Gift of Painting Melts An Old Warrior

Author Grist with Ashley Lauren

During my tour in Iraq in 2004, my team was honored to meet and escort Doug Besherse who had come to Baghdad as a correspondent.

After my return from overseas, his then fourteen-year-old daughter, Ashley, contacted me periodically with questions about the military. She and her family have been ardent supporters of American troops.

Little did I know that Ashley, who has since become the well-known artist Ashley Lauren, had created a painting of me based on a letter I had written to President Bush that was published in the Orlando Sentinel. That letter had been in response to a critical letter to the president.

Ashley's painting "Dear Mr. President" depicts me in Vietnam as well as Iraq. The reflection from behind the Vietnam wall is me as a young lieutenant. Touching the wall with the letter is me as an old sergeant in Iraq.

I had not known about the painting which apparently was completed four years ago. When Doug, Ashley, and the rest of their family came to Orlando on vacation, my wife Debbie and I met them for dinner. I was flabbergasted when Ashley presented me with the painting.

Needless to say, receiving such an extraordinary gift was a humbling experience. To receive it personally from its gifted artist gave this old soldier a lump in his throat. It is indeed an honor to have such friends. I shall be forever grateful.

I hope you will visit Ashleys website at http://www.ashleylaurendesigns.com/. Her paintings are breathtaking.

Charles M. Grist
http://www.mylastwar.com/

"My Last War" is on Barnes & Noble's Rising Star Special Collection

I am pleased that my book is listed in the Rising Star Special Collection on the Barnes and Noble website. The link to that page is http://www.barnesandnoble.com/u/iUniverse-rising-star-books/379000118 .

I hope you will forward this link to your family and friends. I would also invite you to visit the website for the book at www.MyLastWar.com where you can watch the book trailer and learn about the book.

Charles M. Grist
www.MyLastWar.com
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Big Day in Baghdad: Iraqis Take Over Security in Cities

Today is a big day for Iraq, for the United States, and for the Coalition. Our troops have moved out of the cities, and Iraqi security forces are now in charge.

This is a good thing because it's time for the Iraqis to assume more control over their own destinies. While the role of Coalition soldiers will move to more of an advisory role, our quick reaction forces can assist Iraqi units if necessary.

The following article is from the Associated Press:

* * * *

Fireworks over Baghdad as Iraqis take over cities

By Associated Press Writers Kim Gamel And Patrick Quinn

BAGHDAD – Iraqi forces assumed formal control of Baghdad and other cities Tuesday after American troops handed over security in urban areas in a defining step toward ending the U.S. combat role in the country. A countdown clock broadcast on Iraqi TV ticked to zero as the midnight deadline passed for U.S. combat troops to finish their pullback to bases outside cities.

"The withdrawal of American troops is completed now from all cities after everything they sacrificed for the sake of security," said Sadiq al-Rikabi, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. "We are now celebrating the restoration of sovereignty."

The Pentagon did not offer any comment to mark the passing of the deadline.

Fireworks, not bombings, colored the Baghdad skyline late Monday, and thousands attended a party in a park where singers performed patriotic songs. Loudspeakers at police stations and military checkpoints played recordings of similar tunes throughout the day, as Iraqi military vehicles decorated with flowers and national flags patrolled the capital.

"All of us are happy — Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds on this day," Waleed al-Bahadili said as he celebrated at the park. "The Americans harmed and insulted us too much."

Al-Maliki declared a public holiday and proclaimed June 30 as "National Sovereignty Day."

Midnight's handover to Iraqi forces filled many citizens with pride but also trepidation that government forces are not ready and that violence will rise. Shiites fear more bombings by Sunni militants; Sunnis fear that the Shiite-dominated Iraqi security forces will give them little protection.

If the Iraqis can hold down violence in the coming months, it will show the country is finally on the road to stability. If they fail, it will pose a challenge to President Barack Obama's pledge to end an unpopular war that has claimed the lives of more than 4,300 U.S. troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis.

The gathering at the Baghdad park was unprecedented in size for such a postwar event in a city where people tend to avoid large gatherings for fear of suicide bombers. They ignored an appeal by Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi to stay away from crowded places during the U.S. pullback, which has seen more than 250 people killed in bombings over the past 10 days.

Security at the party was stifling, as it was throughout much of Baghdad where increased checkpoints dotted the streets and identity checks were methodical. Police using bomb sniffers searched every man, woman and child who attended the party.

In a ceremony rich with symbolism, the top U.S. military commander in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Daniel Bolger, gave his Iraqi counterpart the keys to the former defense ministry building, which had served as a joint base.

"On the eve of the 30th of June 2009 in accord with a security agreement between Iraq and America, Iraqis take the lead in Baghdad," Bolger said.

The withdrawal, required under a U.S.-Iraqi security pact, marks the first major step toward withdrawing all American forces from the country by Dec. 31, 2011. Obama has said all combat troops will be gone by the end of August 2010.

Despite Tuesday's formal pullback, some U.S. troops will remain in the cities to train and advise Iraqi forces. U.S. troops will return to the cities only if asked. The U.S. military will continue combat operations in rural areas and near the border, but only with the Iraqi government's permission.

The U.S. has not said how many troops will be in the cities in advisory roles, but the vast majority of the more than 130,000 U.S. forces remaining in the country will be in large bases scattered outside cities.

There have been some worries that the 650,000-member Iraqi military is not ready to maintain stability and deal with a stubborn insurgency.

Privately, many U.S. officers worry the Iraqis will be overwhelmed if violence surges, having relied for years on the Americans for nearly everything.

"We think they are ready," U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill told The Associated Press in an interview Monday. He said his main concern was that a lack of progress in efforts to reconcile Shiite, Sunnis and Kurds was feeding the violence that still marks the daily lives of many Iraqis.

"Frankly they need to pick up the pace," Hill said of the national reconciliation effort.

The commander of U.S. troops in the Middle East, Gen. David Petraeus, expressed concern about the spate of high-profile bombings but said the average daily number of attacks remained low at 10 to 15 compared with 160 in June 2007.

"While certainly there will be challenges — there are many difficult political issues, social issues, governmental development issues — we feel confident in the Iraqi security forces continuing the process of taking over the security tasks in their own country," said Petraeus after meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo.

Despite some concerns, al-Maliki appears eager to see the Americans leave and has urged Iraqis to hold steady against any rise in violence. Ahead of national elections next year, al-Maliki is portraying himself as the leader who defeated terrorism and ended the U.S. occupation.

Iraqi officials said they are expecting some violence but would not allow it to trigger the sectarianism that nearly sparked a civil war in 2006-2007.
At that time, death squads roamed the streets, slaughtering members of the rival Muslim sect. Bombs rocked Baghdad daily — until thousands of U.S. troops poured in, establishing neighborhood bases and taking control of the Iraqi capital and other cities.

While the U.S. troop surge strategy was successful in stemming the bloodshed, many Iraqis also saw it as an affront to their national pride.

On a visit to Ramadi, a Sunni city 70 miles west of the capital, Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani, a Shiite, told the AP that when the sun rises on Tuesday "Iraqi citizens will see no U.S. soldiers in their cities. They will see only Iraqi troops protecting them."

Associated Press Writer Qassim Abdul-Zahra in Ramadi contributed to this report.

* * * *

Those of us who served in Iraq made many friends among the Iraqi people. We hope they continue to strengthen their democracy. They must also do whatever is necessary to resolve the differences between their various factions.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Combat Troops Will Be Out of Iraqi Cities by June 30

It will be interesting to see what happens when all American and Coalition combat troops are out of Iraqi cities:

* * * *

Odierno: U.S. committed to June 30 pullback

The Associated Press
Monday Jun 15, 2009 17:31:29 EDT

BAGHDAD — The top U.S. commander in Iraq said Monday that he remains "absolutely committed" to pulling back all combat troops from urban areas by the end of the month, as provided for in a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement.

Gen. Ray Odierno said a limited number of advisers and trainers will remain in the cities to work with Iraqi security forces, leaving unanswered questions about how many U.S. troops would remain and where they would be located.

"We will not get into any specific numbers, but it is a very small number," Odierno told a joint news conference with key Iraqi officials.

Odierno said the pull back of combat troops would also extend to the northern city of Mosul, where Sunni insurgents still pose a threat.

Earlier this year, he said Mosul might be one of the cities where combat troops might remain. Odierno said violence and tensions in Mosul have declined.

"I feel much more comfortable with the situation in Mosul now," Odierno said.

Under the Iraqi-U.S. security pact, American combat troops must withdraw by June 30 with all U.S. forces out of the country by the end of 2011. President Barack Obama has said all combat troops will leave Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010, leaving up to 50,000 troops in training and advising roles.

The withdrawal from the cities will be a major test for Iraq's army and police, which failed to stem a wave of Shiite-Sunni slaughter in 2006. That prompted the U.S. troop surge of 2007 which is widely credited with quelling the violence.

Many Iraqis are happy to see foreign soldiers off their streets but fear their own security forces may not be up to the challenge.

Iraqi spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh called June 30 a historic day that "will be written in Iraqi history."

"The American troops will complete withdrawal by leaving some technical limited members for training purposes of Iraqi government," al-Dabbagh said.

He also said the U.S. role in Iraq would be limited.

"There will be no combat missions unless by the invitation of the Iraqi government," al-Dabbagh said.

Violence has declined dramatically in Iraq, though sporadic attacks with high body counts continue to plague the country.

During the press conference, Odierno also said the number of foreign fighters coming into Iraq has dropped in the past 10 months to "just a trickle."

