One Day the Iraqis Will Send Us Home

While I was in Baghdad in 2004, I asked an Iraqi civilian if he was glad that Saddam Hussein was gone from the scene and he said, “Oh, yes, thank you..”

When I asked him if he was glad the American and Coalition forces were in his country, he said, “Oh, no…”

Then he added, “But please don’t leave yet…”

One of the biggest screw-ups in the beginning of the Iraq war was the failure of the Bush administration to look deeply into the history of the Arab world, the Shiite-Sunni conflicts and the long-held feelings of the Arab peoples that they didn’t want to be “occupied” by any western military forces.

We must remember that the Crusades were not noble endeavors. The Crusaders waged brutal warfare, leaving a trail of blood and Arab bodies – including men, women and children – as they rampaged throughout the Middle East and they were “terrorists” in their own time. Arabs have a long memory and this one remains quite vivid.

Then the British occupied Arabia during their colonial period, suppressing the Arab culture before finally carving up the Arab lands in what may have seemed a logical fashion, but which ignored many of the cultural needs of the people – such as the Kurdish citizens who were not given their own nation.

We must understand that the day will come when the Iraqi people want to be left alone. When they are comfortable that they possess the ability to take care of themselves, they will surely ask us to leave. They will not want any – repeat any – western military forces permanently occupying any part of their land. To believe otherwise ignores an Arab history that is one of complete distrust of western motives. Can we blame them?

American troops and their Coalition partners have done an amazing job and we have made many friends among the Iraqi people, but even these friends do not want our troops there forever. It is not about the willingness of an American administration to continue operations in Iraq; it is simply about whether or not the Iraqi people want us there. This is the Muslim Arab world which believes it has little in common with western powers.

In the end, the Shiite majority will determine the direction of Iraq. With luck the nation will remain a secular one, with a strong relationship – and hopefully friendship - with the United States. However, it remains likely that radical Shiites – with the help of Iran – will try to seize control of the government at some point after we have been shown the door. Should this happen, there will be nothing we can do about it except offer our help if it is requested - as we would for any of our other allies.

The following article is from McClatchy-Tribune Information Services and was posted on Military.com:

* * * *

US-Iraq Security Deal in Trouble

June 11, 2008
McClatchy-Tribune Information Services

BAGHDAD - A proposed U.S.-Iraqi security agreement that would set the conditions for a defense alliance and long-term U.S. troop presence appears increasingly in trouble, facing growing resistance from the Iraqi government, bipartisan opposition in Congress and strong questioning from Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama.

President Bush is trying to finish the agreement before he leaves office, and senior U.S. officials insist publicly that the negotiations can be completed by a July 31 target date.

But that seems increasing doubtful, and in Baghdad and Washington there is growing speculation that a United Nations mandate for U.S.-led military operations in Iraq may have to be renewed after it expires at the end of 2008.

On Capitol Hill, top Democrats and Republicans complain that Bush is rushing the negotiations to try to tie his successor's hands.

Iraqi lawmakers say the United States has dropped at least one demand and is no longer insisting on complete immunity for private contractors.

Six senators, including the chairmen of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees and their ranking minority members have written Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the past week asking for transparency in the negotiations and more briefings. White House, State Department and Pentagon officials briefed staff members on the talks June 10.

"There's a tremendous amount of concern up here about the state of these negotiations. ... It's been expressed repeatedly," said a senior congressional staffer, who requested anonymity. He noted that their appeared to be growing talk in Iraq of simply extending the U.N. mandate.

A spokesman for Obama, D-Ill., said any long-term U.S. security commitment to Iraq must be subject to Congressional approval; alternatively the administration should seek an extension of the current UN mandate. Obama wants a new administration to make it "absolutely clear that the United States will not maintain permanent bases in Iraq," said spokesman Bill Burton.

Some Iraqi parliamentarians are now saying that Iraq has a third option besides extending the U.N. mandate or agreeing to the proposed Status of Forces Agreement: telling the Americans to go home.

"By December Iraq has to decide what to do," said Sami al-Askari, a Shiite lawmaker who is close to Prime Minister Maliki. "If we are put in a corner...we have three options, not just two." Al-Askari said the U.S. side is "keen to sign it early" but said the U.S. "have to be realistic and deal with the issues that are very sensitive for the Iraqis."

On June 10, Ambassador David Satterfield, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's top advisor on Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad that both the Iraqis and Americans were on track to agree and that the U.S. was respecting Iraq's sovereignty during negotiations.

"We're confident it can be achieved, and by the end of July deadline," Satterfield said. "It's doable, that's where our focus is, not on alternatives...We're focused on plan A because we believe plan A can succeed."

He spoke less than 24 hours after an unnamed senior U.S. official told the Associated Press that the deal may not be completed before Bush leaves office next January. Satterfield bristled when questioned about the "unnamed official" and insisted that the talks were on track for completion July 31.

Iraqi lawmakers say the Bush administration is demanding concessions that are unacceptable, among them: dozens of semi-permanent bases from which U.S. forces can launch missions with no prior consent from Iraq's government; control of Iraq's air space; and no guarantees the United States will defend Iraq against a foreign attack.

The United States has portrayed opposition to the agreement as limited to Iranian officials and followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who opposes the U.S. occupation. But the chorus of rejection is growing.

"There is only one agenda for us-we need foreign troops because our forces are not capable yet to defend Iraq inside and outside of Iraq," al-Askari said. But when Iraq reaches the point it can defend itself, "That's it, no more foreign troops on our soil," he added.

"It seems from the draft (agreement) and from the discussions that the Americans have something else in their mind, for instance fighting al-Qaida or terrorism. That's why they want a free hand in arresting any Iraqi. But the Iraqis say, `no you don't have the free hand'."

In interviews this week, majority Shiite legislators told McClatchy Newspapers that the U.S.-proposed draft agreement is unacceptable and, given the way negotiations are going, they did not see them being complete by July 31.

