Expert on Iraq: 'We're In a Civil War'

GhostofMarcus

Star
Registered
JAKE TAPPER / ABC | March 6 2006

As Pentagon generals offered optimistic assessments that the sectarian violence in Iraq had dissipated this weekend, other military experts told ABC News that Sunni and Shiite groups in Iraq already are engaged in a civil war, and that the Iraqi government and U.S. military had better accept that fact and adapt accordingly.

"We're in a civil war now; it's just that not everybody's joined in," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William L. Nash, a former military commander in Bosnia-Herzegovina. "The failure to understand that the civil war is already taking place, just not necessarily at the maximum level, means that our counter measures are inadequate and therefore dangerous to our long-term interest.

"It's our failure to understand reality that has caused us to be late throughout this experience of the last three years in Iraq," added Nash, who is an ABC News consultant.

Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told ABC News, "If you talk to U.S. intelligence officers and military people privately, they'd say we've been involved in low level civil war with very slowly increasing intensity since the transfer of power in June 2004."

Since the elections last year, Cordesman says, more radical Islamist insurgents have made "a more dedicated strike at the fault lines between Shiites and Sunnis." And they have succeeded.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, however, U.S. Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disputed that.

"I think that the Iraqi people -- Kurds, Shia, Sunni -- walked up to the abyss, took the look in, didn't like what they saw, have pulled together, have pulled back from violence, and are working together to keep things calm and to find the right mix for their own government," Pace said.


Sectarian Violence Rages On
The sectarian violence over the weekend was lower in intensity than in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of the Askariya Mosque -- one of the holiest Shiite sites -- in Samarra on Feb. 22. But still, the sectarian violence continued.

On Saturday night, gunmen mowed down four people -- killing two of them -- at the Shiite Ahl al-Beit mosque in Kirkuk, North of Baghdad. On Sunday, at least two others were killed in a gun battle at the Sunni al-Noor mosque in the al-Jihad neighborhood of West Baghdad.

Shakir Mahmoud, a cleric at al-Noor mosque, claimed the attackers came from the Interior Ministry itself, which is controlled by Shiites and has been accused of allowing, if not permitting, Shiite militias.

"The group consisted of 10 cars, care used only by the Interior Ministry," Shakir said. "The uniforms are only worn by the Interior Ministry. They attacked the mosque."

The Interior Ministry denied the charge.


Al Qaeda at Work?
On Saturday in Doha, Qatar, the head of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid, claimed al-Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the Askariya Mosque, saying that the blast indicated the group was changing its goal and trying to start a civil war in Iraq. He allowed that it had worked, to an extent.

"They got more of a reaction from that than they had hoped for," Abizaid told the Associated Press. "I expect we'll see another attack in the near future on another symbol. They'll find some other place that's undefended, they'll strike it and they'll hope for more sectarian violence."

Abizaid also noted that the attack had achieved its intended affect to disrupt the formation of an Iraqi government, saying, "The shrine bombing exposed a lot of sectarian fissures that have been apparent for a while, but it was the first time I've seen it move in a direction that was unhelpful to the political process."

But while Abizaid offered a fairly glowing assessment of the performance of the Iraqi military and police, others noted that the body count hovered in the hundreds, if not surpassing a thousand, and that in some cases the largely Shiite forces had created problems as well.


'Serious Lack of Realism'
Nash told ABC News, "The vast majority of the personnel in the army come from the Shiite and the Kurd population. And what we need to understand is that a political settlement -- not brokered, but insisted upon by the U.S. -- that gives equitable treatment to all factions is what we need."

Cordesman, who is also an ABC News consultant, noted that when military leaders speak publicly, "They have to spin the issue -- particularly for American and European audiences -- and there's often a rather serious lack of realism."

Whether or not this is civil war, the fighting is not yet a broad national conflict, since an overwhelming majority of the attacks are in just four out of Iraq's 18 provinces. The question is whether it will spread.
 
<font size="5"><cdenter>Many Sunnis now say they need U.S. protection</font size></center>

By Edward Wong and Dexter Filkins The New York Times
Published: July 16, 2006

BAGHDAD - As sectarian violence soars in Iraq, many Sunni Arab political and religious leaders once staunchly opposed to the U.S. presence here are now saying they need American troops to protect them from the rampages of Shiite militias and Shiite-run government forces.

The pleas from the Sunni Arab leaders have been growing in intensity since an eruption of sectarian bloodletting in February, but they have reached a new pitch in recent days as Shiite militiamen have brazenly shot Sunni civilians to death in broad daylight in Baghdad and other mixed areas of central Iraq.

The Sunnis also view the Americans as a "bulwark against Iranian actions here," a senior U.S. diplomat said. Sunni politicians have made their viewpoints known to the Americans through informal discussions in recent weeks.

The Sunni Arab leaders said they have no newfound love for the Americans. Many said they still sympathize with the insurgency and despise the Bush administration and the fact that the invasion has bolstered the power of Iran, which backs the ruling Shiite parties.

