News From Irak 2007/02/20 – 2007/02/21 Part 3
The American invasion of Irak has failed. It was doomed to failure from the start. The failure was not only predictable but was widely predicted. Those of us who predicted its failure were excoriated, and in some cases subjected to professional and personal attacks which we will neither forgive nor forget. In this the third part of our collaborative posting I outline the magnitude of that failure and set the scene for the remaining postings in the series.
“The only thing these sand niggers understand is force and I’m about to introduce them to it.” Source: What’s an Iraqi Life Worth?
“But this is America, the so-called guardian of humanity, and killing people for them is like drinking water. I shall go after them until I avenge the blood of my son.”
“A Well Known Military Tactic Engaged In Exclusively By Losers”
Actions have consequences, unpleasant actions typically have unpleasant consequences, brutal and barbaric actions typically have brutal and barbaric consequences. The failure of the American invasion of Irak was inevitable. The magnitude of that failure has been exacerbated by a consistent pattern of brutality and of lawless behaviour by American troops and their commanders.
Nothing short of complete withdrawal of all invading troops from Iraki soil will even begin to rectify the situation in Irak. And the inevitable result of American policies and tactics in Irak mean that that withdrawal will be both accompanied and followed by extreme violence.
In this part of a collaborative multipart posting parts 1 and 2 of which are here. I discuss recent events in Irak and lay the groundwork for putting them into a framework to help those of our readers who unfamiliar with Irak and unfamiliar with military doctrine understand what is going on Irak. While it has been clear for a long period that that the American invasion and subsequent occupation of Irak is a failure it can be helpful for lay readers to have a watershed event to use as a starting point or point of reference. The Al-Sadriya market bombing was just such an event.
markfromireland
The Al-Sadriya Market Bombing
The truck bomb that detonated in the street market of Baghdad’s Sadriya district killing more than 130 people and wounding more than 300 were was just such an event. That particular market has repeatedly been targeted by bombers. Three bombs in December of 2006 killed 51 for example. On February 10th Mohammed Ibn Laith wrote about the most recent major bombing. In that posting he cited several other examples of marketplace bombings all of which either I or one of my colleagues have written about, here, here, here, here, and here.
About Al-Sadriya Market
Al-Sadriya market is typical of many markets in Baghdad it serves not just locals but people who do not live close to it. In his posting of February 6th, 2007 Mohammed explained why in a city as avowedly dangerous as Baghdad people will shop in a market that has been bombed repeatedly:
Many reasons, but the most important is that it is more dangerous and more expensive to try to get your ration card changed from your old address than it is to risk your life to go shopping in the area from which you have been driven out
The Security Situation In Baghdad Generally
The security situation throughout Baghdad is such that irrespective of the composition of the neighbourhood, it is now completely normal for each neighbourhood to have armed men patrol its streets in an effort to protect residents. The police lack the equipment and the manpower to search for bombs and this function has been largely taken over either by vigilantes or militias. This phenomenonal rise of vigilantism has been widely reported in both the Arabic language and Western Media. A recent report from IRIN is typcal:
Our mission is to keep peace in our neighbourhood. We keep in contact with the other vigilantes in the neighbourhood to make sure there is no danger. Should something untoward happen, we start putting our defence mechanisms in motion,” Azawi said, a retired fireman and father of five
Source: “In absence of police, vigilantes take to the streets”
Throughout Baghdad, and increasingly throughout Irak, the citizenry are turning to militias and vigilante groups to provide them with basic security. Moreover as we will see later on they are turning to body’s other than government to provide other services normally provided by government.
The pattern is very clear. Not only has the American military invasion and occupation of Irak failed, their policy, carried out enthusiatically by the Bremer regime, of deliberately collapsing the organs of the Iraki state has led directly to the desperate straits in which the American invaders and their Green Zone Government allies find themselves. The failed American invasion and occupation of Irak has moved into the penultimate phase of all such operations - repeated battles for control of the capital. We’ve posted repeatedly about the bombings and fighting that comprise the ongoing battles for control of Baghdad. A few examples:
- The Al-Sadriya and Karradah bombings (June 11 2006.)
- The the Al-Ula market Bombing (July 2nd 2006.)
- The Jameelah market bombing (July 23rd 2006.)
- The Rashad market bombing (August 17th 2006)
- The “Together Forward” Counter-Campaign (September 1st 2006 et seq)
- The “Search Party” bombings (October 30th 2006)
- The Health Ministry-Attack (November 23, 2006)
- The Al-Sanak market kidnappings (December 14 2006)
- The Red Crescent kidnappings, and The attack on the Dental Hospital. (December 17th 2006)
- The Al-Haraj & Al-Sanak bombings. (January 22nd 2007)
- The massively escalating campaign of February 2007.
The bombings, the kidnappings, the assualts on political power centres, the nocturnal death squad activity, the mortar attacks, the rapes, are all typical of the final phases of a failed occupation. The existence of several interlocking smaller armed conflicts that are primarily politcal in nature in addition to the main struggle against the occupiers are also characteristic of the closing stages of a failed occupation by a defeated invader.
