Global Insight Perspective | |
Significance | The fragility of Iraq’s security gains, achieved in no small measure by the deployment of some 30,000 U.S. troops to Iraq’s security hotspots, came into sharp focus this weekend amid heightened violence in the capital, Baghdad, which was also accompanied by ongoing unrest in the north and south of the country. |
Implications | General Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will tomorrow be grilled by all of the presidential contenders, with U.S. military strategy in Iraq, and—more precisely—the fate of U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq, dominating proceedings. Petraeus and Crocker will emphasise the security gains and argue that political reconciliation remains a work in progress. |
Outlook | The resurgent violence and militia activity has underlined the ineffectiveness of Iraqi security forces, whose lack of discipline and problems with loyalty were on full display in run-ins with the Mehdi Army, strengthening the hands of those who advocate a steady U.S. troop presence in the country. |
Violence on Multiple Fronts
The past weekend (5-6 April) saw a wave of violence in Iraq, underscoring the fragility of progress made during the U.S. troop surge. Among the weekend's worrying incidents was the kidnapping of 40 Iraqi students in the northern city of Mosul by gunmen dressed in Iraqi police uniforms and manning fake checkpoints. The incident was reminiscent of the tactics used by al-Qaida insurgents in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, prior to the deployment of some 30,000 extra U.S. troops there. The group relocated its nerve centre out of Baghdad to the relative sanctuary of Mosul, after it was successfully targeted in the capital with the help of Sunni tribal groups that turned against al-Qaida's reign of violence.
While al-Qaida attacks may have dropped in the capital, this progress is being overshadowed by running battles between Iraqi security forces loyal to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the Mehdi Army of Shi’a cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. These battles, which pit Shi’a against Shi'a, were fought initially in the oil-rich southern Iraqi city of Basra, but this weekend moved to Sadr’s Baghdad stronghold of Sadr City. The eruption in violence in Sadr City, which will further strain the ceasefire ordered by the Shi'a leader, was reportedly sparked by an attack by a U.S. army helicopter on the sprawling Shi’a slum; the U.S. military said that it carried out an operation against criminal elements. Even the fortified U.S. Green Zone, the superpower’s military and political headquarters, was drawn into the violence, with two U.S. soldiers killed and dozens injured in rocket attacks, in a fresh reminder of the ongoing dangers to U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq.
Progress Report to Talk Up Gains
This weekend’s heightened brutality forms the backdrop to tomorrow’s progress report by the United States’ top military and political officials in Iraq. Despite the recent violence, General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are expected to laud the security and political gains achieved since September 2007, when they delivered their last report. This latest testimony will, however, play out in a highly charged political environment as all three presidential candidates offer their competing formulae for political and security progress in Iraq. The themes likely to dominate tomorrow's hearings are as follows:
- The Surge; A Turning Point? The injection of U.S. military muscle, and the rethink in strategy, is seen as the backbone of the security gains in some of Baghdad’s previously most bloodstained districts. Although ‘spectacular’ suicide attacks on popular markets are a sporadic occurrence, they have become a rarity, with al-Qaida staging opportunistic attacks rather than waging sustained campaigns. The security picture has been helped by alliances with Sunni tribal groups, with al-Qaida now seen by many Sunnis as an alien implant. In its heyday, al Qaida offered disgruntled Sunnis reeling from the dismantlement of the Baathist regime an instrument of opposition to the U.S.-led authorities; however, the ferocity of the violence and the tactics employed by the group has turned many Iraqis against al-Qaida. The government’s reversal of the de-Baathification initiative that was one of the ill-conceived ideas of former U.S. administrator in Iraq Paul Bremer has also gone some way to appease the Sunni community. The Democrat presidential candidates will tomorrow no doubt question the sustainability of the troop surge and the impact on over-stretched U.S. soldiers there.
- Strenthening the Iraqi Security Forces: General Petraeus will tomorrow detail improvements to Iraq’s security forces, with an emphasis on the creation of an effective and able body able to take over operational duties. The failings of Iraqi security forces were, however, on full display in Basra, when some 1,500 troops refused to bear arms against Shi’a militias, prompting British troops to provide crucial support. Britain’s decision to freeze planned reductions of troops from southern Iraq does not reflect well on the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and their ability and discipline with regard to the assumption of operational duties.
- A Ceasefire Under Threat: The ceasefire ordered by Sadr has been key in reducing the sectarian violence that has beset Baghdad; however, Maliki’s bold move to suppress the Mehdi Army, backed up by legislation that prevents militias from entering government, places the ceasefire at great strain. If administered effectively, the tussle with the Mehdi Army would cement Maliki’s political authority and legitimacy; it does, on the other hand, also have the potential to instigate a heightened spate of violence within the Shi’a community, turning Maliki’s Shi’a constituents against his government.
- The Regional Scene: The U.S. military has praised the more effective steps being taken by regional governments, including Syria, to halt the flow of army and fighters entering Iraq. The accusations levelled against Syria for turning a blind eye to fighters entering Iraq have subsided. The exception is, however Iran, with the United States expected to revive its criticism of Iran’s support for Shi’a militia groups, to the detriment of Iraq’s stability.
Outlook and Implications
There has been some significant progress made in Iraq since the troop surge began last year, but the new wave of violence inevitably overshadows this and raises questions about U.S. strategy. As Senate members, all three U.S. presidential candidates will have their say at the hearings tomorrow, and it will be interesting to see what lines they take. Republican John McCain faces perhaps the toughest challenge as he is closely associated with the troop surge, and has been trying to paint the crackdown on the Mehdi Army as evidence of the Iraqi government's growing authority. However, the renewed violence has cast doubt on this analysis and McCain could be left badly undermined if it continues. He nonetheless has the advantage of presumably chiming closely with Petraeus and Crocker's analysis. On the Democratic side, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been strongly critical of the war, but at the same time they are trying to convince voters that they would make the best commander-in-chief. To do so, they need to show a good understanding of the situation in Iraq and offer some constructive proposals. Merely lambasting the Bush administration would be counterproductive, and they are also wary of undermining U.S. troops on the ground. The renewed violence is likely to solidify the two Democrats' positions on accelerated troop withdrawals—had the success of the surge been more apparent, they would have been likely to soften their withdrawal demands. It remains to be seen how well Petraeus and Crocker manage to counter the gathering political gloom over Iraq's prospects.