But the Sunni leaders have dropped demands for a quick withdrawal of American troops. Many now ask for little more than a timetable. A few Sunni leaders even said they want more American soldiers on the ground to help contain the widening chaos.

The new stance is one of the most significant shifts in attitude since the war began. It could influence White House plans for a drawdown of the 134,000 troops here and help the Americans expand dialogue with elements of the insurgency. But the budding reconciliation is already stirring a backlash among the Shiites, who make up about 60 percent of the population but were brutally ruled for decades by the Sunni minority.

In Adhamiya, a northern Baghdad neighborhood, Sunni insurgents once fought street-to-street with American troops. Now, mortars fired by Shiite militias rain down several times a week, and armed watch groups have set up barricades to stop drive-by attacks by black-clad Shiite fighters. So when an American convoy rolled in recently, a remarkable message rang out from the loudspeakers of the Abu Hanifa Mosque, where Saddam Hussein made his last public appearance before the fall of Baghdad in 2003.

"The American Army is coming with the Iraqi Army - do not shoot," the voice said, echoing through streets still filled with Saddam supporters. "They are here to help you." Abdul Wahab al- Adhami, an imam at the mosque, said later in an interview: "Look at what the militias are doing even while we have the American forces here. Imagine what would happen if they left."

Even in Sunni-dominated Anbar Province, where insurgents are carrying out a vicious guerrilla war against foreign troops, a handful of leaders are turning to the Americans, asking commanders to rein in Iraqi paramilitary units. Sheiks in Falluja often complain to American officers there of harassment, raids or indiscriminate shooting by Iraqi forces.

A year ago, the party of Tariq al- Hashemi, a hard-line Sunni Arab who is one of Iraq's two vice presidents, was calling for the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops.

"The situation is different now," Hashemi said. "I don't want the Americans to say bye-bye. Tomorrow, if they were to leave the country, there would be a security vacuum, and that would lead inevitably to civil war."

The U.S. ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, has been at the forefront of American efforts to bring Sunni Arabs into the political process. Part of that strategy is to crack down on Shiite militias and push for amnesty for some guerrillas.

This month the American military has stepped up operations against the Mahdi Army, a volatile Shiite militia, and the top American commander, General George Casey Jr., said Wednesday that the Americans would hunt down "death squads" that are a driving force behind the rising bloodshed. Some Shiite leaders deride the American policy toward Sunnis as appeasement. "This strategy will destroy their goal of establishing democracy in Iraq," said Abbas al-Bayati, a Shiite legislator. "Compromising with the insurgency will encourage the insurgents to do more and more violence in the region."

Investigations into possible wrongdoing by American troops in two major cases - the deaths of 24 civilians in Haditha last November, and the rape and murder of a 14-year-old girl and the killing of her family in Mahmudiya in March - have ignited anger among Sunnis, but not nearly to the degree as they might have in 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prisoner scandal emerged. But back then, Iraq had not crept to the brink of full-scale civil war.

Of much greater concern now is the massacre of up to 50 Sunni civilians in Baghdad's Jihad neighborhood on the morning of July 9, when Shiite militiamen dragged people from cars and homes and shot them in the head. Some families fled the area for makeshift tent camps in the backyards of mosques.

"The problem is that American crimes are only a hundredth of the crimes committed by the militias," said Omar al-Jubouri, the human rights officer for the Iraqi Islamic Party, a powerful Sunni group that still considers itself the vanguard of political resistance to the Americans. "It's like one hair compared to all the other hairs on a camel." He added: "We want to tell the American people to increase the presence of the Americans here, to control the situation."

Sunni Arab leaders in the strife-ridden neighborhood of Dawra recently secured an explicit agreement with Shiite-led commando forces based there that said the Iraqi forces would not raid a Sunni mosque or private home without being accompanied by American forces. A new brigade of Iraqi forces has just moved in, and the Sunnis are likely to reach the same agreement with them.

A similar but more informal agreement exists in Adhamiya. Leaders of the Sunni Endowment, an Iraqi organization that helps administer Sunni mosques, say they have asked the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, to extend the Dawra agreement to all of Baghdad.

"If the Iraqi forces come without American soldiers, people will shoot at them, because we'll know they're militias," said Akrim al-Dulaimi, the head imam of the Holy Mecca Mosque in Dawra. "Civilians don't trust the government." The Sunni fear of militias and government forces - and a growing affinity for American soldiers - extends to other mixed areas of Iraq.

In Diyala Province, Sunni fighters and members of the Mahdi Army battle regularly. The town of Muqdadiya there is an epicenter of sectarian killings; on Wednesday, at least 20 people were abducted from a bus station and later found killed.

In late June, gunmen set afire 17 shops in the town center as the Iraqi Army stood by, said Hamdi Hassoun, a provincial council member and a Sunni Arab.

"We have called on the Americans for help, we have called on the prime minister's office," he said. "The infiltration of the police and army is common."

Khalid al-Ansary and Ali Adeeb contributed reporting for this article.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/16/news/sunni.php
 
Back
Top