The Prospects of Regional Conflict Over Iraq

The trouble with the US military is Iraq is that they are not helping, they are making things worse. The Bush Administration has no sophistication of strategy. It's Bushies way or else he'll level the neighborhood, or the city or the country. The war on terror is more about winning over the minds of the Muslim world than about scaring them into submission. It doesn't work to scare a religious fanatic. Juan Cole provides his justification for withdrawl of ground troops while retaining special forces and air force to provide close air support for Iraqi troops. The various militias already run the country, let them have at it.
Informed Comment

Basically, if all the US military in Iraq is capable of is operations like Fallujah and Tal Afar, then they really need to get out of the country quick before they drive the whole country, and the region, into chaos. Even as they are chasing after shadows in dusty border towns, the US military is allowing much of Baghdad to fall into the hands of the guerrillas.


And that is why we have to get the ground troops out. Counter-insurgency has to have both a military and a political track. Even as the enemy is being pressed, you have to reach out to the civilian leadership and try to draw them into a truce.


The US military has had no political successes in the Sunni Arab areas. Mosul and some parts of Baghdad could have been pointed to in summer of 2004. In summer of 2005, these earlier successes have evaporated like a desert mirage toward which thirsty soldiers race.


The situation in the Sunni Arab areas was worse in summer of 2004 than it had been in summer of 2003. It is worse in the summer of 2005 than it had been in 2004. Even the Iraqi political groupings that had earlier been willing to cooperate with the US boycotted the Jan. 30 elections and are now assiduously working to defeat the new constitution. Things in the Sunni Arab areas are getting worse, not better. I conclude that the presence of the US ground troops is making things worse, not better.

One of Juan's point is that the Shiites and Kurds might be more interested in negotiating if they were on their own militarily. I think that is a very powerful point. The presense of American troops is strengthening the Shiite's allied with Iran and ensures Iran will have considerable political influence in Iraq. If the Sunni's remain the powerless one, the surrounding Sunni countries will not stand bye. Al-Faisal's approach to the Bush Administration is not just warning about Iraq fracturing, but about the other Sunni countries entering the war to counter the Iranian influence.
Informed Comment

Saud al-Faisal had accused Iran of moving substantial numbers of men, as well as goods and materiel, into Iraq. The charges mirror those of hard line Iraqi Sunnis, who have never reconsiled themselves to the Shiite majority in Iraq and so are always positing big Iranian population transfers into the south. This charge is frankly silly. Saud al-Faisal also let it it slip that Saudi Arabia and the United States actively helped Saddam Hussein to put down the Shiite uprising in spring of 1991. He said, "We fought a war together to keep Iran out of Iraq after Iraq was driven out of Kuwait. Now we are handing the whole country over to Iran without reason." ' How else can this statement be interpreted?


Many Iraqi Shiites are still furious at the US for allowing the Baath regime to suppress the Shiite uprising, since some 60,000 lives were lost in the repression.