Socialist Action

 

SOCIALIST

ACTION

 

 - home page

 - newspaper
 - subscribe
 - distribute

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Balancing Act in Iraq is

Becoming More Precarious

by Gerry Foley  / March 2008

 

Despite all the hype about the effectiveness of "the surge," that is, the deployment of additional U.S. troops in Iraq, the major U.S. success has been the achievement of an alliance with local Sunni gangs against al-Qaida and other insurgents. However, this relationship has been unstable from the beginning because of a number of basic problems.

 

These Sunni gangs include many former guerrilla fighters against the U.S. occupation, as well as former members of Saddam Hussein's forces. They are not trusted by the mainly Shiite U.S. client government and its security forces.

 

The U.S. commanders themselves fear that these bands are untrustworthy because of shifting loyalties, as well as organized  infiltration by al-Qaida and other insurgents.

 

Also, naturally, since these groups have been formed around local strongmen, many of whom are more or less bandits, these militias are ridden with violent factionalism and personal rivalries. Recently, for all these reasons, the relations of the U.S. military with these groups have been evidently becoming more strained.

 

An article in the Feb. 14 Christian Science Monitor noted: "Hundreds of Sahwa [Awakening Council] militiamen protested Monday to demand that the provincial police chief, a Shiite, be fired for sanctioning alleged crimes against Sunnis within the province.

 

The protesters threatened to quit their jobs as neighborhood guards, paid mainly by the US.  "Iraq's Shiite-led government has also delayed drafting Sahwa members into the police and Army. Only 10 percent of the 77,000 Sahwa members have been accepted for training for police and Army jobs. Of those, 490 have completed training, according to a US-led coalition spokesman, Rear Adm. Greg Smith." For the members of Sahwa, acceptance into the regular Iraqi security forces is essential for status and economic security.

 

An article in the Feb. 28 Washington Post likewise reported: "Since Feb. 8, thousands of fighters in restive Diyala province have left their posts in order to pressure the government and its American backers to replace the province's Shiite police chief. On Wednesday, their leaders warned that they would disband completely if their demands were not met. In Babil province, south of Baghdad, fighters have refused to man their checkpoints after U.S. soldiers killed several comrades in mid-February in circumstances that remain in dispute."

 

The article noted: "Inadvertent U.S. killings of Awakening fighters—five such incidents have occurred in the past three weeks—are adding to the frustrations. In the southern town of Jurf al-Sakr, U.S. soldiers killed three fighters Feb. 15. U.S. commanders said that the men had fired upon the soldiers first and that the troops acted in self-defense.

 

"Within hours, more than 1000 fighters walked away from their posts. Sabah al-Janabi, who heads the Awakening in the area, publicly criticized the U.S. military, alleging it had killed 19 of his men in the past 45 days, which U.S. commanders deny."

 

U.S. commanders say their soldiers have to shoot first and ask questions afterward and let the chips fall where they may, although they are risking losing vital ones: "The incidents illustrate a vexing problem for the American military: The Awakening movement has grown so fast that it has become difficult for U.S. commanders to monitor the fighters and their loyalties

 

"'It's clear there are extremist groups that have penetrated the Concerned Local Citizens, that there may be in fact al-Qaeda amongst the Concerned Local Citizens," said Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, a senior military spokesman."

 

The Awakening Councils thus are being caught in a crossfire, since they are also facing increasingly deadly reprisals from al-Qaida. In January, insurgent attacks on them have grown from 29 in the previous month to 100. And some of these attacks have been deadly. Furthermore, the Awakening Council leaders who face these risks have reason to feel slighted both by the Iraqi government and the American military.

 

According to the Washington Post article, "Rafah Kassim, 37, an Awakening leader in the oil-producing city of Baiji, lost two fighters in mid-February when gunmen ambushed their car. Speaking at their funeral, Kassim said he did not expect the Shiite-led Iraqi government, which fears the Awakening movement could one day turn against it, to embrace his fighters.

 

“He had applied six times to join the Iraqi army and police, he said, but was never accepted. He said he expected his new ally, the U.S. military, to back his struggle. Instead, he said, U.S. commanders have limited his force to 40 fighters when he needs at least 100 to protect his area of 2.7 square miles.

 

"'They should make me stronger. They should not weaken me,' said Kassim, a former commander in the Islamic Army, an insurgent group. ‘We need weapons. We need vehicles. We do not even have gas for the few cars we have. When we joined, the Americans promised to provide all necessities. Now we know those were only words.'