The majority of Iraqi politicians support some kind of security agreement with the United States and the presence of some U.S. forces, although on their terms.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Iraq's government has reached the point of decision.

"Time is of the essence," he said. "There is a need for a clear political decision... Either the Iraqis want this or they don't want it." Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a declaration of principles for the accord last November, Zebari noted. "It hasn't come out of a vacuum or out of the blue."

Iraq wants an agreement in which U.S. Soldiers stay on bases outside of the cities; the United States does not control its air space; and acts only if Iraq asks for help.

* * * *

The fact that the Iraqis will one day no longer want us in their country is not a sign that we failed. If their self-sufficiency is accompanied by a strong free-market economy, if they have achieved the ability to defend themselves from aggression and if they have retained the power to determine their own destiny, then we have achieved success.

Regardless of what future they choose in the long run - it is THEIR future.

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Al Sadr's Quest for Power in Iraq

My “series” of posts on Muqtada al Sadr and the Mahdi Army continues.

Al Sadr may be trying to position himself in order to eventually declare that he is the “Mahdi” or “the guided one”. According to many fundamentalists, this individual will appear when Muslims are being oppressed throughout the world. The Mahdi will make war against those who are deemed to be oppressors. All Muslims will be joined together in peace and justice and the Mahdi will rule over all Arabs. According to believers, the Mahdi will even pray at Mecca with Jesus (“Isa” in the Quran).

Although Muqtada’s father was a high-ranking ayatollah, Muqtada has not even completed his formal religious training. This article talks about his quest for Islamic credentials:

* * * *

Iraq cleric Sadr eyes higher religious credentials

Reuters: December 14, 2007

KUFA, Iraq: Powerful Iraqi Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr is taking advanced Islamic studies in a bid to earn credentials that would allow him to issue religious decrees, a top aide to the young firebrand said on Friday.

Some senior figures in the Shi'ite clerical establishment view Sadr, who commands the feared Mehdi Army militia and has a bloc of legislators in parliament, as an upstart given his lack of scholarly achievement.

The anti-American cleric has a strong following among poor, urban Shi'ites across Iraq. Attaining higher religious credentials would likely enhance the influence of Sadr among majority Shi'ites, engaged in a power struggle for influence in the oil-rich south as foreign troops scale down their presence.

Senior aide Salah al-Ubaidi, speaking in the southern town of Kufa near the holy Shi'ite city of Najaf, said Sadr was looking to gain the title of "Marji", a term used for a cleric who is qualified to make religious decisions for his followers.

"Sayyid Moqtada al-Sadr is studying the Hawza like any other Shi'ite student who aims to reach the level of Ijtihad," Ubaidi told Reuters, referring to a term that describes a level that allows someone to issue religious decrees or "fatwas".

He said Sadr, who is believed to be in his 30s, was studying at Najaf, adding it was unclear how long it would take the cleric the achieve the credentials, but the process normally takes years.

Sadr's followers currently have to seek guidance on religious issues from clerics who have the necessary qualifications.

If Sadr succeeds, he could earn more respect from top Shi'ite clerics who have been unsettled by his rising following, which they believe stems from his respected father, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, who was killed by suspected agents of Saddam Hussein along with two of his sons in 1999.

Ubaidi denied Sadr was developing his religious stature to push for more influence in mainly Shi'ite southern Iraq, a region rich in oil reserves.

"He has no interest in public funds," Ubaidi said.

Sadr's main mass movement Shi'ite rival is the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council (SIIC), headed by Abdel Aziz al-Hakim.

Hakim also built his reputation partly through his father Muhsin al-Hakim, one of the most prominent Shi'ite scholars of recent times. But Abdel Aziz al-Hakim has a closer relationship to traditional clerics at the top of the hierarchy than Sadr.

Sadr, who led two uprisings against U.S. forces in 2004, froze the activities of the Mehdi Army for six months in late August after some of his followers were blamed for sparking intra-Shi'ite violence at a major religious ceremony.

The U.S. military has welcomed the ceasefire and said it has helped bring down violence in Iraq.

Sadr has vowed to reorganise his militia and root out rebellious elements who are ignoring his commands and taking the law into their own hands.

(Reporting by Khaled Farhan in Najaf; writing by Mussab Al- Khairalla in Baghdad, Editing by Dean Yates and Ibon Villelabeitia)

* * * *

We must remember that the future of Iraq will ultimately be determined by Iraqis, not America and its Coalition partners.

Since Arabs have a history of following charismatic religious leaders, we should always look at the fundamentalist Islamic leaders who may be trying to position themselves as the “voice” of Islam. There are quite a few of these potential “wannabe Mahdis” including al Sadr, Osama bin Laden and the religious leaders in Iran.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Never Forget Why We Are At War

I received this via email yesterday. While researching it, I found that it was initially sent in 2006, so some of you may have seen it before. It is worth seeing again:

The USS New York was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center .

It is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft.

Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite , LA to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003 , "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there."

Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back."

The ship's motto? "Never Forget"

* * * *

Al Qaeda and the other terrorists will try to attack us again as they did on 9-11. We must fight them wherever they are and we can never become complacent.

These killers want to turn the entire world into a brutal fundamentalist Islamic empire. Their unforgiving world would repress women, attack minorities and impose brutal religious punishments on perceived offenders.

When Presidential candidate John Edwards denied that there was a Global War on Terror, I couldn't believe that someone in his position could be so foolish. If we left Iraq tomorrow, the Islamic fascists would continue to attack innocent peace-loving people all over the world.

That sounds like a world war to me.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Al-Maliki's Speech Shows Courage & Determination

There has been much criticism of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Most of it revolves around how long it seems to be taking to get some of the laws passed that the American government considers “benchmarks”.

On the other side of the coin, we should remember that al-Maliki is a courageous man to take the mantle of a country that is torn from within. He must walk a daily tightrope between political and religious factions while facing the possibility of assassination each day.

One of my Baghdad friends sent me the following which is the text of a speech made by Al-Maliki on the first anniversary of Iraq’s new government. This speech was on Baghdad’s Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic. It is a positive statement from someone who clearly loves his people.

