Is Basra back under Iraqi government--not militia--control?
James Forsyth 7:38pm
Today’s AFP dispatch from Basra makes for fascinating reading. It suggests that the Iraqi government efforts to rein in the militias that had come to dominate the town, thanks in part to British policy, has been much more successful than initially thought: “Residents say the streets have been cleared of gunmen, markets have reopened, basic services have been resumed and a measure of normality has returned to the oil-rich city.
The port of Umm Qasr is in the hands of the Iraqi forces who wrested control of the facility from Shiite militiamen, and according to the British military it is operational once again.” There’s no doubt that Prime Minister Maliki’s snap decision to launch the clampdown and his failure to properly coordinate with the Coalition forces meant that the operation did not go as smoothly as it could have done. But if the Maliki government is both prepared—as the assault on Basra and Sadr city showed it is—and able to successfully confront the Shiite militias then this would represent a major step forward for Iraq and be as important as the Sunni Awakening which combined with the surge has done so much to degrade al Qaeada in Iraq’s effectiveness.
The awful violence today, bombs in four different cities killed 66 people, is a reminder of just how fragile progress in Iraq is. But the truth is that the situation in Iraq is far better than it was in 2006 when most of the British political class decided to tune out.
Hat Tip: The Weekly Standard
Previous
Comments
Dirk Blade
April 15th, 2008 10:21pmThis is heartening news, but it emphasises the ignominy of the British disengagement from Basra.
The resolve of the Iraqi government to impose its will and enforce the rule of law in Basra puts the cynical accommodation and moral relativism of British policy into stark relief.
And how long before some senior British figure attempts, straight-faced, to argue that it was British tutoring and support that created the conditions for Iraqi success, vindicating our decision to withdraw to 'overwatch'?
It looks very much like the only thing the US and the Iraqis can learn about counter-insurgency from the British example is that it's no good using 'all the elements of national power' if no one believes you've got the political will or the military means to actually defeat the bad guys.
kinglear
April 15th, 2008 11:04pmIf you rerally want to know how spineless and despised our politicians are by the Army, go and see the play Black Watch if it comes near you.
TGF UKIP
April 15th, 2008 11:40pmDirk Blade is spot on but while the Army must take some blame, the much larger share must be attributed to Britain's political class as a whole and not just the Government. Following the war too many troops were withdrawn too quickly and the Blair Government was politically too weak to withstand continuing calls for further deeper and more accelerated withdrawals from the Labour backbenches, the LibDems and most digracefully of all, the Tories. The bottom line is, though, that we have under-manned, under-equipped and under-funded Armed Forces, a situation the Tories are pledged to maintain while promising to throw yet more wasted billions into the bottomless pit called the NHS. Aren't all you Tories so proud of your party?
Dirk Blade
April 16th, 2008 8:35amTGF: You are quite right. I meant no slur on the *tactical* efforts of the forces: where the tasks have been realistic, and resources have been allocated, they have generally done a first-rate job.
At the risk of sounding like a monomaniac, I've seen a lot of our senior military leadership first-hand, and there is definite tendency to throw up hands, mutter "I've done my bit", and fall into line behind flawed political decision-making. As you suggest, delivering security in Iraq's second city with only a UK brigade minus and a half-trained Iraqi division was never a realistic prospect.
Sadly I think the govt has engineered the current situation to create the conditions for an undignified withdrawal, and (incidentally or deliberately) reduce the appetite of the UK electorate for any nasty, expensive overseas interventions - however necessary - for the next decade.
The UK military run down the "gung ho" Americans far too much, but the UK's leadership - political and military - could learn a lot from the US about honour and its sustaining effects. While scepticism and amused cynicism, the stock-in-trade of our armed forces, have much to be said for them, I don't think they're adequate for the long-haul. That's why we accommodated Sinn Fein-IRA in N Ireland, why we dismissed the Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks as "as bad as each other", and why we're selling our national honour in Basra - and Afghanistan - for the price of a few infantry battalions.