Odierno credited the decline to better security along Iraq's borders and efforts by Iraq's neighbors including Syria to curb illegal traffic.

The security agreement also requires the U.S. to release all detainees or transfer them to Iraqi custody by the end of the year.

Defense Minister Abdul-Qader al-Obeidi said the U.S. has released more than 3,000 detainees and handed over 750 more to Iraqi authorities.

Detainees loyal to Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have begun a hunger strike to protest alleged abuse in Iraqi prisons, according to the spokesman of the Sadrist movement, Salah al-Obeidi, who is unrelated to the defense minister.

More than 300 detainees from al-Sadr's movement began a hunger strike Sunday at the Rusafa prison in eastern Baghdad, he said.

Complaints about mistreatment of inmates in Iraqi prisons gained widespread attention last week when a Sunni lawmaker who was a champion of prisoner rights was killed after delivering a sermon at a Baghdad mosque.

They're hoping to draw attention to their plight and force Iraqi officials "to find solutions for their suffering inside the prison," al-Obeidi said.

Al-Obeidi said most of the detainees have been held without charge for at least a year.

"Their cases are still unsettled," he said. "Some officers demand bribes to complete their cases and release them."

Government officials could not immediately be reached to comment on the hunger strike or the allegations.

* * * *

It is the hard work and dedication of American warriors and their Coalition partners that have made it possible for the Iraqi people to have the opportunity to govern and defend themselves.

Now it's up to the Iraqis to make it work...

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iraqis Want Us Out of Their Cities by July

As I have said in prior posts, the Iraqi people will never accept the long-term presence of foreign soldiers. Those of us who came to know them during this war learned that they still remember the Crusades and the British occupation of Arabia. It doesn't matter that we want to "democratize" them; they want to determine their own destiny.

It is, after all, their country.

The following article from the Associated Press discusses the Iraqi desire that we remove our troops from their cities as per the existing agreement:

* * * *

Iraq Wants GIs Out of Cities by July

April 28, 2009
Associated Press

BAGHDAD -- The Iraqi government cast doubt Monday on the possibility that American troops will remain in urban trouble spots like Mosul after the June 30 deadline for U.S. forces to withdraw from cities.

An uptick of violence in recent weeks has prompted concern about whether Iraqi forces are prepared to take over responsibility for security. U.S. commanders have pointed to Mosul and areas in the volatile province of Diyala north of the capital as possible exceptions to the withdrawal plans.

The Defense Ministry spokesman, Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Askari, however, said U.S. troops must leave by the agreed deadline and could return only with permission from the Iraqi government.

"The general position of the Iraq Defense Ministry is to keep the timings in the withdrawal pact that American troops withdraw from Iraqi cities and not enter the cities unless they get Iraqi approval," al-Askari said.

U.S. and Iraqi commanders will make recommendations to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who will decide whether to grant exceptions to the U.S.-Iraqi security pact that set the deadline.

Sunni insurgents remain active in Mosul, 225 miles (360 kilometers) northwest of Baghdad, and Diyala province south of Mosul despite numerous U.S.-Iraqi military operations. The U.S. military has called Mosul the last urban stronghold of al-Qaida in Iraq.

The main U.S. base in Mosul is effectively on the outskirts of the city, raising the question of whether it could be considered outside the city limits as is the case with Camp Victory, which houses the main American military headquarters on the western edge of Baghdad.

Al-Askari said Mosul has adequate security, saying two Iraqi army divisions are guarding the city.

"If we need the support of American troops, we will recall them with Iraqi governmental approval," he said.

The security agreement, which took effect Jan. 1, requires American troops to leave the country entirely by the end of 2011. President Barack Obama has announced plans to withdraw combat troops by Aug. 31, 2010, leaving 30,000 to 50,000 personnel in advisory and training roles.

Violence in Iraq remains at some of the lowest levels since the months following the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. But Baghdad and other cities have seen a series of deadly suicide bombings in recent weeks.

Gen. Raymond Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has not specifically said whether U.S. troops would leave by the deadline, but said that any exception would have to be made by al-Maliki.

The security agreement faced its first major test Sunday when U.S. troops staged a pre-dawn raid in the southern Shiite city of Kut that ended with two people killed and six detained.

Al-Maliki called the raid a "crime" and a "violation of the security pact."
The U.S. military released the six detainees and sent a commander to apologize in a bid to tone down the dispute.

But one of the men who had been detained demanded justice Monday. Sheik Ahmed Abdul-Munim said his wife and his brother had been killed and he could not accept the U.S. apology.

"We want to prosecute the soldiers who killed our loved ones," he said.

He said American troops questioned him and five other male relatives about suspects, then put hoods over their heads and took them elsewhere for further interrogation. He said the investigator was polite and offered breakfast, then released the six after learning the soldiers apparently went to the wrong house.

* * * *

We gave them their democratic government, so we should respect their wishes.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Just Another Cop On The Street - And Loving It

My first two weeks back at the police department were about what I expected. Working with professional cops, getting the feel of the city, and dealing with a wide variety of people. Most of the citizens I come into contact with are terrific; there are still the other kind - those from the "underbelly" of society.

The first day ended with over two hours of overtime because of a late arrest. That was really a positive thing because it got me writing reports, taking statements, processing evidence, and getting back in the general patrol routine. The arrest was just an average shoplifting arrest, but when a local deputy caught the guys based on a witness description, I got a chance to use my “interrogation” techniques once again. There are only three things that can solve a crime: physical evidence, witnesses, or a confession. In this case, we had the physical evidence and the witnesses, so a confession would be icing on the cake.

Some cops will leave it alone once they have sufficient probable cause to make the arrest. I happen to enjoy the icing on the cake, so I always try to get a post-Miranda confession. If I am successful, it simply polishes off a good case. I guess that philosophy is left over from my detective years.

In this particular crime, the arrestee was a man who was recently released from prison after a six year sentence. With a wife and kids to support, he didn’t go out and get a job as one might expect. He and a buddy decided to go into business stealing armloads of women’s purses from retail displays. I guess prison time just doesn’t teach common sense to everyone.

After I got the confession, I took him to the county jail, the first time I had been there in over two years. I turned my unrepentant criminal over to the booking officers and finished my report.

The rest of my first two weeks included multiple calls to various situations as either primary or backup officer. Suspicious persons, false business or residential alarms, a young man threatening to kill himself with a knife, a senior citizen who keeps letting her drug addicted adult son move back home, a sex abuse case, a variety of disturbances or domestic disagreements, and, of course, a handful of traffic tickets.

It ain’t Baghdad, but there’s one thing about police work that keeps a type A personality like me going.

You never know when the big one is going to happen.

* * * *

For those who are curious, the book is coming along fine at the publisher. In two to three weeks, it will move to the final production phase. This is where the cover will be designed, and the final layout will be completed. With luck, it should be available around June.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Back to the Road

Master Police Officer Chuck Grist went to the police department today to draw some of the equipment turned in before reporting for active duty. I picked up my patrol car, my handgun, my taser and some other gear and it felt good to walk back into the headquarters.

Monday, February 2, is my first day back at work. The first week will be used for makeup training in firearms, defensive tactics, computers, CPR and wellness testing (PT test for you Army people). My department has a mandatory test twice a year just like the Army does.

My first day back on the road will be the 11th and I have been assigned to day shift. Between now and then, I will complete the above training and also familiarize myself with any legal changes since I went on active duty.

The American Ranger blog will continue to support veterans, warriors on active duty and all causes related to soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines - and their families. I am proud of my fellow warriors and my retirement from military service (which is effective on February 28) is bittersweet. Still, it is time to pass the sword to the next generation.

I will also spend some time talking about cops and police issues as well. I may even talk about some of the more interesting calls I find myself dispatched to.

Thanks once again to all of you for your support for me and for my fellow service members, whether we are at war or at home. This old Vietnam veteran remembers how it was a generation ago and it's nice to see the current troops get the support from their fellow citizens that they deserve.

After I returned from Iraq in 2004, I was assigned to night shift patrol. It was fun to get back in the groove again. Cops and soldiers have a lot in common, especially the dedication they have for each other.

Naturally, I responded to a lot of interesting calls back then, but I did write about my first good arrest after my tour in Baghdad:

* * * *

Winter, 2004

"The convoys were over and I didn’t have to worry about mortars, rockets, ambushes, or improvised explosive devices any more, but my survival instinct was still fully engaged.

One morning at 0300, or three a.m., I was moving slowly on foot through the shadows outside a darkened apartment building. Like all hunters of men, my senses were at their peak – sight, hearing, even the sense of smell. Skulking about in the wee hours of the morning is one way a guy like me finds society’s thieves, robbers and other neighborhood “insurgents”. Someone’s got to do it; it might as well be those of us who love it.

Now I was easing my way through a concrete, steel and stucco jungle looking for what the police dispatcher described as a “suspicious person”. The biggest challenge was to find this human shadow before he saw me. As we used to say in Vietnam, "Whoever sees the other guy first wins."

Then I saw him.

The dark figure sitting in the car appeared to bob up and down, disappearing below the dashboard for a moment and then reappearing. With a flashlight and my nine millimeter Glock at the ready, I surprised the guy with a sudden burst of illumination. The light revealed a shattered driver’s window and a now-terrified thief.

I yelled the standard "Police, freeze!" and the car burglar gave me a "deer in the headlights" look. With dark, 'Mahdi Army' type clothes and a black knit cap pulled down over his ears, this wide-eyed moron was sitting in the driver’s seat, wearing gloves, holding the car’s stereo in one hand and grasping a screwdriver in the other.