 

"In the past two months, he said, 20 of his fighters have quit. Many felt their monthly salary was no longer worth the risk of fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq. His men also have not received their salaries in two months, he said. 'We'll all be patient for another two months. If nothing changes, then we'll suspend and quit,' Kassim said. 'Then we'll go back to fighting the Americans.'"

 

Such threats can be a form of attempted blackmail, to which the U.S. dependence on the Sunni gangs makes them vulnerable. But it probably also reflects doubts the military have about these groups and their consequent fears that they risk equipping future enemies.

 

In any case, it is evident that the gains of the U.S. against al-Qaida and other insurgents, based on an alliance with these groups, are very precarious. And a breakup of this constellation could lead to a worse situation for the U.S. military in the Sunni areas than the one it faced before "the surge" and the enlisting of these bands.

 

At the same time that the U.S. alliance with the Awakening groups is showing signs of strain, the U.S. relationship with its only firm ally in Iraq has been severely shaken by U.S. complicity with a large-scale Turkish army search-and-destroy operation in the Kurdish area in northern Iraq. The Turkish forces, reporting numbering about 10,000 soldiers, stayed in Iraq for about a week, and the Turkish government has announced that it will carry out such operations whenever it wants without regard to any pressure from its allies, thereby thumbing its nose at the U.S.

 

The Turkish assault was allegedly aimed against bases of the Kurdish nationalist guerrillas of the PKK, who have been waging war against the Turkish state. In fact, since the inception of the modern Turkish state, Turkish nationalists have seen the liquidation of their Kurdish minority as essential for the achievement of their objectives. Until recently, it was even against the law to speak Kurdish in public, although the Turkish authorities maintained that there was no such thing as the Kurdish language.

 

 The refusal of successive Turkish governments to grant even the most minimal national rights to their Kurdish population has provoked repeated Kurdish uprisings, of which the struggle of the PKK is only the latest. The result of this attitude of the Turkish state makes it hated among all Kurds, who have major communities in Iraq and Iran, as well as Turkey.

 

The Kurds in Iraq also have reason to think that the Turkish nationalists will not tolerate the development of Kurdish self-government across their border with northern Iraq.  Furthermore, the Turkish state has historic claims to the oil-rich territories of northern Iraq, inhabited mainly by Kurds, which Turkey lost in World War I.

 

Le Monde reported Feb. 27: "Retired general Edip Baser, former commander of the infantry and later coordinator of the fight against the PKK, said: 'My feeling is that the Turkish army should stay. The objective is to occupy a territory from which we can have total control of the border. We have to stay in northern Iraq until the PKK is totally eliminated. Not just in Iraq, but also in Europe, where its financial reserves are located.’

 

“Other former generals have not hesitated on TV to evoke Mosul and Kirkuk as the real targets of the operations. 'I don't think it will go so far,' said Mehmet Dulger, former minister of foreign affairs, but Mosul and Kirkuk, which Great Britain took after World War I, have remained two wounds in my heart.'"

 

The Kurdish leaders, facing attempts to destroy their people from Saddam Hussein, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the Turkish state have hoped to gain protection from the United States. That explains their alliance with the U.S. occupation in Iraq and also apparently their acceptance of support from U.S. covert operations in Iran.

 

But U.S. imperialism has no long-term interest in defending the national rights of oppressed peoples.  Its natural allies are oppressors. It has manipulated the Kurdish leaders but always betrayed them. It is unlikely that the politically conscious Kurdish nationalists have forgotten that.

 

Moreover, the Kurdish people living in northern Iraq have shown in a number of ways that their real aspiration is independence and the logical implication of that is a state for all Kurds. However, the United States' most important allies in the Middle East are Israel and Turkey, states that are both based on forcibly stamping out the nationalist aspirations of oppressed peoples.

 

The aggression of the Turkish state in northern Iraq obviously threatens the U.S. alliance with the Kurds in Iraq, and thus threatens to undermine its domination of the country as a whole. Yet the U.S. rulers have no choice but to defend the Turkish operations, even if with some reservations and complaints.

 

Since the U.S. has proven unable to crush the opposition to its domination of Iraq militarily, it has come increasingly to depend on manipulation to maintain its position. But that has led it to try to juggle contradictory alliances, and it seems that is beginning to risk dropping some major pieces. The result could be an escalation of the conflicts in the region with a disastrous rebound against the United States.                                              

 

Human Needs, Not Profits!