truce declared by al-Sadr to arrest members of his militia and erect concrete barriers on major streets going in and out of the part of Baghdad known as Sadr City. For the Sadrist forces and others opposed to the occupation and Green Zone government to follow the proposed law discussed above would only make the job of getting rid of those political forces opposed to Washington's plans for Iraq that much easier.

It's obvious by now that Washington has no intention of trying to win the hearts and minds of the people who claim al-Sadr as their political leader. Without this option, the only remaining choice is neutralization-a choice ultimately made by Saddam, as well. It is a choice that haunted him and will haunt Washington, too.

Once again, the only true solution to this conundrum and every other problem brought on by the continuing US occupation of Iraq is a complete US withdrawal. If public opinion polls are to be believed (and the sheer consistency of the results in this instance indicates they should be), the majority of Iraqis want the US occupiers out of their country. This has been the case since the end of the first year of occupation and will most likely continue to be the case unless Washington somehow manages to silence every single Iraqi that opposes their presence. Then again, opinion polls of US residents have consistently shown that they too want US troops out of Iraq, yet the troops are still there doing the work of the few Americans and Iraqis who truly benefit from their presence.

Instead, the US Congress is trying to convince the bureaucrats the US military props up in the Green Zone to pay for the US endeavor in Iraq. Two Democrats and one Republican (Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Evan Bayh of Indiana) are now drafting legislation that would replace all future aid grants to Washington's client regime with loans. This is what passes for opposition legislation in the United States these days. In actuality, it is just another attempt by Washington to blame Iraq for the mess the occupation has created. Furthermore, the fact of reconstruction is more myth than anything else and what exists is rife with corruption in almost every facet. Besides all this, the loans would keep Baghdad in debt for a considerably long time, forcing any government there to spend its resources not only on so-called reconstruction costs but on interest payments, as well. In regards to the militias, the legislation's sponsors hope that Baghdad will pay for the Awakening Councils, thereby making them a semi-official part of the Green Zone's security forces, despite al-Maliki's consistent opposition to the Councils' mere existence. This fact alone seems likely to doom the legislation as proposed, if not completely.

The suggestion that Iraq should pay for its reconstruction assumes that the Iraqis asked to be destroyed by the US military. It further assumes that the government set up by the occupiers is a government that is able and willing to fulfill the Iraqi people's desire for peace and freedom from occupation. The reality is that this is nowhere near the case. Not only does the Green Zone government exist because of the US military and intelligence presence on Iraqi soil, it exists because Washington allows it to. Of course, one hopes that Iraq will someday pay for its rebuilding. However, as long as its government is beholden to the US for its survival that is unlikely to occur.

When i heard of that new law being passed my first thought was good luck with that because Sadr and his militia will never give up his arms and considering the inefectiveness of the iraqi army i cant see them enforcing that new law but we shall see if this leeds to more fighting or what?

LMAO! PLEASE explain a bit further on the "inefectiveness of the iraqi army". There were 100,000 that went to Basrah and there were what 1,500 military and police that were shit canned. Not to damn bad for a new army fighting it's own people. By the way, sounds like the streets of Basrah are a bit tamed down these days.

Al-Sadr is driving his party right out of the political arena and the hearts of the Iraqis. They're sick of this crap and if you recall, Sistani isn't a big fan of his either.

Keep up the bad faith though.....:thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

holy shit p4b you have to stop watching U.S news ...the iraq army got shit kicked bye AL-sadr ..come on buddy watch BBC NEWS or Canadian news to find out the facts.....

The Iraqi Army, backed by Coalition advisers and airpower, has launched an assault on the Mahdi Army-controlled neighborhood of Hayaniyah in the port city of Basrah, sparking heavy fighting. Multinational Forces Iraq described the action as "a new phase of operations" as part of the overall operation, called Knights' Charge, which was launched on March 25.