The guy panicked and made a quick move toward the passenger door, but the old soldier’s command voice convinced him to stop. His shoulders drooped in defeat, he dropped the radio and then the screwdriver. He had no choice but to raise his hands in surrender.

I smiled and thought to myself, "I’m back."

* * * *

Am I looking forward to police work? You bet I am.....

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iraqi Leader: Internal Strife Could Destroy Iraq

If anything can destroy the new Iraq, it will be the internal strife that has always plagued that country. (A prior Shiite demonstration is pictured above.) No matter how hard America and its Coalition partners tried or how heavy the loss we sustained, we can’t force the Iraqis to get along with each other. Only the different Iraqi factions can find the common ground that must hold their nation together:

* * * *

Arizona Daily Star (Tucson)
January 26, 2009

Sectarianism A 'Rotten Thing,' Iraqi Leader Says

By Associated Press

BAGHDAD — Iraq's prime minister on Sunday blamed sectarianism for destroying the country, as he tried to tap into a backlash against religious parties before next weekend's nationwide provincial elections.

Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, has been delivering numerous speeches in the days leading up to Saturday's provincial elections in a thinly veiled effort to rally support for the candidates running under the umbrella group that includes his Dawa party.

"Sectarianism is behind the destruction of the country," al-Maliki told academics and sportsmen at a forum in Baghdad. "It is natural that we have different views, but we are all representing a unified Iraq that is not ready for division."

He appeared to be distancing himself from the major religious parties, particularly his governmental ally the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, after years of violence between Shiites and Sunnis.

He told the forum that sectarianism is a "rotten thing" and that Iraqis must focus on rebuilding efforts.

Al-Maliki isn't running, but his pictures have been plastered on campaign posters throughout Iraq, and he has campaigned extensively as he seeks to solidify his power base before national parliamentary elections later this year.

For years, al-Maliki himself had a reputation as a hard- line Shiite nationalist. But there are signs the public, especially in Baghdad and other major cities, has grown weary of the religious parties that have dominated national politics since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Al-Maliki's criticism of sectarian politics appeared to be an effort to tap into public discontent against parties run by clerics, such as the Supreme Council.

The prime minister also favors centralized rule and opposes a bid by the council, the country's biggest Shiite party, to establish a self-ruled region in the Shiite south modeled on the autonomous Kurdish administration in the north.

Voters on Saturday will be choosing ruling councils in 14 of the country's 18 provinces. It will be the first nationwide balloting in three years. A strong showing by al-Maliki's Coalition of the State of Law would bolster him against political rivals.

(Above article from Associated Press.)

* * * *

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iran’s Surrogates Want Self Rule in Southern Iraq

The radical Shiites will remain the biggest threat to a unified and democratic Iraq. The ultimate goal is a Shiite theocracy like Iran and the Iranians will do everything they can do help make this happen. (Above photo is the most powerful Shiite cleric in Iraq, Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani.)

* * * *

Arizona Republic (Phoenix)
January 17, 2009

Shiite Council Seeking Self-Rule In South Iraq

By Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Associated Press

NAJAF, Iraq - The country's biggest Shiite party is hoping for a big win in elections across the oil-rich south to jump-start its campaign for a self-ruled region - a move that would transform Iraq and, critics say, give Iran its biggest prize since the ouster of Saddam Hussein.

To reach that goal, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council needs to win control of Najaf - which it wants as a future capital of an autonomous southern Iraq - when voters across the country choose members of ruling provincial councils Jan. 31.

But the Supreme Council faces strong opposition from other Shiite groups, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa party and followers of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Those groups fear regional self-rule, modeled after the Kurdish autonomous area in the north, would weaken Iraq, open the door to expanded Iranian influence and threaten the existence of the Iraqi state.

On Friday, a Shiite candidate for provincial elections was assassinated while campaigning south of Baghdad, underscoring fears that political rivalries will lead to a spike in violence ahead of voting. The slain candidate, Hashim al-Husseini, was a member of the Dawa Party and was running on the party's State of Law list for a seat on the Babil provincial council.

In Najaf, Zoheir al-Hakim, a senior Supreme Council official, predicted a comfortable win in this urban center of Shiite learning about 100 miles south of Baghdad.

"Creating a region in the south is our right by law and under the constitution," Hakim said. "Our loyal masses will take on anyone who tries to take this right away from us."

The council's campaign posters outnumber the competition in Najaf, dominating every available space in the heart of the city. The party has a hometown advantage: Najaf is home to the Hakims, a prominent family that has produced generations of top clerics and scholars and founders of the Supreme Council.

Even so, the large number of candidates, about 1,100 running for 28 seats, makes it difficult for any single party to take power alone.

Hakim and other Supreme Council officials say they will take concrete steps toward creating a self-ruled region after the election but that the timing would depend on how well they do in the balloting.

To transform a province to self-rule, one-third of the members of a provincial council must call for a referendum that requires the support of a simple majority of the voters.

The law also provides a second, more cumbersome method involving collecting two sets of signatures of voters in support of self-rule. Once enough signatures are collected, the paperwork goes to the prime minister who has two weeks to forward the proposal to the election commission, which in turn must schedule a referendum within three months.

Under the constitution, self-ruled regions enjoy significant powers. They can write their own constitutions, amend federal laws that conflict with local ones, open representative offices abroad and assume responsibility for internal security. The Supreme Council hopes to establish a self-ruled region encompassing all nine provinces south of Baghdad, but officials say they would settle for less if they don't win everywhere.

Nevertheless, Najaf is a must-win, largely because of its prestige among the world's Shiite Muslims.

The city includes the most venerated Shiite shrine: the tomb of Imam Ali, a cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad and the founding saint of the Shiite faith. The shrine and the Shiite seminaries draw pilgrims and students from throughout the Shiite world. It's also the home of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq's most powerful Shiite cleric and a close ally of the Supreme Council.

* * * *

America made its share of mistakes during our efforts in Iraq. One of them was not better understanding Islam's Sunni versus Shiite split.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Countdown to Withdrawal: Pentagon Revises Iraq Re-Deployment

The Pentagon is revising its current plans for withdrawal from Iraq. As we all suspected, President-elect Obama will surely bring the troops home even sooner than required by the new status of forces agreement with the Iraqis. That agreement mandates that our troops leave not later than January 1, 2012. Obama’s campaign timetable was sixteen months.

* * * *

New York Times
January 15, 2009

Military Planners, In Nod To Obama, Are Preparing For A Faster Iraq Withdrawal

By Elisabeth Bumiller and Thom Shanker

WASHINGTON — Military commanders are drawing up plans for a faster withdrawal of American troops from Iraq in anticipation that President-elect Barack Obama will reject current proposals as too slow, Pentagon and military officials said Wednesday.

The new plans would provide alternatives to a timetable drawn up by the top American commanders for Iraq to bring troops home more slowly than Mr. Obama promised during his presidential campaign. Those plans were described to Mr. Obama last month.

The officials said that Mr. Obama had not requested the new plans, but that they were being prepared in response to public statements from the president-elect and on the basis of conversations between military officials and members of Mr. Obama’s transition team.

Mr. Obama met last week in Washington with his national security team, including Robert M. Gates, the defense secretary, and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

A drawdown in Iraq is seen as a prerequisite to any significant American military buildup in Afghanistan, where Mr. Obama is ready to add up to 30,000 troops over the next two years, a near doubling of the current American force there of about 31,000.

The broad outlines of the military plan for Iraq presented to Mr. Obama in December envisioned withdrawing two brigades, or some 7,000 to 8,000 troops, over the next six months, officials said.

American military officials have declined to be more specific about other details in that plan, by Gen. David H. Petraeus and Gen. Ray Odierno, the top American commanders responsible for Iraq. But they have made clear that the plan does not set forth as fast a withdrawal as Mr. Obama pledged during the presidential campaign, when he repeatedly promised to have all combat troops out of Iraq within 16 months of his taking office, or by May 2010.

Officials with Mr. Obama’s transition team say he remains committed to that goal, although he has also said he will listen to the recommendations of his commanders. In an interview on Wednesday, Joseph R. Biden Jr., the vice president-elect, said he was “not prepared to talk about” new troop-level options.

Brooke Anderson, the national security spokeswoman for the Obama transition team, said, “We have had briefings from the Bush administration, including Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen, about current plans for Iraq and Afghanistan, and we appreciate the information that has been shared.” Ms. Anderson said that as president Mr. Obama would meet with his commanders “to make a determination to how we move forward to safely redeploy our combat brigades in 16 months.”

Senior military officers say they have anticipated that Mr. Obama will seek speedier options for Iraq troop withdrawals. But they have also expressed uneasiness about a quick withdrawal from Iraq and are unclear at this point about Mr. Obama’s overall strategy in Afghanistan.

“It is more than a question of how fast and how low; it includes calculating how much risk you are willing to take in Iraq,” one senior military officer said of the discussions over a withdrawal.

The official, who asked not to be identified because of the delicacy of discussing war planning before the new commander in chief takes office, said the planning also required defining the future mission for American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and goals for where those missions should be in years to come.

“Various options are being drawn up to give the new president choices,” said another senior military officer involved in the process.

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said Mr. Gates intended to make sure that Mr. Obama, once he is commander in chief, gets to hear directly from all of the senior military officers with a stake in the Iraq and Afghanistan missions before making any decisions.

