Hopefully Nouri al-Maliki has a plan B in reserve, because plan A is not working.
Shiite militias in Basra openly controlled wide swaths of the city on Saturday and staged increasingly bold raids on Iraqi government forces sent in five days ago to wrest control from the gunmen, witnesses said, as Iraqi political leaders grew increasingly critical of the stalled assault.
Witnesses in Basra said that members of the most powerful militia in the city, the Mahdi Army, were setting up checkpoints and controlling traffic in many places ringing the central district controlled by some of the 30,000 Iraqi Army and police forces involved in the assault. Fighters were regularly attacking the government forces, then quickly retreating.
After Maliki loses his most economically important oil port and his most reliable armed division, his credibility as a national leader will be next to nil.
As Ezra Klein says, “the Bush administration has eschewed a strategic approach for tactical goals that lead nowhere but are achievable through military force and are popular here at home.” I don’t know how many times I have tried pointing that out to war supporters; I do know that it never sunk in. Maybe this passage will help.
Since the Basra assault began Tuesday, violence has spread to Shiite districts of Baghdad and other places in Iraq where Shiite militiamen hold sway, raising fears that security gains often attributed to a yearlong American troop buildup could be at risk. Any widespread breakdown of a cease-fire called by Moktada al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric who founded the Mahdi Army, could bring the country back to the sectarian violence that strained it in 2006 and 2007.
The troop buildup had tactical goals, which boiled down to reducing violence in Iraq. Indeed the violence went down; never mind that neither of the major causes (Sunni cooperation against al Qaeda and Sadr’s ceasefire) have any proximate connection to our troop buildip. As people like Ezra, myself and thousands of others have pointed out these tactical results amount to a hill of beans without progress on the strategic goals of cementing reconciliation between the armed factions. In reality they amounted to less than a hill of beans, since each party used the lull in combat to rearm and reorganize.
I suppose that we could hold a seminar on the difference between tactical and strategic goals, but maybe it would be easier to stop listening to people who need to see points like this play out before they understand. These same people for the most part also miss fine points like how removing Iran’s major competitor could benefit Iran and the general benefit of postinvasion planning. See for example Yglesias’s recent bit on Krauthammer. At every step since the Iraq invasion was nothing but a neocon wet dream America would have unambiguously benefited by treating these guys as the war-drunk fantasy thinkers that they clearly are. Every time we listen to Bill Kristol or a Kagan on any meaningful topic America loses.
calipygian
And a kitten dies a horrible, agonizing death. Or an Iraqi prisoner.
Eural Joiner
Where does your * go?
TenguPhule
Fixed.
w vincentz
Not only Basra. This is the defining “battle” that Maliki wanted. Cheney gave his blessing.
Oh SHIT! Defections? Yes.
From Huff Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/29/shiite-leader-alsadr-def_n_94008.html
Phil
Two words: lead pipes.
Sure would explain a lot.
Jay McDonough
from swimming freestyle:
“Iraq is a sovereign state, or so we claim. Why would U.S. forces assist the sovereign Iraqi government and Iraqi Army in their attempts to squash internal, anti-government insurgents?
We don’t have a horse in this race. Wouldn’t it be in our national interest to allow Iraq to settle it’s own internal power struggles?”
http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com
Tim F.
The draft was published a little bit too soon. I fixed it.
Bruce Moomaw
Note that all this is happening BEFORE al-Sadr has officially declared that his cease-fire is over — which gives you some idea of how long al-Maliki would hold on by himself in an official war with the Sadrites. (For that matter, it may well indicate how long al-Maliki will hold on in such a clash even WITH American assistance.)
TenguPhule
Plan A: Pick a fight against a fortified position with troops who probably like the other side more then yours.
Then pray for US intervention.
Plan B: Grab the money and run into exile.
Delia
I am still trying to figure out whose bright idea this whole thing was. I’m no military expert. I’m just sitting here in Eugene, Oregon, but it looks like a pretty obvious no-brainer to me that if a rather fragile puppet like Maliki goes after al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army, he’s going to get his ass whupped and the Americans are going to have to go in the rescue him and their precious surge is going to be shown up for the sham it always was. Oh, and Iraq goes back from being a low-simmering hell-hole to being a full blown one. And just in time for the election season.