One Country Many Wars
There are several different wars going on in Irak at present. Roughly speaking they can be categorised as follows:
- The war to expel the invaders and their allies.
This is the main war going on in Irak. It will not end until the American invaders and their allies are expelled from Irak. As you go through US government report, after US government report, after US government report, such as the collection of GAO reports headed “Iraq: War and Reconstruction” (showing 89 items at the time of writing) it becomes very plain that not only do attacks upon American forces and their allies in Irak account for the overwhelming majority of attacks in Irak but that they always have.
[See: GAO-06-428T (PDF)] & GAO-06-1094T, (PDF) for examples.]Insurgent groups are better organized, increasingly achieve effective operational security, have improved their capabilities to cache and distribute weapons, and have refined and adapted their tactics.
“August Memo”It is also very clear that these attacks are increasing in scale, sophistication, and deadliness.
Attacks aimed at rendering Irak ungovernable by the occupiers and their local allies come under this heading [See for example the "August Memo" (PDF),] as do attacks undertaken as part of the ever tightening Siege of Baghdad
[See for example this search of postings on this site.]
- Fighting amongst Irakis.
These are attacks either upon civilans or armed groups to ensure a favourable political position once the American occupation finally collapses and the invaders withdraw.
Not Mindless At All
In short the violence in Irak is very far from being mindless. It is a combination of more and more deadly, sophisticated, and effective violence against an increasingly vulnerable, hated, and despised invader, and political violence directed against internal political foes.
To use American political terminology various “messages” are being sent.
Many Messages
There are many messages – political messages, being sent by the groups of fighters. I remind my readers that the Jaish Al Mahdi fought alongside the “insurgents” resisting the rape of Fallujah:
- We, the resistance, will attack, and attack, and attack. We will attack in ever increasing numbers and with ever more deadly weapons. No sacrifice is too great to expel the American invader. The only thing an American understands is force and we are introducing them to it. We will keep on attacking until you are so horrified by the loss of life and the maiming of your troops that you give up. We will make you waste the lives and limbs of your troops and bureaucrats as you have you wasted money.
We will fight you the invader who have brought calamity and mayhem to our people and to our land before, during, and after your departure until not one of your troops remains on our soil.
We will fight to ensure that we are not swamped in the new Irak that is now emerging as you prepare to flee.
We will fight any who try to rule us without our consent.
We are not without friends either inside or outside our land, and we do not forget who it was who fought alongside us in Fallujah and Tal Afar, we will fight alongside them again.
Irak is for the Irakis.
- We are the majority here, this is our home and you are not welcome here. You betrayed us when we rose against the tyrant. You and the collaborators who returned from abroad have wreaked havoc upon our home and our children will suffer for generations because of American treachery and brutality.
We will fight alongside our Iraki brothers as we fought alongside them in Fallujah and Tal Afar, we will exact our retribution upon you and your collaborators as you flee.
We demand to live in our land according to our beliefs and our heritage. Who are you? foreigner to tell us who is and is not Iraki?
We will fight any who try to rule us without our consent.
We will fight those who seek to break away from Irak be they in the north or the south.
We also have friends and allies and they are not who you, foreigner might think.
Irak is for the Irakis.
What About The “Foreign Jihadis?”
Well what about them? You’ll notice that I have ignored the “Al Qaida in Irak” bogey man. American claims to the contrary that particular bogey mostly doesn’t exist.
There are a few, a tiny few, attacks carried out by so called “foreign jihadis.” As I wrote last December 9th:
They always trot out the excuse, the stupid excuse, that Al-Qaeda was there. It’s ludicrous. The majority of attacks in Iraq are carried out against the Americans. The overwhelming majority of those attacks are carried out by Iraqis. The proportions in this poll:
“Al Qaeda is exceedingly unpopular among the Iraqi people.
Overall 94 percent have an unfavorable view of al Qaeda, with 82 percent expressing a very unfavorable view. Of all organizations and individuals assessed in this poll, it received the most negative ratings. The Shias and Kurds show similarly intense levels of opposition, with 95 percent and 93 percent respectively saying they have very unfavorable views. The Sunnis are also quite negative, but with less intensity. Seventy-seven percent express an unfavorable view, but only 38 percent are very unfavorable. Twenty-three percent express a favorable view (5% very).
Views of Osama bin Laden are only slightly less negative. Overall 93 percent have an unfavorable view, with 77 percent very unfavorable. Very unfavorable views are expressed by 87 percent of Kurds and 94 percent of Shias. Here again, the Sunnis are negative, but less unequivocally —71 percent have an unfavorable view (23% very), and 29 percent a favorable view (3% very).“
Are matched by the proportions of the attacks.
Source: ”A Well Known Military Tactic Engaged In Exclusively By Losers”
To be continued …