“The discussions the secretary and the chairman have had with the president-elect and his team have thus far been very broad,” Mr. Morrell said. “They will not begin the process of presenting the president-elect with specific options for a way ahead in Iraq until after the inauguration.”

The current military plan for Iraq was drawn up to meet the recent status-of-forces agreement between the United States and the Iraqi government that calls for both shorter and longer timetables than Mr. Obama’s campaign promise. Under that agreement, all United States combat troops are to be out of Iraqi cities by June and all American forces are to be out of Iraq entirely by the end of 2011. That agreement, however, can be renegotiated.

Even as Mr. Obama prepares for the drawdown in Iraq, some influential Democrats and national security experts have begun voicing concern about his willingness to send up to 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan, where the United States has been at war for more than seven years. They say that Mr. Obama has yet to make clear his overall goals beyond calling for more forces, money and diplomacy in an increasingly violent, ungovernable country that the military says presents even more problems than Iraq.

Peter Baker contributed reporting.

* * * *

It no longer matters whether the Iraqis are ready to handle security or not. They want us gone, so it’s time to go.

It is their country, after all. I just hope they remember who gave them their freedom.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iraqis Now In Charge of Green Zone and Saddam’s Palace

During my time in Iraq, I spent a lot of time in the Green Zone as well as inside Saddam's former palace that became our first embassy. For any soldier who served there, the new changes are something else. I always hoped I would get another tour in Baghdad so I could re-live some of the atmosphere that became so life-altering. (I took the above photo of Saddam's home during my tour in 2004.)

My team, the C.O.B.R.A. Team, lived in a small villa that was across the street from our general’s house. Our little villa, which we nicknamed the “cobra pit”, was directly on the Tigris River across from the Sheraton Hotel and just up the river from the palace. From the roof of our headquarters building, we could look out over Baghdad and take in some of the majesty of that ancient city.

Watching the swift Tigris River, listening to the call to prayer from the nearby mosque, and hearing the sounds of gunfire or mortars in the distance was an electrifying experience. It was especially so for an old soldier like me who was experiencing his last war.

Now that Iraqis have taken over the security for the Green Zone, the safety issues in that compound will be enormous. America has also left Saddam’s old palace to the Iraqis and we now have our own new embassy.

With the new status of forces agreement, there is no doubt that our military role in Iraq will continue to decline. Truthfully, if they don’t want us there, it’s their country and they can make that call.

I am proud that my fellow warriors and I played a part in liberating the nation of Iraq. We made many friends over there regardless of the self-serving factions that don’t care for us.

Shiites should remember that Saddam Hussein treated them like dirt, murdered them, didn’t allow them to celebrate their holidays, and would have continued to suppress them if he and his sons had retained power. I don’t suppose a little gratitude from the new government would be out of place, but I won’t hold my breath.

The future of Iraq is in the hands of the Iraqis. Let us hope they do not squander the chance we gave them to live their lives in freedom and prosperity.

* * * *

Iraq Takes Over Green Zone Security

January 01, 2009
Agence France-Presse

BAGHDAD - The United States today handed over security control of the Green Zone, symbol of the American-led occupation, to Iraq as a UN mandate for foreign troops ran out and bilateral military accords took effect.

Iraqi government and military officials hailed the return of the heavily fortified area in central Baghdad to Iraq's control in an emotional ceremony at the former palace of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein.

"It is our right to consider this day the day of sovereignty and the beginning of the process of retrieving every inch of our nation's soil," Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said in an impassioned speech in a palace hall.

"The palace is the sign of Iraqi sovereignty and it is a message to all Iraqis that our sovereignty has returned," Maliki said as the Iraqi flag was hoisted at the palace entrance.

Maliki also declared the day a national holiday.

"I ask the Council of Ministers and the Presidency Council to announce this day as a national holiday."

Under the terms of an agreement signed with Washington in November, U.S. troops officially decamped from the nine square kilometre (3.5-square-mile) Green Zone located on the banks of the Tigris in central Baghdad.

However, U.S. troops will continue to play an advisory role to the Iraqi military and the new huge U.S. embassy complex lies within the fortified zone although many other buildings already have been handed back to the Iraqis.

The end of the UN mandate put in place on October 16, 2003, seven months after the invasion by U.S.-led troops to topple Saddam, means Iraq takes greater control of its own security and a further step towards full sovereignty.

Soldiers from the Baghdad Brigade, who take orders from Maliki, took over when the UN mandate expired at midnight although American forces will help man checkpoints and play an advisory role to the Iraqi military.

"The American withdrawal from the Green Zone will be gradual," Iraqi military spokesman in Baghdad, Major General Qassim Atta, told AFP.

"U.S. checkpoint equipment remains in place and the checkpoints will be coordinated with the American forces but the zone will be run by the Baghdad Brigade."

The embattled country also took another step towards full sovereignty as British forces handed over control of Basra airport, its main military base in southern Iraq, to Iraqi officials in line with agreements signed this week.

"This is a great and important day during which Basra airport control tower and all the airport was turned over by the British to us," Basra province governor Mohammed Masbah al-Waeli said at ceremony at the airport.

Britain's troops had already withdrawn from Basra -- a key oil and financial hub and Iraq's third largest city -- in September last year and handed over security control of Basra province some three months later.

The U.S. military has also handed back to the Iraqis control of Baghdad airport although the adjacent U.S. military base, Camp Victory, will remain a key headquarters for the U.S. military.

However foreign troops will still remain on Iraqi soil for some time.
The United States, which has 146,000 soldiers in Iraq, signed in November a bilateral agreement with Baghdad which allows its combat forces to remain in the country until the end of 2011.

Britain and Australia -- which had the second and third largest contingents respectively -- have signed their own separate bilateral agreements with Iraq on Tuesday and will stay on until the end of July.

* * * *

Most people don't believe me when I say that I miss Baghdad. I guess only someone who's been there would understand what it's like to live each day on the edge. There is nothing like the rush of adrenaline to keep your senses alive.

I've written a book about my tour in Baghdad with the C.O.B.R.A. Team. It is titled, "My Last War - A Vietnam Veteran's Tour in Iraq". It should be available in two to four months. I'll keep you posted on the status and you can always check out the team's website at www.TheCobraTeam.com.

On behalf of all of my fellow Iraqi war veterans, thanks for your support. It was mighty different during and after Vietnam.


Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

British Troops Have Made A Difference in Iraq

It was my great pleasure to serve with members of the British military during my tour in Iraq. I met very professional British naval officers, infantry officers and even a commando from the unit that was “Roger’s Rangers” during the French and Indian war.

As the protective service detail for our general, my team had the chance to meet troops from all the nations in the Coalition. As expected, we found the British to be highly disciplined warriors and we were proud to have them with us.

During one of our convoys along Baghdad's Route Irish, we were short-handed and couldn’t man the turret in one of our vehicles. As I casually mentioned this fact to my driver, a senior British officer offered to stand in the turret with his rifle. I said that such an offer was appreciated, but it wasn’t necessary that he put himself at risk. The officer stood up with his rifle anyway and added his potential firepower to our convoy.

As the following article discusses, our British friends will leave Iraq next year. On behalf of all of my fellow American troops, I thank them for their comradeship, their courage and their sacrifice. We will always value the extraordinary friendship between our two nations.

* * * *

Washington Post
December 11, 2008
Pg. 17

British To Begin Iraq Withdrawal In March

Reports Say U.S. Troops Will Take Over Positions in Basra

By Mary Jordan, Washington Post Foreign Service

LONDON, Dec. 10 -- Britain will withdraw nearly all of its troops from Iraq beginning in March and U.S. troops will take over their positions in Basra, according to several British newspapers citing military sources.

Britain currently has 4,100 troops in the country and is expected by June to have only about 400 remaining to help train the Iraqi army, the reports said.

The leaked timetable appeared to have been orchestrated by the Defense Ministry to cheer troops ahead of Christmas and to make good on a promise by Prime Minister Gordon Brown to end the nation's involvement in the unpopular war. Brown is expected to make an official announcement in the new year, but is widely seen as waiting to coordinate with the new administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

During the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Britain moved 46,000 troops into Iraq. In July, Brown, well aware of the political damage the war had caused his predecessor, Tony Blair, said most of Britain's troops would be withdrawn by early 2009.

The British drawdown signals an end for the second-largest force and America's strongest ally in the coalition in Iraq. The United States has about 150,000 troops in Iraq; Obama promised during the campaign to withdraw most combat troops within 16 months of taking office.

"Our whole country will breath a sigh of relief that an end to this illegal war is now in sight," said Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats, referring to the British reports.

A Defense Ministry statement Wednesday, while not explicitly confirming the reports, said the ministry was "expecting to see a fundamental change of mission in early 2009."

"Final decisions on the timing of the drawdown will depend on the circumstances at the time," said a ministry spokesman who spoke on the customary rules of anonymity.

U.S. and British commanders have been in close contact on the timing of the long-expected British withdrawal. The British presence has been key in protecting main supply routes across southern Iraq.

The Guardian and other British newspapers said several thousand U.S. troops would move in to take over Basra airport, where British forces are now based, to protect convoys from Kuwait and support Iraqi forces in keeping the peace.

"This is far more significant for the British than it is for Iraq or the U.S.," said Gareth Stansfield, a professor of Middle East politics at the University of Exeter. He said the British troops were "at such a low level, they were barely able to protect themselves, never mind enforce Basra." Still, he said, the pullout will boost Brown, who is expected to call an election next year, and "may make a difference in how many forces can be sent to Afghanistan."