Not surprisingly, I have heard nothing about this speech from our own mainstream media. It is a little long, but so is the task the Iraqis must accomplish:

Iraq's Al-Maliki Reviews Government's Accomplishments on First Anniversary
GMP20070522617001 Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic 1458 GMT 22 May 07

[Speech by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki 'on the occasion of the first anniversary of the formation of the national unity government;' in Baghdad; recorded]

"In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate, dear Iraqi people -- people of the two rivers -- brothers and sisters: God's peace and blessings be upon you. A year has passed since the formation of the first elected government in Iraq's modern history, a government which has won the support of the parliamentary blocs taking part in the political process, which unanimously supported the national plan and granted confidence to the government.

Based on this unanimity, we depended on God and the people's confidence to implement the government's program. This is a task you undoubtedly know is difficult and complicated and is facing huge challenges.

The year 2006 was a real test of the will of the government and people. We were at a crossroads -- either Iraq will remain united and its social fabric cohesive and strong or it will slip into a sectarian war, which is the dirtiest of wars throughout history.

Praise be to God, we have succeeded in avoiding the danger of sectarian war after the holy shrine of the two Al-Askari imams in Samarra was blown up. That ugly crime was committed by the takfiris and their allies the henchmen of the dictatorial regime. The sectarian war which threatened our national unity is now behind us.

The year 2006 also witnessed the end of the dictator and his abominable rule, which dragged the country to wars and reckless adventures. That was a dark era during which we suffered the worst of tragedies and pains and offered hundreds of thousands of martyrs in prisons, detention centers, and mass graves, and in Al-Anfal and Halabjah. The rule of the one party, one faction, and the indispensable leader, and the policy of discrimination, exclusion, and marginalization have ended for ever.

Our success in avoiding a sectarian war and putting an end to the dictator was not without great sacrifices. We have sacrificed blood, shed tears, and faced difficulties. This is a heavy price we are paying today in our fight against terrorism. It is the same price we paid in 35 years. The road to freedom, justice, democracy, and equality cannot but be difficult and tough.

Brothers and sisters: Since the first day of the formation of the national unity government, which I had the honor of heading, I launched an initiative for national reconciliation and dialogue. The initiative was not launched on the basis of political, party, or sectarian considerations, but on a strategic vision to rebuild the state and consecrate the culture of dialogue and tolerance, renounce secondary differences, and close the past chapter.

We have placed the issue of national reconciliation at the top of the government priorities and devoted all resources to it. We said on more than one occasion that national reconciliation is a lifeboat for all Iraqis and it is the only way to overcome the ordeal and cross to the shore of safety. Regrettably, some have rebelled against dialogue and reconciliation. We will deal with them firmly and in accordance with the law.

The national reconciliation initiative led to conferences held by tribes, civil society organizations, political forces, officers, and intellectuals all over Iraq. It also provided the appropriate background to introduce constitutional amendments in which the authority of law has the final word. We did so by presenting the draft law of Accountability and Justice to the Council of Representatives. This draft law guarantees the rights of martyrs and distinguishes between those whose hands were stained with the blood of innocent people and those who were forced to join the dissolved Ba'th Party.

The draft law provides a legal framework and just accountability, and closes the bloody chapter of the past. The law which we want to be an arbiter and ruler does not mean leniency with criminal Ba'thists or ignoring the rights of martyrs and prisoners. It seeks to administer justice and rehabilitate all those who were exposed to injustice, despotism, and oppression.

O honorable Iraqi people, we consider the national reconciliation plan the strongest weapon in fighting terrorism. We were fully confident that this plan would succeed in defeating the takfiris and their allies despite the claims of some political forces, which wagered on turning national reconciliation into a bridge for the return of killers and criminals. It is impossible for this delusion to materialize.

In the new Iraq there is no place for the Ba'th Party, whose history is replete with coups, plots, and leaders of crime and mass annihilation. I will not miss the occasion here to invite the faithful Iraqi tribes and civil society organizations to form national salvation councils in all Iraqi governorates and to stand by the side of our armed forces in order to destroy the epidemic of terrorism, which is targeting Iraq -- land, people, and heritage.

The terrorists are destroying the infrastructure and killing teachers, physicians, engineers, builders, journalists, sportsmen, and artists, in addition to women and children. They are also attacking mosques, churches, and universities. Their blind grudge has reached the historical, civil, and cultural landmarks of Baghdad.

Brothers and sisters: Our war against terrorism is an open and long one. None should think that this war will end today or tomorrow. The security challenges facing dear Iraq are extremely serious. What makes the situation even more difficult is foreign interference, which is no longer a secret to anyone. Some political forces' acceptance of and submission to the influence of a number of countries has led to complicating the security file, which is no longer an internal challenge. This calls for greater vigilance and caution.

The day will come when we reveal the involvement of political groups and personalities in stirring up terrorist acts. We will not hesitate to expose the subversive role some regional and international parties are playing. These parties are not pleased to see Iraq strong and living a democratic experience and determined to establish the state of institutions. These quarters, which we know well, will pay a heavy price from their security and stability if they do not stop the policy of undermining security in Iraq so that the country will remain weak. A strong democratic and pluralistic Iraq is the only guarantee against the return of dictatorship. It is a safety valve for stability and prosperity in the region.

Any Iraqi entity that seeks support from abroad will be making a terrible mistake because this will lead to regional and international forces' conflict in the Iraqi arena. We also call on all those who care for the unity, safety, and sovereignty of Iraq to stop interfering in our internal affairs because the Iraqis alone can protect their country and defend their dignity. Our people, who recorded electoral epics in a record and critical time and established constitutional institutions on the debris of dictatorship, reject the logic of trusteeship and the logic of having others think on their behalf.

