Sunday, March 2, 2008
Out of the Frying Pan
The situation in Iraq just got a whole lot worse.
A story that should have dominated the news on Wednesday was relegated to the back burner amidst growing talk of a recession. U.S.-backed Sunni Iraqi forces, sometimes referred to as Sunni Awakening forces, threatened to renege on their deal to fight alongside American troops against al-Qaeda in Iraq. These local militias are unhappy with the Shi'ite police chief in Diyala province and are trying to pressure the government to replace him. The news seems innocuous enough amongst repeated claims from the White House that "the surge is working," but the loss of a key ally like the Sunni Awakening squads could not only undo everything that has been achieved in the last year, but possibly even make things worse.
These Awakening squads are a large reason for the success of the surge in the first place. Having an extra 30,000 troops in the area is significant, certainly, but having fewer enemy combatants is perhaps more significant when it comes to explaining why fatalities have dropped so dramatically. Before the surge, Sunni Iraqis were actively fighting against U.S. troops, but in the beginning of 2007, they formed a temporary alliance in order to combat the growing influence of al-Qaeda in Iraq in Anbar Province. These soldiers, called "concerned local citizens" (CLCs) by the American military, are paid $10 a day to police combat areas. The military likes the idea because it allows the security of Iraq to be placed in the hands of Iraqis, which is the entire point of the war in Iraq. The sooner Iraq can stabilize itself, the sooner U.S. troops can come home.
That's all good and well, but Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is worried that these troops aren't loyal to Iraq. He has every reason to be. The CLCs are fighting against al-Qaeda in Iraq. They're being paid by the U.S. military. At no point does the
Iraqi government enter the picture. Maliki is worried that once the threat of al-Qaeda in Iraq disappears, they will resume fighting against the government, and after Wednesday's announcement, those fears are starting to be realized.
Which makes one wonder: is the surge really working? Increased troop levels provide an image of security at home, but on the battlefield, the CLCs seem to have actually been making the difference. With the threat of their disappearance, not only does the U.S. military lose a valuable ally, but it also potentially gains more enemy combatants. That mitigates the claims coming from the White House about the success of the surge. Most of these claims are centered around the argument that conditions in Iraq are better than they were before the surge. That sounds wonderful, but when you stop and think about it, the argument falls apart. Of course conditions are better now than they were in 2006. In 2006, the country was in the grip of a civil war. Now that Sunnis across the country have resolved to fight alongside U.S. troops instead of against them, the civil war has largely ended. It's no great stretch to say that conditions after a war are better than they were during it. It is a stretch, however, to connect that improvement to an increase of troop levels.
The end of the alliance between U.S. troops and CLCs makes things in Iraq worse. However, the prospect of armed and U.S.-trained CLCs potentially fighting against the government is far more dire. The Bush administration was livid when they suspected Iran and Syria of arming and funding Iraqi insurgents. If conditions continue as they are right now, they won't have anyone to blame for an increasingly deadly insurgency than themselves. While the situation in Iraq is grim for George W. Bush, it looks to be even more so for his successor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Now, I'm not too well-versed in history, but isn't this the same thing that happened to Russia in Afghanistan?
Post a Comment