I mean, it’s gotten so that the repugs are good at absolutely nothing except propaganda.
TenguPhule
Maliki’s, probably.
He’s got no chance when elections are next held.
He bet everything on ‘I’ll kick the shit out of the opposition’ pony since it works in so many other countries.
Problem is, those other countries tend to outgun and outmuscle the ‘rebels’, not the other way around.
Plan B is gonna be a Marcos, take the money and run away.
rawshark
I’ve come to realize they don’t need to be good at anything else.
Davis X. Machina
The troop buildup was intended to neutralize Iraq as an issue in the run-up to the US presidential elections, nothing more.
Everything these boyos do is politics.
Wilfred
Listen, don’t listen – it hardly matters. We’ll be there for decades:
w vincentz
So much for the “surge”.
Despite the fact that the sock puppet chimp said it was workin’ out so swell a couple of days ago, looks like it isn’t.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/iraq-crisis-threatens-bus_b_94037.html
jake
Place your bets:
In the next [] days, Dick n’ Bush will start catapulting pro-Sadr propaganda.
I give it 30.
Dennis - SGMM
After thinking about this for awhile, I’ve formed the completely unverifiable hypothesis that the purpose of Cheney’s recent visit was to tell al-Maliki to get his act together or else.
Al-Maliki panicked and decided to force continuing American support by launching an attack on his main opposition – even if it launched an inter-Shiite civil war. He attempted to co-opt the American forces into acting as the militia that his Dawa party lacks. Now the US is in the position of supporting an ineffective figurehead in a war against a popular religious figure with huge grass roots support and an effective armed force.
Can you say Ho Chi Minh? I thought you could.
John Cole
We are so fucked.
TenguPhule
We passed that point awhile ago.
We’re now at the morning after with a hangover and an unidentifiable person who may or not be of a different gender in the same bed.
dbrown
Can we spell ‘civil war’?
w vincentz
And the winner is….
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jNhVbwmjixMs2NciVz_S_cCCgk2AD8VNBMO82
rob!
i’m glad to see CNN and MSNBC aren’t wasting time on this Iraq silliness, because then they’d have to cut down some of their wall-to-wall “Can The Rev. Wright Controversy Still Hurt Obama?” coverage.
Rick Taylor
I’d expect his “plan B” would be us.
w vincentz
Rob,
Expect a Brittany Spears story to break, or perhaps Paris H, or maybe Anna Nicole’s corpse to be exhumed.
Anything to divert attention.
Plenty of basketball on now. That really matters, right?
Rick Taylor
I’m still wondering how they’re going to blame the Democrats for all this. We were on the verge of winning, only Maliki saw that with a Democratic victory likely in the next election, he’d be loosing his U.S. allies, which forced his hand before he was ready as well as emboldening the Sadrists? We were that close to winning before the defeatists lost if for us!
cbear
Yep, we’ve now officially entered the “coyote love” stage of our relationship with the Maliki government.
w vincentz
Rick Taylor,
Though it looked like the Dems would be to blame for this, whew! luckily, it’s the British that are to blame…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3646595.ece
The dems dodged a bullet (pun intended).
w vincentz
OOOPS,
Maybe Cheney, one week after his visit.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/cheney-visits-iraq-a-week-late.php
GSD
I was right when I said civil war in Iraq is over. This is inter-sectarian strife.
-Field Marshall Fred Kagan
Brachiator
Sick joke du jour:
Building not hard enough? Try Cialis.
(tip of the hat to LA radio personality Wayne Resnick
Dishonorable mention: Sadr-day night’s all right for fighting.
Our invasion of Iraq destroyed a sovereign nation and split it into various religious and secular factions.
What did Colin Powell say about “you break it, you own it?” Oh yeah, by having him deliver phony evidence of WMD before the UN, the Bush goons rendered Powell as damaged goods in the eyes of liberals. And when Powell failed to support Bush doctrine with all his heart and all his soul, Powell became damaged goods in the eyes of conservatives.
A win-win for the forces of evil.
What a freakin’ moron. We need to scoop Kagan, Kristol and other neo-cons up and embed them with the troops, where they can assist directly with the “success” of the surge.