Brothers and sisters: Completing the establishment of our armed forces is a central national task we are trying to accomplish at the earliest possible time. This is a process which daily brings us closer to assuming full responsibility for security in the whole country. We have made a large stride in this regard and we are racing time in training, rehabilitating, and equipping our forces with modern weapons and military equipment so that our security services can take the initiative and assume responsibility for protecting the country and citizens, and thus pave the way for the withdrawal of the multinational forces from the country. This task will remain a top priority in our program for 2007.

On this occasion, I call on all honorable Iraqis to shoulder their responsibility and help our armed forces so that these can perform their duty under the sovereignty of the law and respect for human rights. The Law Enforcement Plan, which has entered its fourth month, is an integrated professional plan implemented in stages. We said right from the first day that the plan does not target any entity or sect, but seeks to protect the citizens.

It is an open war against the terrorists. We are determined to strike with an iron fist all outlaws -- terrorist organizations, militias, armed groups, and crime gangs which tamper with the security of the country. We cannot build a state in the presence of militias which have various allegiances, affiliations, and interests. We will give a full chance for those who voluntarily lay down their weapons and return to the national rank. We will exhaust all political solutions before we begin taking military measures, which we hope we will not be forced to take, to impose the authority of law.

Praised by God, we have succeeded in largely reducing the rate of sectarian killings and managed to restore normal life to a number of areas in Baghdad which were under the control of the terrorists. In view of the deliberate confusion some known parties and personalities are making and in view of attempts to undermine the reputation of our armed forces and security services, we call on the judicial authority to pursue these parties and refer their files to justice in order to call them to account for encouraging terrorism and inciting hatred and sectarian strife.

Brothers and sisters: He who thinks that building the state and its institutions and various departments is the job of only the government will be mistaken. We are all responsible for Iraq's recovery, security, stability, and prosperity. There is no doubt that this long and tough mission cannot be accomplished in a short time. It is a gradual historic task requiring solidarity and sacrifice by all.

It is inadmissible for the political forces participating in the political process to take a neutral position or act as bystanders or ones looking for mistakes. We have very regrettably seen this done by some people who placed themselves in the position of observers from a distance instead of putting their hands in our hands to build the new Iraq.

Cooperation among the three authorities takes place in an integral manner without interference by any authority in the affairs of the other authorities. We, together with our partners in the political process, raised the slogan of cooperation, integration, and revision in order to reach the largest possible understanding that is based on constitutional controls with the aim of reviewing programs and laws in a manner that serves the country's higher interests.

In 2006, we established balanced regional and international relations with many countries and succeeded in developing Iraq's relations with these countries in the various domains. Iraq, together with 60 countries and international organizations, signed the International Compact Document in Sharm al-Shaykh.

This document stands for mutual commitments between Iraq and the international community. We expect Iraq to reap good results from this document. This will reflect on the economy and its infrastructure and on the building and reconstruction drive in the country. It will also encourage foreign investments and lead to security and stability.

The government, in cooperation with the Council of Representatives, ratified the investment law, which is considered an extremely important step to promote the economy, rebuild the destroyed infrastructure, and provide job opportunities. The government also approved the largest budget in the history of Iraq. Part of it was allocated to reconstruction. The government also presented an oil draft law. The parliament's approval of this law was a qualitative step in the field of reconstruction, development of the oil industry, just distribution of wealth, and consecration of the unity and sovereignty of Iraq.

Brothers and sisters: Fulfilling your aspirations and hopes is the core of our program and the center of our attention. We have made a pledge to God and to you that we will continue to fulfill them and we will spare no effort to reach that goal. We are aware of your daily life concerns. We follow them up every moment and work hard and perseveringly to improve services and raise the living standards.

Our efforts will continue and the subversive trend of the terrorist gangs will not prevent us from serving you or hearing your concerns and knowing about your suffering. What helps us continue to shoulder our responsibility is our feeling that you are aware of the size of internal and external challenges and dangers facing our beloved Iraq. This increases our insistence on continuing our efforts to build a free, democratic, pluralistic, and federal Iraq.

God's peace and blessings be upon you."

* * * *

Note Al-Maliki's use of the term "takfiri". According to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Takfiri (from the Arabic word تكفيري) is the person who professes the disbelief of certain individuals or groups within the Muslim society or Islam. They are viewed as "extremists" by some of their opponents, arguing that "no one Muslim can call another Muslim a 'kafir' (infidel)".

Takfiris, on the other hand, exist in every Muslim sect, large or small, and often their fingers point not only to those who supposedly belong to a 'rival' sect, but also to those within their own; an example to that is the clear enmity between the Sufis and Salafi (both groups of which go under the umbrella of Sunni Islam.) Another example of internal 'takfir' is that occuring between pro-Saudi Salafis and the Jihadi Salafis (like Bin Ladin's group, al-Qaeda). Among Shia groups, takfir occurs as is the case toward the followers of the major Shia ayatllah Fadlullah of Lebanon (whose latest published opinions that review many beliefs deeply characteristic of Shia Islam have caused uproar and fierce opposition on the part of other Arab and Iranian clerics). There also exists the example of Twelver Shia declaring the takfir of the Shaykhi Shia small sect (found mainly in Basra, Iraq).

* * * *

Seeing the words of the Iraq prime minister helps us to understand the difficult tasks he must deal with each day.

We removed the dictator Saddam Hussein, but we also dismantled every aspect of Iraqi society from the governmental infrastructure to the army and police. We owe them a chance to work through their internal issues in order to make their government work for all of them.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Muqtada al Sadr's New Strategy

The following article from today’s Washington Post provides an interesting perspective on all the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering going on in Iraq:

Washington Post
May 20, 2007

Iraq's Sadr Overhauls His Tactics
Shiite Woos Sunnis, Purges Extremists

By Sudarsan Raghavan, Washington Post Foreign Service

NAJAF, Iraq -- The movement of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has embarked on one of its most dramatic tactical shifts since the beginning of the war.