Jock Stirrup, chief of the Defense Staff, said last month that British troops departing Iraq cannot be transferred "one for one" to Afghanistan, where there has been growing U.S. pressure on Britain to add troops.

Stirrup and other defense officials have said the two wars have put enormous strain on the army.

Britain already has a considerable presence in Afghanistan, with 7,800 troops, and the media reports said it would be moving some aerial surveillance drones and Merlin helicopters from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Stirrup indicated last week that any growing British presence in Afghanistan would include manpower and aid to rebuild the economy. "I and others have been saying for over two years now we have to get a grip on the civilian effort," he said.

Special correspondent Karla Adam contributed to this report.

* * * *

Our British friends will continue to stand by our side in the War on Terror and, for this, we are eternally grateful.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Operation Iraqi Freedom is a Success - Now Its Up to The Iraqis

The following assessment of the current situation in Iraq is one of the best I’ve seen:

* * * *

A Framework for Success in Iraq

By Michael Gerson
Roger Hertog Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations

Friday, November 21, 2008;
Op-ed, Washington Post, A23

A war that once seemed likely to end in a panic of helicopters fleeing the American Embassy now seems destined to conclude as the result of a parliamentary process. A landmark status-of-forces agreement (SOFA) -- requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraqi cities by the end of June and from Iraq itself by the end of 2011 -- is headed for a final reading in the Iraqi parliament next week.

The approval of the SOFA would leave a chapter of history decorated with paradoxes. President Bush -- who once called withdrawal timelines "arbitrary" and "unacceptable" -- ends his term accepting them. President-elect Barack Obama will inherit a more peaceful Iraq because of policies he strongly opposed. And the Iraqi government -- so often criticized by Americans as weak and ineffectual -- is now asserting its sovereignty in a decisive manner, for good or ill.

The withdrawal deadlines contained in the SOFA seem like concessions from the Bush administration -- and they are. Officials are careful to point out that the June withdrawal from Iraqi cities merely codifies the current process of transferring provincial control to Iraqi forces -- and that both sides are free to renegotiate the agreement when it expires in three years. But the deadlines in the SOFA do limit the tactical flexibility of the next president in ways the current president would not have preferred.

Yet President Bush can take comfort from the fact that these deadlines are conceivable only because of the success of his surge strategy -- because al-Qaeda in Iraq has been decimated and the Sunni revolt has died down. Put another way: The more successful the surge has been, the less dangerous the deadlines for withdrawal have become. And this, after all, was the whole purpose of the surge -- it was intended to be a "bridge strategy" from the failures of 2005 and 2006 to a situation where an orderly withdrawal would be possible.

The SOFA also may seem to be a vindication of the Obama approach to Iraq, but it isn't. Candidate Obama proposed the withdrawal of all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008 -- a policy that would have left chaos and perhaps genocide in its wake. He stuck with a strategy of precipitate withdrawal even after the successes of the surge became evident. The new, more responsible timetables of the SOFA became possible not because of Obama's views but in spite of them.

Yet both leaders are likely to see benefit from the agreement. If a broadly based Iraqi government emerges as American troops withdraw, Bush's Iraq policy will demand and deserve a major historical reassessment. And the SOFA should allow President Obama to reinterpret his campaign pledges on Iraq in a more responsible manner – giving deference to the best military advice during the next three years and avoiding destabilizing actions.

The success of the surge has achieved some extraordinary things – not only the possibility of peace in Iraq but also a convergence in American politics. Bush's and Obama's modified positions on Iraq are quite close. Both leaders have accepted a responsible, gradual withdrawal and the possibility of leaving behind success instead of failure.

Much of that success, of course, will depend on the Iraqis themselves - particularly on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his leadership. If he acts the part of a benign nationalist, he could father a stable and unified nation. If he uses the military we have built, in the vacuum left by U.S. withdrawal, to attack his enemies and consolidate his personal power, he could provoke another civil war with the Sunnis.

Administration officials believe they have taken precautions that will encourage Iraqi nationalism over a destructive pan-Shiism. Iraqi security forces and police have been carefully integrated. Provincial elections in January will give greater influence to disenfranchised Sunnis (who foolishly boycotted the last elections). And national elections set for December of next year could act as a check on Maliki's ambitions and abuses.

Dealing with the new Iraq will not be easy. It has become a prickly nation, jealous of its sovereignty and determined to avoid even the appearance of American imperialism. But this also means it is becoming a "normal," self-governing country, in the midst of a national debate on its security just six years after the end of a vicious tyranny.

The cost of this success has been high for America, and some may argue that it has not been worth the price. But it is still a success.

* * * *

Our efforts to build this nation have been successful. The Iraqis want to be completely on their own and that is their right as a sovereign nation. However, they must continue the path of peace and cooperation between their various factions. To do otherwise will turn our joint victory into ashes.

Let us hope that their own history will record the sacrifices by the warriors of the United States and other Coalition countries that made their freedom a reality.

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iraqi Civilians Want the New Agreement

The following article was posted on military.com. While the Iraqis will certainly be glad to run their own country, it is still annoying that the Shiites have not thanked us in a large-scale official way for pulling them out from under Saddam’s Sunni thumb.

The new agreement, which will end our involvement in Iraq by the end of 2011, still has to be approved by the Iraqi Parliament, but it will likely go through since it has the blessing of Ayatollah Ali al Sistani, the most powerful Shiite religious leader in Iraq.

* * * *

Iraqis Demonstrate in Favor of US Pact

November 19, 2008
Deutsche Presse-Agentur

BAGHDAD - More than 5,000 Iraqis demonstrated in the Iraqi city of Hillah on Nov. 18 to support the security agreement between the United States and Iraq that would require U.S. troops to withdraw from the country.

The deal sets the legal basis for the future presence of US troops in Iraq after a United Nations Security Council mandate expires at the end of the year.

Under the agreement, the deadline for the complete withdrawal of US troops is Dec. 31, 2011. More than 140,000 U.S. troops are currently stationed in Iraq.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker signed the deal in Baghdad on Monday. However, it still needs parliamentary approval before it can be signed by the US and Iraqi presidents.

The demonstration in support of the security pact broke out in the centre of Hillah, 100 kilometres south of Baghdad. Clan chiefs and students were among the demonstrators, witnesses told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

The demonstrators carried flags and signs that said "Together for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq" and "With heart, with blood, we save you, Iraq." They also chanted slogans that urged the Iraqi government to sign the security agreement with the U.S.

Hundreds of Iraqi police and soldiers surrounded the demonstrators who walked to the city council.

* * * *

The war in Iraq may end for us by 2011, but watch the Shiite militias and the Iranians closely. The breeze of "fundamentalism" is blowing gently across the desert...

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Withdrawal From Iraq Is Not Very Far Away

The following article discusses the problems in negotiations between Iraq and the United States on our continued presence there:

* * * *

'Deal, No Deal' on Iraq-US Troop Talks

November 07, 2008

Knight Ridder

BAGHDAD - The United States delivered Thursday what it said was the final text of the controversial accord on the stationing of U.S. forces in Iraq, but Iraq said more talks are needed before the government can accept it.

"We have gotten back to the Iraqi government with a final text. Through this step, we have concluded the process on the U.S. side," said Susan Ziadeh, the U.S. Embassy spokeswoman in Baghdad. "Iraq will now need to take it forward through their own process."

The accord, which calls for complete withdrawal of U.S. forces by the end of 2011, has been the subject of tense negotiations for the past seven months.

According to State Department officials, the United States yielded to several important Iraqi demands, including Baghdad's proposal to inspect mail and cargo for U.S. forces in Iraq. One official said he did not know the details of how those inspections would be carried out, adding, "I don't think it's going to be overly intrusive."

He and other officials spoke on condition of anonymity, because the details of the American response were not being made public.

President Bush also accepted Iraq's request for firmer language in its call for U.S. troops to withdraw by the end of 2011, two defense officials said, although they did not know the details of the wording.

While the U.S. government signaled that it will not engage in further negotiations over the pact, which has been repeatedly delayed, the government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, indicated that Iraq expects further discussions with the United States before the process is completed.

"These amendments need meetings with the American side to reach the bilateral understanding, and the environment is positive," Dabbagh said in a statement on a government-funded television channel. "The Iraqi side needs time to give the main blocs to have their opinions, suggestions and notes on the amendments suggested by the American side."

Many Iraqi officials are now calling the status-of-forces accord, or SOFA, "the withdrawal agreement," possibly as a way of marketing it to a wary public.

The accord is controversial in Washington as well. The White House has pushed aggressively to reach the deal, but some Pentagon officials expressed concern that the concessions will set a precedent for current and future status-of-forces agreements with other countries. The United States is not believed to have agreed to another nation monitoring mail in status agreements with more than 80 other countries, for example.

Earlier this week, a senior Pentagon official who requested anonymity to speak candidly said he found it "hard to believe we could find aspects there that are acceptable" in the Iraqi proposal to search mail and cargo, adding: "What kind of precedents would we be setting?"

Administration officials said Bush sees the agreement as key to shaping his legacy on Iraq. They said Bush wanted to leave the presidency with a solidified relationship between the United States and an indisputably sovereign Iraq.

To the White House, "SOFA is a sign of success," a second U.S. defense official, who also requested anonymity to speak candidly, told McClatchy Newspapers.

That said, the Bush administration refused to accept one major Iraqi proposal, which would have given Iraq expanded legal jurisdiction over U.S. Soldiers alleged to commit wrongdoing while in the country. U.S. officials have called that a "non-starter."