Thepanzer
Even if Bushco had a coherent strategy I don’t know if it would make any difference. When you’re standing in quicksand the best strategy is to just get out. The whole reason Bush Sr. wouldn’t go to Bagdhad was due to the very same can of worms we’re dealing with. We can’t fix it, we can’t stop it, but we CAN financially drain ourselves until we can no longer stay. We will be leaving, it’s just a matter of how many trillion and how many dead people before we go.
Will Iraq be a bloodbath after we go? Who knows? It’s pretty fucking obvious the plan now is to try and hold it all together with duct tape and hope things magically resolve themselves over time. I’m reminded of something from the Ben Kingsley Ghandi film. If I remember right one of the british imperialists tells him that when the british leave the country would tear itself apart. Ghandi says something to the effect, that’s true but it will be our country and our problem. Iraqi made solutions won’t be pretty but they will be Iraqi.
Delia
WAAAAaaaah . . . . . This is tooooo HARD. It would be so much easier if we could just pretend reality was the way we wanted it to be the way they do on FOX.
Rick Taylor
w vincentz said:
Surely we can work the Democrats in there someplace? Perhaps the British would have stayed if we’d showed fortitude and a united front in this country? Who can blame the brits for doubting our resolve when the leading candidates for the party likely to win in November is openly calling for defeat?
Regardless, I’m looking forward to people finally saying how yes, it’s bad, but then telling us we liberals are awful people because unlike conservatives we want it to be bad so we can win the elections.
It’s a puzzling phenomenon, so many conservatives are unable to tell apart “wanting to win” and “talking as though we’re winning no matter reality is”. Even after five years it hasn’t changed.
The Grand Panjandrum
What’s VERY interesting is that on this evenings edition of All Things Considered (NPR) reported that al-Maliki evacuated his battle HQ in Basra. But I can’t find that report nor can I find it reported anywhere else… Democratic Underground had a thread on it but no one can find the link now.
Just Some Fuckhead
Iraqi made solutions won’t be pretty but they will be Iraqi.
More likely Persian.
tBone
See? I was right. There’s virtually no evidence of Sunni vs. Shia conflict here at all.
-Festering Ass Crater Bill Kristol
Punchy
I cant wait to see Maliki’s new declaration, on April 9, about some new 30 day extension. Followed by another 10 day extension. Repeat.
When Iraqis see how little control/power the central gov’t has, I’d think they’d quickly turn to militias for protection. Just wait and see how THAT works in a “democratic” government.
Ninerdave
That was like 3 years ago. Our presence in there is only lengthening the time the civil war will last.
Soliton
To paraphrase Roseanne: We are so far beyond fucked that the light from fucked won’t reach us for ten billion years.
Brachiator
I couldn’t find anything that corroborates this.
On the other hand, I found this little nugget in a recent news story very interesting (Shiite leader al-Sadr defies Iraq gov’t):
Hearts and minds, people, hearts and minds….
Delia
Well, I think the first prize for quote linkages tonight goes to Kevin Drum.
And on a related note, what’s all this about the Iraqi Army not knowing how to fight? It seems to me they’re fighting very well indeed. It’s just that, um, they don’t seem to be fighting on the same side the Bushies would like them to be fighting on. It’s all a question of motivation. Maybe the US government should commission some self-help books to be translated into Arabic or something.
Brachiator
Great point!
But it is not just a question of motivation. There is this odd thing which you see in both the left and the right, and is the critical flaw in all neo-con thinking, where people believe that Iraqis are magically supposed to want to do whatever corresponds to America’s national interest.
The Sunday news shows will overflow with this hubristic BS when they turn to the topic of Iraq.
4tehlulz
Improved.
Wilfred
Col. Pat Lang, who actually knows what he’s talking about, sums it up:
Kagan, Kristol, Wolfowitz, Feith, Abrams et al. were never interested in what was good for the United States. Their objective was to make the world better for Israel. Mission accomplished.
scrutinizer
This morning:
Last night:
scrutinizer
CNN says:
“Cooperating with Iraqi security forces” is not the same thing as “calling for an end to armed appearances.” Sound to me like al-Sadr wins this round.
maxbaer (not the original)
I hope that’s not in Iraqi Dinars. Or American Dollars.