The 33-year-old populist is reaching out to a broad array of Sunni leaders, from politicians to insurgents, and purging extremist members of his Mahdi Army militia who target Sunnis. Sadr's political followers are distancing themselves from the fragile Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, which is widely criticized as corrupt, inefficient and biased in favor of Iraq's majority Shiites. And moderates are taking up key roles in Sadr's movement, professing to be less anti-American and more nationalist as they seek to improve Sadr's image and position him in the middle of Iraq's ideological spectrum.

"We want to aim the guns against the occupation and al-Qaeda, not between Iraqis," Ahmed Shaibani, 37, a cleric who leads Sadr's newly formed reconciliation committee, said as he sat inside Sadr's heavily guarded compound here.

Sadr controls the second-biggest armed force in Iraq, after the U.S. military, and 30 parliamentary seats -- enough power to influence political decision-making and dash U.S. hopes for stability. The cleric withdrew his six ministers from Iraq's cabinet last month, leaving the movement more free to challenge the government.

"Our retreating from the government is one way to show we are trying to work for the welfare of Iraq and not only for the welfare of Shiites," said Salah al-Obaidi, a senior aide to Sadr. He said the time was "not mature yet" to form a bloc that could challenge Maliki, who came to power largely because of Sadr's support.

In recasting himself, the cleric is responding to popular frustration, a widening Sunni-Shiite rift and political inertia, conditions he helped create. The shift is as much a reaction to U.S. efforts to rein him in as it is an admission of unfulfilled visions. His strategy exposes the strengths and weaknesses of his movement as it pushes for U.S. troops to leave and competes with its Shiite rivals in the contest to shape a new Iraq.

Since Sadr emerged with force after the U.S.-led invasion, he has sought to create a Shiite-led state guided by Islamic law with a strong central government. In 2004, his militia battled U.S. forces in Najaf, bolstering his authority and appeal across sects. But his credibility as a would-be unifier of Iraq suffered after his militiamen engaged in widespread revenge killings of Sunnis following the February 2006 bombing of a revered Shiite shrine in Samarra. His movement remains in flux, at times in turmoil, over the approach toward Sunnis, the proper timing of a U.S. withdrawal and Sadr's political involvement.

"The Sadrists believe they have political problems, and they are trying new tactics to serve their own interests," said Mithal al-Alusi, an independent Sunni legislator. "But anyway, we welcome any political group who wants to talk instead of kill."

Sadr has vanished from sight in recent months, raising concerns about his leadership, although his close aides insist he's in hiding for security and strategic reasons.

Sunnis continue to accuse the Mahdi Army of committing atrocities, and fissures are emerging in the loosely knit militia as fighters break off on their own. A three-month-old U.S. and Iraqi security offensive in Baghdad, which Sadr has tacitly backed, has not reduced attacks on Shiites, prompting fears that his militiamen may again spark cycles of reprisal killings. And while Sadr has ordered his fighters to lie low, U.S. arrests of militiamen are mounting, creating discontent.

"The main questions are: How seriously can we take these new tactics? And do they have real control over the Jaish al-Mahdi?" Alusi said, using the Arabic term for the militia.

'We Are Not Anti-American'

As black-clad militiamen stood guard, Obaidi, his white turban glinting in the buttery sunlight, walked into the gold-domed mosque of Kufa. The senior aide to Sadr, tall and gaunt with a black beard, stepped up to a wooden lectern and stared out at the courtyard where the faithful waited. Hundreds of men, young and old, had come to hear Sadr, whom they had not seen in months. This was his mosque. Obaidi, on this day, was his voice.

He read aloud Sadr's two-page sermon, which condemned U.S. military forces building a wall in Baghdad's mostly Sunni Adhamiyah neighborhood; residents complained the wall would divide Sunnis and Shiites.

"Didn't we see and hear of our beloveds in Adhamiyah while they were chanting, 'No, no, to sectarianism'?" Obaidi thundered at the crowd. "We will stand, as one hand, to demonstrate with them and defend our sacred lands everywhere."

The day after the sermon, Obaidi sat inside Sadr's compound in Najaf, where a green Islamic flag fluttered between two Iraqi national flags.

Three months ago, Obaidi was released from Camp Cropper, a U.S. military detention center, where he had been held for five months. In near-perfect English, he said the American military officers set him free because they view him as a moderate who could help neutralize the radicals in Sadr's fold.

"I can give him good advice," Obaidi added with a smile.

Shaibani, the cleric, was released in March after U.S. military officials determined that he "could play a potentially important role in helping to moderate extremism and foster reconciliation in Iraq," the military said in a statement at the time.
U.S. generals are now differentiating between "irreconcilable" rogue members of the Mahdi Army and "reconcilable" ones they can engage.

Still, U.S. policy toward Sadr often appears contradictory. American soldiers are more cautious in conducting raids, understanding the movement's social dimensions and popular roots. U.S. military leaders no longer cite Shiite militias as the biggest threat to Iraq's stability, emphasizing the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq instead.

At the same time, the military is attempting to contain Sadr. U.S. military leaders say they are preparing to increase the number of U.S. and Iraqi soldiers patrolling the streets of Sadr City, the cleric's stronghold in Baghdad.

"Sadr clearly has some influence," said Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, who commands U.S. forces south of Baghdad and in southern Iraq. "But it's simplistic to say this guy is in charge of all Jaish al-Mahdi, that when he says, 'Go left,' they all go left. We're not seeing that."

But Sadr's aides say the fact that the Mahdi Army has not risen up yet is proof that the cleric is in control.

U.S. officials have publicly claimed the cleric is in Iran, which undermines Sadr's homegrown credentials and his hopes to woo Sunnis, who are wary of Iran's growing influence.The officials have also alleged that groups in Iran are training and funneling weapons to Shiite militants.

"The Americans are trying to picture the Mahdi Army as being a tool of Iran," said Karim Abu Ali, a Sadr spokesman in Baghdad. "It is baseless."

Altering such perceptions was part of Sadr's reason for cooperating with the current Baghdad security plan, Obaidi said. Violence now is largely being perpetrated by Sunni insurgents deploying car bombs and suicide attacks.