The agreement has to be completed by the end of this year in order to replace a U.N. mandate that provides the legal basis for the U.S. presence in Iraq.

Iraqi officials were tight-lipped Thursday about whether the changes were acceptable. The changes first must be presented to the Cabinet. If the Cabinet agrees, the draft will be presented to the Iraqi parliament. One of the main sticking points for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government has been the issue of jurisdiction over U.S. Soldiers in Iraq.

Shiite Muslim officials who raised new demands when the accord was completed two weeks ago have been accused of succumbing to Iranian influence not to sign the agreement. At the time, Iraqi officials openly predicted that the government would be forced to extend the United Nations mandate. In recent days, officials have sounded more positive about the outcome.

"The next step is for the Cabinet to meet to look at the responses," Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, told McClatchy. "I hope it will be very soon."

The latest draft calls for U.S. forces to withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 2009 and withdraw from Iraq by 2011. It also lifts immunity for private U.S. contractors such as Blackwater, whose security guards were accused of uncontrolled shooting while on patrol duty, resulting in the deaths of Iraqi civilians.

It also allows for a joint U.S. and Iraqi committee to decide whether a U.S. Soldier who's committed a crime outside a U.S. base was off-duty and where he should be tried. Iraqi officials wanted to make that decision on their own, but the Bush administration has apparently rejected the demand.

President-elect Barack Obama has long advocated a U.S. withdrawal by the summer of 2010, a date that Maliki originally demanded in the agreement.

U.S. officials are pushing to get the deal done before the end of the month. If it's not done by the beginning of December, the government will have to begin the process to renew the U.N. mandate, one U.S. official in Iraq said. The parliament must approve the agreement when it's back in session next week and before it adjourns just before the end of the month for the Hajj season, when millions of Muslims make the holy pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

"Look, the government of Iraq has debated this agreement thoroughly. ... They forwarded to us their suggested amendments. We got back to them," State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Thursday. "Now the negotiating process has come to an end."

© Copyright 2008 Knight Ridder.

* * * *

As I have emphasized before, Iraq will never permit a long-term presence of foreign troops on their soil. They will also never permit the continued occupation of bases for America's stategic purposes. There will be no Germany or Japan-styled multi-decade presence.

Those of us who served in Iraq and who came to know the Iraqi people understood this reality from the beginning. The Crusades and the British colonial occupation of the early twentieth century are still bad memories for almost all Arabs.

The Bush administration has already accepted provisions in the status-of-forces agreement that will move our forces from the cities of Iraq to military bases in mid-2009. We have also agreed to have all troops out by the end of 2011. Mr. Obama will make it happen even sooner.

Watch Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi Army. This extremist Shiite militia is supported by Iran and its members are voicing opposition to anything that will keep Coalition forces in Iraq. Their ultimate objective is a fundamentalist theocracy like the one in Iran. Let's see what they do after the only things standing in their way are new Iraqi soldiers and police officers.

America's soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines can be proud of what they have accomplished in Iraq. In the end, the people of this troubled nation will decide for themselves how they will live in the future.

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Getting Better in Iraq – Notes from a Soldier Who’s Been There, Done That

The following article was written by a retired Army officer and veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and he tells it like it is:

* * * *

Washington Post
September 14, 2008
Pg. B4

This Time, Things Are Looking Up

By John A. Nagl

BAGHDAD--When I retired from the Army in June, my comrades in arms laughed at my summer vacation plans: another August in Iraq.

But I had unfinished business here. When my unit left Iraq in September 2004, one of my battle captains presented us with coffee mugs to celebrate our return home. The sardonic inscription: "Operation Iraqi Freedom 2003-2004: We were winning when I left." We weren't, and we knew it. We had lost 22 men and more than 100 had been wounded during our combat tour. The decline of the U.S. project in Iraq over the following two years made it all too easy to believe that their sacrifices had been for naught.

I've played the history over and over in my mind. Early mistakes by U.S. officials -- disbanding the Iraqi army and firing almost all the civil servants needed to run a society -- provided tinder for the Sunni insurgency. Things worsened as U.S. commanders withdrew our forces from the cities to large, comfortable bases from which they commuted to war. By the time my unit left, the Sunni insurgency that had erupted in Fallujah in the summer of 2003 had spread to the heart of Baghdad. Sunni and Shiite militias were pushing Iraq to the brink of full-scale civil war. And the pages of Army Times magazine were filled with the faces of fallen friends.

But studding this bleak narrative were signs of hope. As early as 2003, some of Iraq's minority Sunnis came to understand that their future lay not in resisting U.S. forces but in working with them. After neglecting Sunni tribes for years, our military began paying some to break ranks with the radicals of al-Qaeda in Iraq, leading to the Anbar Awakening of late 2006.

Enter the "surge" and a new U.S. strategy: to protect Iraqis by living among them. Military units left the comfort of their bases and, with counterparts from the maturing Iraqi army and police, manned the smaller encampments that dotted the country's cities and provinces. U.S. casualties also surged as we cleared Baghdad and surrounding communities in the summer of 2007.

Then Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki moved against Shiite militias -- first in Basra in March 2008, then in the massive Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad known as Sadr City. Operations continue in Mosul and Diyala, and so far the success is undeniable.

Route Irish, which runs from Baghdad International Airport to the International Zone, used to be the most dangerous road in the world. When I drove down it last month, I saw flowers being planted in newly rebuilt medians, a touch that would have made the late Lady Bird Johnson smile. Guard rails -- which we'd had to tear down to prevent IEDs from being hung behind them -- are being reinstalled.

Walking through the famous Dora market in Baghdad, I felt naked without a weapon. But then I reminded myself that I was safe, protected by the Sons (and Daughters) of Iraq. I visited a packed athletic club started by a Dora entrepreneur with a micro-loan from my West Point classmate, Lt. Col. Tim Watson. Festooned with posters of a young Arnold Schwarzenegger, the gym has a waiting list for membership. The deputy manager of the bank in Dora, who was sporting gaudy costume jewelry rather than an abaya, was happy to see us but made it clear that she didn't have time to chat; the line of women waiting for pension payments stretched out the door.

Everyone I talked to, Iraqis and Americans alike, stressed that the security gains are fragile and reversible; there were two car bombs and a suicide vest attack in Mosul three days after our visit. But the improvements in Baghdad and Basra are striking, with increasingly competent Iraqi security forces on every street corner -- although they will continue to need our advice and assistance for some years to come.

I am no cheerleader for the war in Iraq. We've made horrible mistakes that cost the lives of too many of my friends, American and Iraqi. It took us too long to learn from our errors and adopt an effective counterinsurgency strategy, and even now the war is far from won.

But the way ahead is becoming clearer, with a road map provided by men such as Col. Dominic Caracillo, a brigade commander in the 101st Airborne whose men patrol a patch south of Baghdad that used to be called the Triangle of Death. The soldiers now laughingly refer to it as the "Triangle of Love." A year ago, there were as many as 50 attacks every week; now there are just a few. Caracillo is overseeing a drawdown of U.S. forces; his brigade of about 4,000 soldiers is shipping out, to be replaced by a task force of fewer than 1,000. This force will not conduct counterinsurgency operations, but will support the newly created 17th Division of the Iraqi army. Its commander, Maj. Gen. Ali Jassim Mohammed Hassen al-Frejee, faces his own challenges: He's short of helmets and body armor, and he'd sure like to have some heavy artillery of his own rather than having to rely on ours. Still, as Caracillo says, Ali's forces are "good enough for the enemy they have to face."

So they are -- as long as we continue to back them with air support, intelligence and U.S. combat units, whose numbers are steadily diminishing. Iraq will need American advisers for years to come. For starters, it takes five years to produce a competent fighter pilot or tank company commander. Moreover, Iraq faces significant external security threats, as well as the remnants of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Shiite militias and Sunni insurgent groups. But U.S. forces will increasingly be able to turn combat over to the Iraqis, allowing the United States to scale back its involvement significantly.

When I came home from Iraq in 2004, we weren't winning. Four years later, the situation has changed dramatically. I can scarcely bring myself to say it out loud, but this time, we were winning when I left.

John A. Nagl, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, was an operations officer in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. He helped write "The U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual."

* * *

We’re getting there, but we can’t ease up. The Obama “quitter” solution won’t work; the McCain way will allow us to leave Iraq in victory.

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Opinions Vary on Iraq Troop Withdrawal Options

I know it's been awhile since my last posting (sorry about that). I have been traveling again, but it looks like that is slowly coming to an end. My pre-retirement medical exams, etc. may keep me in the Orlando area until I begin my terminal leave. We shall see.

Both Americans and Iraqis are debating when and under what circumstances American troops will begin to withdraw from Iraq. The following New York Times article offers some interesting perspectives, but some of the Iraqis who were interviewed have political agendas for their groups:

* * * *

New York Times
September 9, 2008
Pg. 6

Should U.S. Forces Withdraw From Iraq?

By Stephen Farrell

BAGHDAD — As Iraqi and American diplomats negotiate how long and under what circumstances American troops will remain in Iraq, Iraqis are also debating the issue.

For Iraqis, as for Americans, the answer is far more complex than a simple “stay” or “go.” For both it is about blood, treasure, pride, dignity and a nation’s sense of itself and its place in the world.

But a lot more Iraqi blood than American has already been spilled, and stands to be spilled again, if the politicians get it wrong.

On the streets of Iraq, the questions being asked about the continuing American presence are about sovereignty, stability and America’s intentions in Iraq’s past, present and future: How many American troops will stay? How quickly will they go? If they stay, where will they be based? To do what? With what powers? And under what restrictions?

For the most part, Iraqis’ views fall into three categories. One group, which includes many followers of the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, and some intensely nationalist Sunni Arabs in parts of the country that have suffered the worst since the invasion, simply want the Americans to leave, period. They say no amount of American effort now can make up for the horrors of the occupation, including the destruction of society and the killing of innocent civilians.

A second group takes a similarly dim view of the occupation, but worries that the brief period this year of improving security in Iraq will be vulnerable if the Americans abruptly withdraws. They say that the United States has a moral obligation to remain, and that continued presence of the occupiers is preferable to a return to rule by gangs and militias.

A third group worries that without a referee, Iraq’s dominant powers — Kurds in the far north and Shiites in the center and south — will brutally dominate other groups.

The Americans are not the first to face such quandaries in Iraq. In August 1920, only two years after his declining colonial power had emerged from the devastation of World War I, the British secretary of war, Winston Churchill, wrote (but did not send) a letter to his prime minister that contained this assessment of Mesopotamia:

“It seems to me so gratuitous that after all the struggles of war, just when we want to get together our slender military resources and re-establish our finances and have a little in hand in case of danger here or there, we should be compelled to go on pouring armies and treasure into these thankless deserts.”

A millennium and a half earlier, in A.D. 694, the Umayyad provincial governor Al-Hajjaj also faced a fractious Baghdad. His response to one angry crowd was a speech learned by all Iraqi schoolchildren: “I see heads before me that are ripe and ready for the plucking, and I am the one to pluck them, and I see blood glistening between the turbans and the beards.” The turbans melted away.

Five years later, Al-Hajjaj faced a rebellion in a troublesome region to his east, which forced him to move troops from Iraq. That rebellion was in Kabulistan, now part of Afghanistan, a historical parallel that drew a wry smile from Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of American forces in Iraq, when it was pointed out to him last month. General Petraeus will soon move up the chain of command to take over the Central Command region, making him responsible for an area that covers both Iraq and what was Kabulistan.

Names and governments change, but there is nothing new under the Mesopotamian sun.

The debate goes on. Following are some Iraqi perspectives on whether and how American troops should stay in their country.

Opinions of the Iraqis

The Choice Is Not Ours: America Wants to Stay

I don’t expect that the Americans will leave Iraq because they reached the maximum level of political influence in the region. America is controlling the future of energy, so I believe it’s not to America’s benefit for it to leave Iraq. -- ISMAIL KABABCHI, 38, a restaurant worker in central Baghdad

America will not leave Iraq. I think my grandsons’ grandsons will watch Uncle Sam and his blue jeans. The idea that America will depart is a kind of delusion because America came for its interests in Iraq. Iraq represents the most important treasure in the struggle among the superpowers for it includes plenty of wealth in addition to its important geographic location. In the long run, America will not leave Iraq because it reached the treasure of the world. -- SAID AL-MAJMAYI, 50, a painter in Baquba

Or Maybe It Doesn’t

I expect that the Americans will leave Iraq sooner or later because they can’t control the security situation. I expect their departure within the next few months because of the achievements of the Iraqi security forces and the Awakening in terms of security and stability. That will help the American forces leave Iraq and save the rest of their dignity before the situation turns bad again like between 2004 and 2005. -- ABU ABDUL QADER AL-JUMAYLI, 60, a retired army officer in Falluja

The withdrawal is coming, no doubt. America has lost its influence in Iraq to a very great and dangerous degree. The No. 1 country in the world didn’t imagine that it would become a toy in the hand of radical parties and armed groups, or some powers which will ally with America at daytime and conspire against it at night. -- MATEEN OMAR OJI, 32, a teacher in Kirkuk

America Must Leave Iraq Now

We want to push them out immediately. We don’t need them, and we don’t want them. We have two governments, the Iraqi and American governments. We are confused about who we need to obey, the Americans or Iraqis. And both the American and Iraqi governments are hurting the Iraqi people. -- ABDUL RAHMAN HAMED HUSSEIN, a social worker in Abu Dshir, south of Baghdad, who follows the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr

I want them to leave because they caused destruction for us, they have robbed us and they never gave us any of what they had promised to give us. If a civil war breaks out after their departure, it would be their doing. It’s going on now because of them. They are inflaming it. Iraqis have proved that they are not being seduced by the American actions. Their departure is the beginning of the road toward stability. What ever happens after their withdrawal, it will be finished within a year. -- MUHAMMAD SNAD, 36, an electrical technician in Mosul

We Don’t Love the Americans, But Withdrawal Is Worse

I am not with the coalition forces’ withdrawal from Iraq currently, because chaos and destruction will be all over Iraq. Even before the Americans came, we used to have genocide, destruction and wars. We know that the Americans came for their own benefit, yet they are our only solution. -- NISREEN HASSAN, 25, a teacher in Sulaimaniya

The presence of the American forces will make Iraq a regional and international power. If the Americans withdraw, Iraq will be subject to domination from neighboring countries which support terrorism in Iraq to protect their interests, so the departure of the American forces doesn’t serve Iraq’s interest. -- ABD MUHAMMAD AL-BEDEER, Samawa

If It’s Not the Americans, Someone Else Will Take Over

The coalition forces are the best solution to Iraq’s situation, they are just like a strong dam against the outside and the inside enemies and even the neighboring countries. They are all wolves — the Arabs, the Persians and the Turks. -- JALEEL MAHMOOD, 31, Sulaimaniya

Staying is the best thing for Iraq. If the Americans depart, half of Iraq will go to the Kurds and Iran will take the other half. We need a safety valve. America occupied Iraq and must solve the problems before its departure. America’s departure will increase the problems. -- AMJAD SALAH, 34, a driver in Basra

The Dream Deferred: Please Go, Just Not Yet

I don’t want them to leave right now, but I don’t want to see them here forever. Sooner or later the Americans have to leave Iraq or understand that our policy differs from their policy. They have to recognize the sovereignty of Iraq. I’d love to keep good relations with America rather than telling bad stories to my kids about it. -- HUDA HANI, 33, a Shiite employee of the Ministry of Higher Education in Baghdad

I’m against the Americans’ withdrawing before we have a fully independent government and security forces. I witnessed many terrible things with the Americans, and I don’t want the same thing to happen with the next generations. It would be better for both sides to have a scheduled withdrawal. -- MUHAMMAD MAHDI, 28, a Sunni graduate of the College of Arts who now works as a taxi driver in Baghdad

No one accepts the residence of the occupier, but the withdrawal should be studied well and not randomly. Things are getting better now, and we don’t want anything to affect that. The Americans are probably one of the reasons behind the previous chaos, but their quick withdrawal will generate bigger chaos. -- SALIM MUHAMMAD, 40, Najaf

Saying No and Meaning Yes

All of them declare in public that they are against the Americans remaining in Iraq. They demand Iraqi liberation. They always raise the same slogan: Independence for Iraq. But in private sessions or meetings they are always telling me and other reporters that the Americans must stay, and that if they leave right now it would be a big mistake. The reasons for this political hypocrisy are like a disease. Most of the Iraqi politicians suffer from it. Their aim is to maintain their reputation in the public eye. -- TAREQ MAHER, an employee of The New York Times in Baghdad

In public we say we do not want American troops, but our hearts say they should stay in Iraq until we become a state of institutions based on democracy and dialogue, not violence. Most of our recent leaders are tiny in the political world and the Americans want to teach them how to be leaders. Really we need them to stay more. They are a fence against Iran’s ambitions toward Iraq. -- AHMED HASOON, 38, a teacher in Basra

Never Mind the Troops, I’m Leaving Iraq

At night in all seasons, especially in summer, it is so very, very hot because we are suffering from electricity shortages and water shortages. So many times I have to buy my baby’s milk from the black market. The American forces have been here for such a long time, and still it is not stable and nothing is sure. Sometimes I feel that I should leave Iraq and claim asylum or refugee status, so that later on I would be lucky enough to get another nationality, which would make me feel respectable and that I have some rights. As an Iraqi now I cannot help my country improve. But maybe later on with a new nationality I would be able to come back and do something. Only then will my voice be heard. -- ANWAR ALI, an employee of The New York Times in Baghdad who is seeking asylum in the United States

Reporting was contributed by Richard A. Oppel Jr. from Kirkuk; Riyadh Mohammed, Ali Hameed, Mohamed Hussein and Anwar J. Ali from Baghdad; and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Mosul, Salahuddin Province, Falluja, Kirkuk, Diyala Province, Najaf, Karbala, Basra and the Kurdish-administered northern region of Iraq.

* * * *

We will continue to negotiate the terms of our troop drawdown. Hopefully the Iraqis will work with us to make sure that the pace does not risk losing the security gains we have made together.

However, in the end it is their country. When they decide they don't want us there, we will have no choice but to leave.

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Mahdi Army Influence Weakened By the Surge

I've been busy at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, but I'm glad to see all the reports about the improvements in Iraq because of the surge.

The following story was in the New York Times and it talks about the declining influence of Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army. Unfortunately, these fundamentalist Shiite militiamen will alway be in the shadows because they are supported, trained and financed by their Iranian mentors.

We will eventually draw down our troop levels in Iraq (as the Iraqi government is able to assume more responsibility), but we must keep our eyes on these thugs from Sadr City and be ready to swat them like flies should they re-emerge:

* * * *

New York Times
July 27, 2008
Pg. 1

Shiite Militia In Baghdad Sees Its Power Ebb

By Sabrina Tavernise

BAGHDAD — The militia that was once the biggest defender of poor Shiites in Iraq, the Mahdi Army, has been profoundly weakened in a number of neighborhoods across Baghdad, in an important, if tentative, milestone for stability in Iraq.

It is a remarkable change from years past, when the militia, led by the anti-American cleric Moktada al-Sadr, controlled a broad swath of Baghdad, including local governments and police forces. But its use of extortion and violence began alienating much of the Shiite population to the point that many quietly supported American military sweeps against the group.

Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki struck another blow this spring, when he led a military operation against it in Baghdad and in several southern cities.

The shift, if it holds, would solidify a transfer of power from Mr. Sadr, who had lorded his once broad political support over the government, to Mr. Maliki, who is increasingly seen as a true national leader.

It is part of a general decline in violence that is resonating in American as well as Iraqi politics: Senator John McCain argues that the advances in Iraq would have been impossible without the increase in American troops known as the surge, while Senator Barack Obama, who opposed the increase, says the security improvements should allow a faster withdrawal of combat troops.

The Mahdi Army’s decline also means that the Iraqi state, all but impotent in the early years of the war, has begun to act the part, taking over delivery of some services and control of some neighborhoods.

“The Iraqi government broke their branches and took down their tree,” said Abu Amjad, a civil servant who lives in the northern Baghdad district of Sadr City, once seen as an unbreachable stronghold for the group.

The change is showing up in the lives of ordinary people. The price of cooking gas is less than a fifth of what it was when the militia controlled local gas stations, and kerosene for heating has also become much less expensive. In interviews, 17 Iraqis, including municipal officials, gas station workers and residents, described a pattern in which the militia’s control over the local economy and public services had ebbed. Merchants say they no longer have to pay protection money to militiamen. In some cases, employees with allegiances to the militia have been fired or transferred. Despite the militia’s weakened state, none of the Iraqis interviewed agreed to have their full names published for fear of retribution.

In a further sign of weakness, Shiite tribes in several neighborhoods are asking for compensation from militia members’ families for past wrongs.

The changes are not irreversible. The security gains are in the hands of unseasoned Iraqi soldiers at checkpoints spread throughout Baghdad’s neighborhoods. And local government officials have barely begun to take hold of service distribution networks, potentially leaving a window for the militia to reassert itself.

The militia’s roots are still in the ground, Abu Amjad said, and “given any chance, they will grow again.”

A Criminal Enterprise

At the peak of the militia’s control last summer, it was involved at all levels of the local economy, taking money from gas stations, private minibus services, electric switching stations, food and clothing markets, ice factories, and even collecting rent from squatters in houses whose owners had been displaced. The four main gas stations in Sadr City were handing over a total of about $13,000 a day, according to a member of the local council.

“It’s almost like the old Mafia criminal days in the United States,” said Brig. Gen. Jeffrey W. Talley, an Army engineer rebuilding Sadr City’s main market.

Um Hussein, a mother of 10 in Sadr City, the largest Shiite district in the capital and one of the poorest, said her family’s fuel bill had dropped so far that she could afford to buy one of her daughters a pair of earrings with the savings. Others interviewed listed simpler purchases that had now become possible: tomatoes, laundry detergent, gasoline.

One young man said that even though his house was right across from a distribution center that sold cooking gas, he was not allowed to buy it there at state prices, but instead was forced to wait for a militia-affiliated distributor who sold it at higher prices.

“We had to get our share of the cooking gas from Mahdi Army people,” Um Hussein said. “Now, everything is available. We are free to buy what we want.”

Before, the Mahdi Army controlled the 12 trucks that made daily deliveries of cooking gas canisters for the district, because the leader of the Sadr City district council, who was affiliated with the militia, was the one who handled the trucks’ documents.

“We had no idea when they were coming or where they were going,” the council member said, referring to the trucks.

Those who questioned the militia’s authority were dealt with harshly. A gas station worker from Kadhimiya recalled a man in his 60s being beaten badly for refusing to pay the inflated gas price last year. The Sadr City council member described his relationship with the militia by touching his hand to his face.

“I was kissing them here, here and here,” he said pointing to his right cheek, his left cheek and then his forehead.

A spokesman for the movement in Sadr City, Sayeed Jaleel al-Sarkhy, defended the Mahdi Army, saying in an interview that it was not a formal militia and denying the charges that it had taken control of local services. He said the militia had been infiltrated by criminals who used the name of the Mahdi Army as a cover.

The Mahdi Army is an army of believers,” he said. “It was established to serve the people.”

An employee in the Sadr City local government who oversees trash collectors — daily laborers whose salaries he said were controlled by the militia — said that had long stopped being true.

“I am sick all over,” he said. “I am blind. I’ve got a headache. I’ve got a toothache. My back hurts. All of this is from the Mahdi Army.”

Signs of Weakness

A month after Mr. Maliki’s military operation, strange things started to happen in Shuala, a vast expanse of concrete and sand-colored houses in northern Baghdad that was one of the Mahdi Army’s main strongholds. Militia members suddenly stopped showing up to collect money from the main gas station, a worker there said.

A member of the Shuala district council said: “They used to come and order us to give them 100 gas canisters. Now it’s, ‘Can you please give me a gas canister?’”

Then, several weeks later, 11 workers, guards and even a director, all state employees with ties to the militia, were transferred to other areas. Employees’ pictures were posted so American and Iraqi soldiers could identify impostors.

The Iraqi Army now occupies the militia’s old headquarters in Shuala. Soldiers set up 18 checkpoints around the neighborhood, including at the gas station. When the militia opened a new office, soldiers put a checkpoint there, too, said an Iraqi major from the unit based there. Iraqi soldiers recently distributed warning notices to families squatting in houses whose rent had been collected by the Mahdi Army until May.

In Sadr City, the authorities closed the militia’s radio station. The leader of the district council was arrested by the American military. Cooking gas delivery documents must now be approved by three officials, not just one, the council member said.

Another sign of weakness is the growing number of financial settlements between powerful Shiites and Mahdi Army members’ families over loved ones who were killed by the militia. In Topchi, a Shiite neighborhood in western Baghdad, a handwritten list of militia members’ names was taped up in the market this month, with the warning for their families to leave town. Several of their houses were attacked.

Some militia members’ families went to the local council to ask for help. They found none. Mahdi militiamen killed four local council members over several weeks last fall.

“I told them this isn’t good, they must not be blamed,” the council member said. Even so, “if your brother has been killed, this is the time for revenge.”

Now neighborhoods are breathing more freely. A hairdresser in Ameen, a militia-controlled neighborhood in southeast Baghdad, said her clients no longer had to cover their faces when they left her house wearing makeup. Minibuses ferrying commuters in Sadr City are no longer required to play religious songs, said Abu Amjad, the civil servant, and now play songs about love, some even sung by women.

“They lost everything,” said the Sadr City government employee. “The Sadr movement has no power now. There is no militia control.”

Lingering Fears

The Mahdi Army might be weak, but it is not gone.

Majid, a Sadr City resident who works in a government ministry, said several Iraqi Army officers in his area had to move their families to other neighborhoods after Mr. Maliki’s military operation because the militia threatened them. Bombs are still wounding and killing American soldiers in the district. And early this month, one Iraqi officer’s teenage son was kidnapped and killed, his body hung in a public place as a warning, said Majid, who gave only his first name because he feared reprisals.

“People are still afraid of the Mahdi Army,” he said. “You still get punished if you talk bad about them.”

While most of the Iraqi soldiers at the new checkpoints seem loyal to the government, others have sympathies closer to the militia. A friend of Majid’s was obliged to pay a steep tribal settlement, after telling an army patrol about his neighbor, a militia member. The patrol had been infiltrated and leaked the tip to the neighbor.

“They are still trying to influence things,” General Talley said, though his overall assessment was that their control was receding.

The shift comes at a crucial moment: Iraqis will vote in provincial elections in December. The weakening of the Sadrists in national politics clears the stage for the group’s most bitter rival — a Shiite party led by another cleric, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. One of the party’s members, Jalal al-Din al-Sagheer, a sheik and a member of Parliament, is arranging state aid for Sunni families willing to move back to Topchi.

The timing was not missed by the Sadr movement’s spokesman, who said the government had recently warned the group to vacate its office. He blames Mr. Hakim’s party for the attempts to marginalize his movement, whose members have also been targets of a political crackdown in southern Iraq.

“Some parties are occupying large buildings in Jadriya,” he said, referring indirectly to the headquarters of Mr. Hakim’s party. “That’s what makes us suspicious. Why only us?”

He added, “The main motive is to exclude the Sadr movement from politics.”
One indicator of whether the new gains will hold is whether local governments can truly fill the gap that the militia left and deliver services effectively and consistently.

General Talley said his unit had recently spent $34 million to help reconstruct a major market in Sadr City. But the district council has gotten bogged down in arguments over who has the right to disburse $100 million that Mr. Maliki promised Sadr City after the military operation. The district council was given 90 days to come up with projects. More than 30 days have passed and not one proposal has been submitted, council members said.

“To be honest with you, I find it very slow,” said Haidar al-Abadi, an adviser to Mr. Maliki who said that funds had been held back because militia-affiliated companies had gotten involved. “There’s a danger this slowness could backfire.”

The militia is painting its response on Sadr City walls: “We will be back, after this break.”

The Iraqi Army is painting over it.

Reporting was contributed by Mohammed Hussein, Tareq Maher, Campbell Robertson, Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Alissa J. Rubin.

* * * *

Great article; surprised it was in the New York Times....

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com