Iraq announcement followed by massacre

The Iraqi prime minister, Nouri Maliki, has said that Iraq's security forces will take over securing the devastated country from the United States and others by end of 2007. The forces, sections of which allegedly have strong ties to militias (e.g. Sunni soldier helping Sunni insurgents and fighting opposing Shias). There are roughly 325 thousand Iraqi security forces, including police and law enforcement.

In more violent areas, Iraq's military is weak at best. However, much of the country, notably the Kurdish north, is relatively tranquil.

Car bombings killed up to 200 in Baghdad following the announcement — the bloodiest attack since a step up by the Iraqi government and American military in February (remember the 'surge'?).

The chain of events is probably a coincidence, because there is little reason for the bombings unless they were a sectarian attack or an attack against America or Iraqi government in general. In addition, the Maliki announcement will be welcomed by most in Iraq.

If it's not a coincidence, the attack could be an omen of bad things to come in the civil war; a war that will hopefully end soon. The next couple of years will see policy shifts by the Iraq government and those of America and its allies as pressure increases on governments and some have already begun change in their policy on Iraq.

This is an amazingly bloody war being fought in Iraq, with the death toll going up every day. Let's not forget the innocent civilians who are, for the most part, bystanders to this carnage. And what is the objective of the sides? Sunnis against Shias, Shias against Sunnis, and various other groups only stirring up the violence. Unlike the foreign 'freedom fighters' (e.g. 'al-Qaeda in Iraq'), domestic insurgents (e.g. al-Sadr's Mahdi Army), and foreign military presence (e.g. US, Britain), the ordinary people of Iraq did not volunteer to die; they did not volunteer to be put at risk. Just like we have seen in the North Ireland conflict of ages past, in many uncivil civil wars, no body really wins, but lives are lost — see BBC Newsnight's intriguing Iraq 2020 debate.

technorati tags: iraq, nuri+maliki, baghdad, baghdad+bombings, iraq+car+bomb, news, politics, death+toll, iraq+civilian+deaths

Baghdad: one big red zone

'Nowhere is safe'
Following a suicide bombing in the ultra-secure and guarded Green Zone of Baghdad, in Iraq, there is an increased feeling of unease among those protected in the Green Zone since the invasion by a US-led coalition in 2003. Is this incident a symbolic move showing the security situation is getting even worse in Iraq's capitol, or is it an isolated incident?

Up to a few days ago, any major attacks within the Green Zone were very rare — it was secure, one of the only secure areas in a city in as much turmoil as Baghdad. Worse yet, the security breach was a terrorist act against Iraq's fledging democratic government. However there is a silver lining: maybe this attack will bring the divided lawmakers of Iraq together. Many have ties to militias, or their parties do anyways. Even more represent their own ethnicity or religions denomination, not the people they were elected to represent and not Iraq in general.

The Iraqi government has failed in most aspects, although it is quite a young one in one of the most violent, destroyed nations on earth. Unity is Iraq's only option if it wants to keep itself from becoming an all-out failed state. Sectarianism is at fault; if only the politicians did something (constructive) about it.

Iraqi government tightens security in Baghdad

On the Iraqi front, security is being stepped up as a new security plan, including the US troop "surge" (which the US Congress is debating), is being implemented.

The Iraqi government announced late Tuesday that its security forces in the capital would forcibly remove tens of thousands of people from homes that they are occupying illegally as part of an aggressive effort, tantamount to martial law, to reverse the tide of sectarian cleansing that has left Baghdad bloodied and balkanized.

Lt. Gen. Aboud Qanbar, who was named by Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki to head the new security crackdown in Baghdad, announced the new campaign, which he said would have the force of law, during a nationally televised speech in which he claimed sweeping emergency powers.

The scope of the announcement appeared to catch the American military command by surprise. Enforcement of the housing provision alone would face considerable obstacles.

Under General Qanbar’s decree, the border crossings to Iran and Syria will be temporarily closed effective immediately, as the Iraqi security forces try to reassert control in this lawless capital city.

Is this a Giuliani-like city cleanup or is it just a move that will spill more blood, increasing violence? Will these 'emergency powers' mean even more control by a military that may just worsen conditions in Baghdad? This is serious considering much of the Iraqi Army is corrupt and fights according to their religion/ethnicity (many Sunnis protect or fight with Sunni sectarian militiamen, etc.). I also wonder what this plan will make homelessness an even more pressing humanitarian debacle.