"We have been accused that we're not cooperating to bring security," Obaidi said. "Now, we've shown that we are not the source of the problems."

Sadr's cooperation with the plan, his aides said, is based partly on political battles over Iraq policy in Washington -- a sign, he believes, that the occupation is in its final stages. His aides say he is open to meeting U.S. politicians who are not part of the Bush administration, particularly those calling for a U.S. withdrawal.

"We are not anti-American. We think the Americans have an important role in rebuilding Iraq, but as companies, not as an army," Obaidi said. "We can open a new channel with the Democrats, even some of the Republicans."

Vow to Weaken Al-Qaeda

Shaibani, Sadr's spokesman in Najaf during the confrontation with U.S. troops in 2004, spent more than two years inside U.S. detention centers. Sidelined from an increasingly sectarian war, he befriended Sunni insurgents instead of killing them, earning a credibility few in Sadr's movement can claim today.

Sadr is now dispatching Shaibani to speak with Sunni religious leaders in Syria, Egypt and across the Persian Gulf to seek their help in approaching Sunnis inside Iraq.

Sadr senses an opportunity in recent moves by Sunni insurgent groups to break away from militants influenced by al-Qaeda, and in the threats by the largest Sunni political bloc to leave the government, which opens the possibility for a new cross-sectarian political alliance, his aides said.

If the sectarian war can be stopped, if the Mahdi Army and Sunni insurgent groups can join hands and break al-Qaeda in Iraq, there will be less reason for U.S. forces to stay, said Shaibani, wearing a black dishdasha, a traditional loose-fitting tunic, and clutching a Nokia cellphone during an interview in late April. "The American argument is we can't have a timetable because of al-Qaeda," he said. "So we're going to weaken al-Qaeda for you."

Sadr's political followers have had informal talks with Sunni politicians and insurgent groups in the past month. "We think there is some possibility to have a closer relationship," said Hussein al-Falluji, a legislator in the Iraqi Accordance Front, the largest Sunni political bloc.

Abu Aja Naemi, a commander in the 1920 Revolution Brigades, said Sadr's representatives have had informal discussions with his group.

The Sadrists, like most Sunnis, are against the idea of creating autonomous regions. They share concerns over the fate of the contested oil-rich city of Kirkuk, division of oil revenue and the need for Iraq's constitution to be amended.

Their differences, though, are numerous. Some Sunnis fear that a premature U.S. withdrawal could endanger their community. Sunnis and Sadrists disagree over allowing thousands of former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party to return to government jobs.

"If national reconciliation is at the expense of the return of the assassin Baathists, then we will reject such reconciliation," said Falah Hassan Shanshal, a Sadr legislator and chairman of the parliament's de-Baathification committee.
Sadr's Shiite rivals inside Maliki's coalition say it is unlikely the Sadrists will unite with the Sunnis.

"Now, it is very difficult," said Ridha Jawad Taqi, a senior legislator with the Supreme Islamic Council in Iraq, the party formerly known as SCIRI and the largest within Maliki's ruling coalition. "Between them, there's a gap made of blood. After Samarra, there is no possibility for reconciliation."

Sunnis Distrustful

This month, Mahdi Army militiamen in the Hurriyah area of Baghdad chased several Sunni families from their homes. Sadr, who wants to protect his militia's image as a guardian of Shiites, acted swiftly.

A committee based in Najaf created to deal with rogue elements dismissed 30 militiamen in the area, said Haider Salaam, a senior Mahdi Army commander in Hurriyah.

Across Baghdad, at least 600 fighters have been forced out of the militia over the past three months, Sadr officials said. Their misdeeds included murder and using Sadr's name to gain undue influence.

In the Kadhimiyah neighborhood, militiamen who engaged in a firefight with U.S. forces near a mosque were also dismissed.

"Yes, this was self-defense, but they exceeded the orders of the commander," Salaam said. "Any breach of the security operations will be blamed on the Mahdi Army."

But it is hard to get rid of the militiamen. "Some of those who are dismissed still go around and say they are members of Mahdi Army," said Abu Ali, the Sadr spokesman.
"We sent people to talk to them, to inform them of Moqtada Sadr's instructions and abide by them, but they refused," Salaam said. "We now consider them a splinter group. They don't belong in the Mahdi Army."

A few days later, the fighters attacked the Sadr office in Hurriyah with rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns, killing two bystanders, including a child.
Even as Sadr struggles to reform his militia, mistrust runs deep on the streets.

Khulood Habib, 45, a Sunni seamstress and mother of four, lives in Baghdad's Risala neighborhood, where tensions are growing after recent bomb attacks on Shiite areas. In the last week of April, gunmen kidnapped two Sunni men near Habib's apartment. The next day, their bodies were found mutilated and tortured -- a signature practice of Shiite militias.

Two days later, Habib received an envelope containing a bullet and a letter signed by the Mahdi Army that ordered her to leave within 24 hours. The next afternoon, gunmen began to drive out the Sunnis in her building. Soon, they were in front of her apartment.

"They broke the door down. It fell on my little boy's leg and broke it," Habib recalled, round-faced with light brown hair peeking from underneath her black head scarf. "He was screaming. I was screaming."

Cursing Sunnis as apostates, the men ordered the family to leave the neighborhood. Within an hour, they fled to the home of Habib's parents in the Adil neighborhood. Today, she's too afraid to return.

"Moqtada is saying something, but on the ground they are doing something else," Habib said, tossing a glance at Ibrahim, 6, his left leg in a cast. Sadr's call to reconcile with Sunnis is "all nonsense," she continued."They want to know who the Sunnis are, so they can start butchering people at their own pace."

* * * *

It is hard for me, and probably most of those who served with me during the Mahdi Army uprisings in 2004, to trust Muqtada al Sadr. After all, many of our friends were killed or wounded by his militia.

His ultimate goal surely remains a Shiite theocracy in Iraq, modeled after the dictatorship in Iran. His motives here are suspect, but we must watch his actions very carefully.

