Global Insight Perspective | |
Significance | The blast at the heart of the Iraqi parliament came hours after a suicide bomber destroyed the prized Sarafiya Bridge across the Tigris River; the attacks sent a message of defiance from Iraqi insurgents and struck a blow to efforts at reversing the security situation in Iraq’s troubled capital. |
Implications | The ability of insurgents to infiltrate the heart of the Iraqi government raises uncomfortable questions about the loyalties of Iraqi security forces charged with protecting the country’s leadership. |
Outlook | Although the Green Zone is no stranger to the occasional volley of mortar attacks—as evidenced during the UN chief’s recent visit to Baghdad—this latest security breach will force a thorough reassessment of the security network tasked with protecting Iraq’s leaders. |
Symbolic Targets
Iraq’s parliament will today hold a special session in a symbolic gesture of defiance against a suicide bomb attack that killed eight people, including two parliamentarians. Yesterday’s blast, which transported the daily carnage afflicting ordinary Iraqis to the heart of the fortified Green Zone, raised renewed concerns about the loyalties and professionalism of Iraqi security forces tasked with protecting the country’s political leadership.
The attack came hours after insurgents destroyed Iraq’s celebrated 70-year-old Sarafiya Bridge, killing at least ten others on a day when insurgents targeted the symbols as well as the arteries of the Iraqi state. The UN’s Special Representative in Baghdad described the attacks as assaults on “Iraq’s proud history as well as hopes for its future”. U.S. President George W. Bush condemned the attack, saying, “It reminds us that there is an enemy willing to bomb innocent people and a symbol of democracy…Our message to the Iraqi government is we stand with you as you take the steps necessary to not only reconcile politically but also put a security force in place that is able to deal with these kinds of people".
Surges and Setbacks
The dramatic attacks came just as the administration was trying to talk up the progress achieved by the current troop "surge" strategy and attempting to give the four-year anniversary of the invasion a positive spin. The troop surge has been hugely controversial back in the United States, where Democrats—and some Republicans—have argued that it will only drag the superpower deeper into an unwinnable situation. For the administration, the surge is therefore an extremely high-stakes gamble—perhaps its last chance to prove the nay-sayers wrong and set Iraq on a more stable trajectory. Despite an apparent reduction of violence in pockets of the Iraqi capital, yesterday's headline-grabbing attacks have inevitably made a much greater impression on sceptical Americans back home. Without clear signs of progress in the short term, the clamour for a staged withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq will become very difficult for the administration to resist. The emboldened Democrats are pushing ahead with legislative moves to force Bush's hand and, in any case, their candidates stand a good chance of wresting the presidency from the Republicans come November 2008.
Outlook and Implications
The unfolding events are also no less important for those who hope to become the next Republican president as they are for Bush. Senator John McCain is one of the frontrunners and one of the most passionate supporters of the "troop surge". He has been earnestly talking up the situation in Iraq and last week paid a visit to Baghdad. His message is not washing with the electorate, however, and his rosy depiction of Baghdad street-life has been met with widespread derision. His latest poll ratings (for Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times) give him just 12% support, compared to 29% for the former New York mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, 15% for former senator Fred D. Thompson and 8% for former governor Mitt Romney. However, Giuliani is no foe of the war either, and has skeletons in his cupboard that are not helping his challenge. Should the situation in Iraq not improve substantially before the 2008 elections, all the Republican frontrunners will be badly weakened, but it is McCain who has most to lose given his eagerness to commit the additional troops.
Bush tried to regain the initiative in interviews yesterday, stressing that the surge is still in its early days. He also said that the attacks should remind Americans why the fight against extremists is so important: "There's a type of person that would walk in that building and kill innocent life, and that is the same type of person that is willing to come and kill innocent Americans". McCain echoed these sentiments, arguing that "the first glimmers" of progress are being seen in Baghdad, and that yesterday's attacks do not change the "larger picture". In the meantime, the administration is struggling to sell its decision to extend the tours of duty for soldiers in Iraq from 12 to 15 months. This illustrates the strain that the army is under and the call is proving understandably unpopular among the many families of those affected.
The strains were also detectable in the low turnout during today’s special parliamentary session; deputies fearing their personal security stayed away in droves, illustrating that political progress and national consensus remain hostage to the insecurity and lawlessness that persists in Baghdad. Yesterday’s bloodshed was the latest test of the U.S. leader’s controversial strategy for stabilising Iraq’s troubled capital.