Update: Added link to post on US House of Representatives debate on Iraq policy.

technorati tags: iraq, baghdad+security, al-maliki, qanbar

More death, desolation in Baghdad

It was an extremely bloody day in Iraq. At least 80, possibly scores more, lost their lives from coordinated attacks in Baghdad. as violence seems to continue at a harsh level.

[The Guardian:]

It was intended as a period of national reflection. A 15-minute pause at midday to mark the first anniversary of what many consider to be the spark that lit the fuse of Iraq's civil war.

The bombing of the golden-domed Askariya shrine in Samarra last February by suspected Sunni militants killed no one - but since that day 33,929 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives in the ensuing violence. As Baghdad's clocks registered 12.20 yesterday, Iraq's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, appeared on state television to appeal for calm, for national unity and for an end to the violence that has devastated the country.
...
The latest atrocity came a week after Mr Maliki had ordered thousands of police and troops on to the street as part of a joint Iraqi and US security plan.

Yesterday both Iraqi and US soldiers had also taken to the streets, adding checkpoints across the city in a show of force aimed at stopping sectarian violence in Baghdad. The American military is sending 21,000 additional troops to Iraq to assist in the crackdown.
...
"Watching this, I think it is like being in hell. Where is Mr Maliki? Will he visit this place?" said a bystander who gave his name only as Muhammad.

When will it stop?
Sunnis and Shias need to work together; Iran and America need to work together. They all have so much to loose from this worsening civil war. The Sunnis and Shias and Kurds and others are loosing their country and livelihood, Iran and others in the Middle East have a neighbor that is imploding on itself, and the US is facing a military and political — local and international — disaster. It may sound like a dream, but one of these pairs have to work together, and will eventually.

iraq, baghdad

Surging violence, surging deaths

Well over 100 people have been killed today in Baghdad from a bomb attack. Some figures have placed blame on Sunni groups and Baathist (Saddam) loyalists for the second most deadly single attack to hit Iraq since the invasion.

The reason for the escalating violence lately can partially be put on the troop surge President Bush has pushed for. Competitive insurgent forces and sectarian militias are attempting to go out with a bang, so to speak, before Baghdad security is due to increase, hopefully for the better. These groups want to inflict as much damage as possible before — in their eyes — it might be too late. (The key word in that sentence: “might”.)

BBC News:

At least 135 people have been killed and 305 injured in a lorry bombing at a market place in central Baghdad, Iraqi security officials have said.

Article continues…

Only the Sadr City bombings in November, which killed more than 200 people, have claimed more lives.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki blamed loyalists of the executed former leader Saddam Hussein for the al-Sadriya attack.
BBC world affairs correspondent Mike Wooldridge says the attacks on markets are widely seen as militant groups deliberately stepping up their activities before a new joint Iraqi-US security operation for Baghdad gets under way.
The US is to deploy an extra 21,500 troops.

On Saturday, Iraq's most prominent Shia cleric, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, made a new appeal to all Iraqis.
"Everybody knows the necessity for us to stand together and reject the sectarian tension to avoid stirring sectarian differences," he said.

It was only yesterday when a NIE report warned that sectarian (‘Iraqi-on-Iraqi’) violence was the primary agitator of the insurgency and source of turmoil — contrary to the Bush administration's continuous blaming of Iran and Al Qaeda for inflaming the situation in Iraq.

As an update to my post on the NIE, it is important to note the ‘civil war’ wording the report used — wording many policymakers and plenty others in the US are afraid to use.

"The term 'civil war' does not adequately capture the complexity of the conflict in Iraq," said the report. "Nonetheless, the term 'civil war' accurately describes key elements of the Iraqi conflict.”

January had already seen some of the worst violence since the invasion. Even when removing the US v. Iran factor, there's still an unbelievable amount of death and destruction in a ravaged nation such as Iraq.

Bush is asking Congress for hundreds of billions more dollars for the war effort in Iraq. This administration is already slated to spend — or has already spent — a minimum of half a trillion on its “war on terrorism”. The budget, which the White House is getting ready to propose to Congress, will top $2.8 for fiscal year 2008.

If one ever finds themselves thinking about the morality and ethics instead of the politics relating to Iraq war policy, at least acknowledge civilian deaths. These people did nothing wrong; they were just unlucky being in the wrong place at the wrong time... with the wrong leader of the country invading their own.

Update: Check out this great Slate article by Fred Kaplan on Bush's poor Iraq strategy in re to sectarian violence and the Sunni-Shia conflict.

technorati tags: iraq, baghdad, bush, maliki, politics, congress, budget, white+house, iran, sectarian+violence, civil+war, news