Still, success in Iraq will ultimately be determined, not by Coalition military forces, but by the Iraqis themselves. All our troops can do is to try and buy the Iraqis enough time for the various factions to figure out how to live together in peace.

This is the mission we must complete and the one for which our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have given so much.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

The Ancient Struggle of Arabs & Persians

The following article appeared today in the Orlando Sentinel. It is interesting from a cultural point of view because it points out how much we DON’T know about the people of Iraq and Iran. Centuries-old religious and ethnic divisions continue to breed hatred, mistrust and murder.

Our soldiers are doing a magnificent job as they try to help the Iraqis bridge their differences, but there is only so much the Coalition can do.

In the end, only the Iraqis themselves will be able to solve this problem:

Orlando Sentinel (May 16, 2007): Post-Saddam Iraq embraces ancient Persian heritage

By Borzou Daragahi
Los Angeles Times

Najaf, Iraq – Persian script flows across the walls of Najaf’s seminaries.

Shiite religious scholars in the ancient city’s turquoise-tiled edifices pore over texts illustrated with Persian calligraphy in scenes that evoke Mesopotamia’s history.

For centuries, Najaf has been a key shrine city and center of worship for many of Iraq’s people. But for centuries, Iraq’s Ottoman and Arab rulers rarely considered Najaf part of their own history. It was considered an outpost of the enemy: Iran.

They were right, for the most part. Historically and culturally, Najaf has long been under Persia’s sway.

But so has much of Iraq.

The reading of the Quran in this country differs from the rest of the Muslim world: The rhythm and cadence of Sunnis are unique to Iraq, and the Shiites’ are unique to Iran. Persian dishes such as pomegranate stew are a standard part of Mesopotamian fare. Iraq’s capital carries a Persian name, Baghdad.

The sectarian nature of the war between Shiite and Sunni Arabs in Iraq reflects a centuries-old battle between Persia and the Arab world.

It is a point often misunderstood by U.S. policymakers and ground commanders, who perceive the re-emergence of Persian influence among Iraq’s newly powerful Shiite majority as proof of meddling by the regime in Tehran.

Rising Persian influence is a sign of Iraq’s ascendance, not Iran’s.

“Iraq has been part of the Persian sphere of influence for more than 400 years,” said Karar Dastour, an Iraqi Shiite intellectual who lives in southern Tehran and travels to Iraq. “But governments have always tried to crush anything that had the scent of Shiism or Iran. They were never accepted.”

Violent Sunni Arab rejection of Iraq’s Persian roots plays out daily on the streets of the capital with bombings.

In their Internet postings, Sunni Arab insurgents, many of them officers during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, describe their attacks on Shiites as settling accounts with “Safavids,” a reference to the 16th- century dynasty that embraced Shiite Islam as the official religion of Persia. Shiite Safavids and Sunni Ottomans fought for decades in a conflict that infused sectarianism into what had been a centuries-old ethnic and political conflict between Arabs and Persians.

“There has always been conflict between Arabs and Iranians, and they always tried to involve Iraq,” Humam Hammoudi, an Iraqi Shiite politician and cleric who lived in Tehran during Saddam Hussein’s rule, said in an interview last year. “Both have wanted to use Iraq as the trench for their battles.”

Iraq’s 20th-century leaders tried to graft a Sunni-dominated Arab identity onto a country that was majority Shiite. Even during the relatively benign years before Saddam’s rise in the late 1960s, Shiites visiting Sunni Arab towns feared for their lives.

Saddam’s downfall after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 ended the enforced separation between Iran and Iraq, much to the frustration and rage of Iraq’s long-dominant Sunni Arabs.

Persian cultural influences, long suppressed, have re-emerged in the past four years.

* * * *

It is important to remember that the majority of Iraqis are not radicals, whether they are Shiite, Sunni or Kurd. In fact, there are quite a few Sunnis who are married to Shiites.

For the most part, Iraqis are gentle people who want to live normal lives in peace. They want safe homes for their families, a decent way to make a living and a chance to raise their children in happiness.

That kind of sounds like us, doesn’t it?

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

The "America Goes Home" Scenario

For argument’s sake, let’s assume the United States and its Coalition partners complied with the wishes of the “cut and run” crowd and pulled out of Iraq tomorrow. I submit the following fictional article as one of the scenarios that might occur:

"With the Iraqi Army and police still not fully prepared to protect their country, the fundamentalist Shiite militias rapidly took control of the secular central government. This decisive move occurred with the consent of the country’s most powerful Shiite religious figure, Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader of over 60% of Iraq’s citizens.

Other than Sistani, the new face of power became Muqtada al Sadr, leader of the Mahdi Army. This private militia would come to be known as the “Hezbollah of Iraq”. Any remaining democratic institutions in the Iraqi government were quickly subdued and crushed. The Iraqi version of the Taliban completed its takeover of Iraq in only weeks.

With their Shiite supporters already embedded within the militias, the mullahs in Iran began to inject their influence into every segment of Iraqi society. Under al Sadr’s leadership, the militias commenced the ethnic cleansing of the Sunni minority and the resulting slaughter was the most brutal in Arab history.

Without American troops to distract them, the Sunni insurgents and the remaining Baath Party loyalists directed all of their hatred at the Shiites. The Tigris and Euphrates Rivers turned red with blood.

The Shiite radicals were firmly in charge of Iraq, but the rest of the Arab world is mostly Sunni. These nations began to oppose the new Iraqi dictatorship and this opposition began as an effort to train and supply the Sunni insurgency. Ultimately, the brutality of the Shiites became unbearable and the armies of these countries marched into western Iraq to protect their Sunni brothers.

With virtually all Arab nations engaged in the fighting to some degree, the flow of oil from the Middle East was interrupted. Governments in Europe, Asia and the Americas had been dependent on that oil, so their economies were plunged into economic depression.

The Middle East became engulfed in a cataclysmic war of Biblical proportions. Since America’s withdrawal from the Iraq war gave a major victory to the Islamic fundamentalists, the political influence of the United States was diminished throughout the world. The Islamic terrorists began to direct their efforts at the remaining American soldiers in Afghanistan, Kuwait and elsewhere in the Middle East. They also began to select the next targets inside the United States.

The “cut and run” politicians and pundits succeeded in bringing American forces home from Iraq, but now they realized that the war didn’t really end.

It had only just begun."

* * *

Scary stuff, isn’t it?

Sometimes the easy way is not the right way; sometimes the more difficult path is the one that must be followed.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

(Photo above from Associated Press)

Baghdad: Four Years After Liberation

"We regard Iraq’s success to be our success.
And, God forbid, Iraq’s failure will also be ours.”

Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq on February 20, 2005

This is the fourth anniversary of the liberation of Baghdad by America and the Coalition. When Saddam’s statue was brought to the ground (above photo from Reuters), we were greeted as liberators and welcomed by most of the citizens of Iraq. Then we dropped the ball.

Ignoring the advice of experienced military leaders, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George Bush believed we could invade a country of 25 million people, remove its entire governmental infrastructure, including all of its police and military personnel, and then fix everything with only 140,000 soldiers. This type of intellectual arrogance has plagued the upper regions of our government for too long. These leaders failed to plan for contingencies, failed to understand the history of the Arab people and failed to recognize the limitations of their own down-sized military.

I was in Baghdad on the first anniversary of its liberation. Even in 2004, most average soldiers could see that the Coalition had a tiger by the tail. The Iraqi people were hungry, jobless and they had no electricity or clean water. Civil affairs soldiers submitted plan after plan for rebuilding Baghdad. The Coalition Provisional Authority took its time in reviewing the plans and rejected too many of them. The clock was ticking and the patience of the Iraqi people would not last long.

The presence of any western military power will eventually be rejected by most Arabs. We choose to forget that the Crusades of the Middle Ages were not enlightening religious experiences to the Arab world. Those who came to the Arabian deserts in the name of Christianity were brutal “terrorists” who murdered and pillaged in the name of God. The Arabs have never forgotten this period in history and they don’t welcome westerners who want to “teach them a better way”. They even convinced the mighty British empire of the last century that it was in their interests to go home.

From the moment of Iraq’s liberation, we have been held in contempt by the same radical Shiite leaders we freed from oppression. While we waffled, backed off and tried to walk a political tightrope with the Shiites and the Sunnis, our indecision encouraged the likes of Muqtada al Sadr. Al Sadr, the founder and spiritual leader of the Shiite Mahdi Army, remains in hiding and he is probably in the land of his generous foreign sponsor, Iran. He called for massive demonstrations today in the holy city of Najaf to protest the “occupation” of Iraq by Coalition troops. Al Sadr and his militia should have been destroyed when they numbered in the hundreds. Now there are tens of thousands of them clamoring for American blood.

Although our post-invasion strategy has been poor, we have been warmly received by most Iraqis. Our brave soldiers have proven they are friends to the average citizens and they have accomplished many great things. The stumbling block continues to be the inability of the Iraqis to get along with each other long enough to build a future of cooperation, brotherhood and prosperity. Even if they can find an Iraqi solution, the radical fundamentalist groups like Al Qaeda will probably always be around in this ancient land.

There is much controversy about whether or not America will stay in Iraq until we “win” the war. The war to liberate Iraq from the clutches of Saddam Hussein was won. The challenge now is an Iraqi struggle to create a strong, self-sustaining nation with the helping hands of the Coalition. Only the Iraqis will decide if the final chapter will be a free and prosperous Iraq or a new tragedy for old Mesopotamia.

While the Iraqi front in the world-wide war on terror has not been managed well, we must not give up and allow the fundamentalists to make Iraq their new sanctuary. We must convince Iraqis on all sides to work together, we must increase our efforts to build a strong Iraqi military and we must destroy any armed force – whether Sunni, Shiite or foreign - that tries to bring down the new Iraq.

We must not forget the words of Mr. Khalilzad.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Send Us to Win or Don't Send Us

I anticipate that my mobilization orders will arrive shortly. My date to go on active duty is not too far away. It was announced this week that the Pentagon has abandoned the 24 month limit on cumulative service for Reservists and Guardsmen. I already served for 21 months during my two mobilizations in 2003 and 2004. This time limit will no longer be an issue for others returning to active duty, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

Arab governments throughout the Middle East are becoming increasingly concerned about the direction of the war in Iraq. Remembering that most Arabs are Sunni, these other countries are not happy with the sectarian violence in Iraq where Shiites have been taking their revenge on the Sunni minority of the late Saddam Hussein. Saudi Arabia has even threatened to take matters into their own hands should America pull out of Iraq.

Since we first arrived in Iraq, we have been fighting the Sunni insurgents. The question at this point will be how to deal with the Shiite-led militias like the Mahdi Army. Muqtada al Sadr has become a powerful figure and his militia now numbers in the tens of thousands. Fighting this Iranian-influenced and funded militia will be a daunting task, but our forces can do it – if we are permitted to do so by the Iraqi government.

There were two uprisings of the Mahdi Army in Iraq in 2004. This was when Al Sadr’s forces only numbered a couple of thousand or so. We were on the receiving end of many of his rockets and mortars back then and my fellow soldiers fought the black-uniformed militia in Sadr City, Najaf and other places.

Americans have tired of hearing about Iraq. They are weary of the political battles and the issues relating to tactics, strategy, sectarian violence and all of the other problems in that war, but so are the warriors fighting the battles.

Americans must not forget that the politics of the war have nothing to do with the service of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. Continue to honor their service, their sacrifice and their dedication to each and every one of you.

Your warriors want to finish the job and come home to you, but they want to come home as victors. They won’t be satisfied to simply give up, back out of Iraq and spend the rest of their lives regretting that their comrades died for a politically-abandoned cause.

That’s what happened to us in Vietnam. It will be a tragedy to do it again to another generation of young Americans.

When it comes to war, warriors will tell you: “Send us to win or don’t send us.”

SFC Chuck Grist