The fighting in Basrah is said to be intense. The assault began at 6 AM local time when "British artillery and US aircraft released ordnance against known criminal rocket and mortar sites west of Hayaniyah," the Multinational Forces Iraq press release stated.

"There were violent clashes with gunmen there," Captain Chris Ford, a British military spokesman in Basrah, told The Los Angeles Times. An Iraqi witness said Coalition airstrikes blunted a Mahdi Army attack and allowed Iraqi forces to take control of the main streets in Hayaniyah.

Iraqi troops are now said to be in control of the neighborhood. "Our troops deployed in all the parts of the (Hayaniyah) district and controlled it without much resistance," Major General Abdul Karim Khalaf, a spokesman for the Ministry of the Interior told Reuters. "Now we are working on house-to-house checking. We have made many arrests."

Elements from at least two Iraqi Army divisions are involved in the Hayaniyah operation. The newly formed 14th Division is operating in conjunction with the 1st Division, one of the most seasoned divisions in the Iraqi Army. "This remains an Iraqi led, planned and executed mission," said Major Tom Holloway, the British Armyâ??s spokesman in southern Iraq. A brigade from the 1st Division was moved into Basrah to support the operation after the military met tougher than expected opposition at the onset of Knights' Charge. The 1st Division is based out of Anbar province and has seen action in Fallujah, Ramadi, Baghdad, Baqubah, Mosul, and elsewhere.

Hayaniyah was one of three Mahdi Army-controlled neighborhoods that have been surrounded by the Iraqi Army since earlier this week. Iraqi forces also have surrounded the Khamsamile and Garma neighborhoods in an effort to isolate the Mahdi Army and control movement into and out of the areas. Iraqi troops pulled control of Taymiyyah and Qiblah away from the Mahdi Army over the past several weeks.

Ongoing pressure in Basrah

Today's operation is the latest in a series of actions designed to wrest Basrah from the grip of the Mahdi Army. On April 18, the Iraqi security forces detained 35 "wanted men" in Basrah, Al Faw, and Al Qornah. One of those captured included an "accused suspected of being involved in the attempt on the life of one of top Shiite Cleric Ali al Sistani's representatives in Basrah." The Sistani representative was seriously wounded in the assassination attempt.

Also on April 18, Iraqi troops surrounded an office of the Sadrist movement in the heart of the city. The building complex is owned by the Iraqi Olympic Committee and was occupied by other political parties, all of whom left after receiving notice from the government. The Iraqi military has been ordered to eject political parties from state-owned buildings, but the Sadrist party is refusing to leave. A 48-hour deadline has been issued for the Sadrists to leave. The Sadrists have said they have begun to leave the premises and will be out of the buildings today.

Background on the fighting between the Mahdi Army and the Iraqi government

Mahdi Army forces rose up after the Iraqi government started the assault on Basrah on March 25 to clear the city of the Mahdi Army and other Iranian-backed Shia militias. Sadr called for his forces to leave the streets on March 30 just as Iraqi Army and police reinforcements began to arrive in Basrah. Sadr later admitted he ordered his followers within the Army and police to abandon their posts and join the fighting against the government.

US and Iraqi forces killed 173 Mahdi Army fighters in Baghdad alone during the six days of fighting from March 25-30. The fighting has not abated in Sadr City and other Mahdi Army-dominated neighborhoods in northern and eastern Baghdad.

Sadr and his political movement have become increasingly isolated since the fighting began in Basrah, Baghdad, and the South. The Iraqi government, with the support of the political parties, said the Sadrist political movement would not be able to participate in upcoming provincial elections if it failed to disband the Mahdi Army. On April 13, the cabinet approved legislation that prevents political parties with militias from contesting provincial elections this year. The bill will now be sent to parliament for approval. Grand Ayatollah Sistani said the Mahdi Army was not above the law and should be disarmed.
Iraqi troops advance against Mahdi Army in Basrah - The Long War Journal

Oh crap....this isn't the Canadian news so I suppose it's just a false report.:rolleyes:

Have a good one!:s4: