Hopefully goes better than BasraMay 17th, 2008 - 17:59:33

These types of mass arrests are generally vacuum-cleaner operations of anyone who they can grab, as those who pose a threat have had months of notice to clear out and go to nearby Syria. Those left are either the residents (some of whom may have cooperated with the fanatics; and some could simply not afford to leave), or people ready to die for their cause. Some residents name others in the area as 'troublemakers', and personal grudges get settled.

Just as in Basra, al-Maliki is offering pardons and payment for weapons. Since this group is likely NOT under Mahdi Army/al-Sadr control, but more likely includes some remnants of al Qaeda that had been pushed north, I doubt that people are lining up to turn weapons in; and this tactic fails right in the U.S. in gang-infested areas. Al Qaeda is busy in other areas of the world, and the fighters will simply move to places like Afghanistan.

It will be worth seeing fewer al-Qaeda in Iraq; but the problem here is the native insurgents, and open borders allowing other foreign fighters to slip back later. As Sadr City demonstrated, there's ample opportunity for violence in Iraq even when al Qaeda is no part of it.

This time al-Maliki has the U.S. forces right there with him in the planning, rather than having to ask for help after the initial invasion, when over 1,000 defected from the Iraqi Army in Basra, or refused to fight. This time we're propping him up with air power and intel in advance. You can bet that the U.S. will spend whatever is needed to prevent another Basra; and to keep al-Maliki from once again having to rely on Iran to end it.

This time, al-Maliki has no excuses. He's talked this military action up for months and months, giving the leaders in the area ample time to move elsewhere, including Syria.

U.S. forces in the past took areas like Fallujah, and then found that they could not move elsewhere, and hold that ground. The Iraqi Army will have to hold Mosul and other areas, WITHOUT the kind of troops and equipment available to U.S. forces. The 'success' therefore could only be measured 6 months down the road, when U.S. forces are not involved in strength.

Report this comment

From a related M&C pieceMay 17th, 2008 - 18:42:04

www.monstersandcritics.com/news/middleeast/news/article_1405529.php

Mosul is believed to be the last urban stronghold of al-Qaeda in Iraq group, which is a home-grown militant Sunni group with links to al-Qaeda terrorist network.

(In actuality, the base of AQI is renegade Iraqi Sunni's and assorted foreign fighters)

Before the launch of the Mosul offensive Saturday, former army officers were arrested on suspicion of belonging to the outlawed Ba'th Party of former President Saddam Hussein. To placate critics of the arrests, al-Maliki called on former army officers to 'return to the fold of army and take part in defending their country and people.'

(These are political arrests; not the 'capture' of terrorists)

A statement issued by the al-Maliki's office quoted Mosul lawmakers as saying 'people in the city welcome the offensive and are prepared to fully cooperate with the army to restore law and order.' Several local clan chiefs, however, voiced their concerns, in interviews on the private Iraqi al-Sharqiyah channel, that the authorities have committed human rights abuses in the province.

(Sunni vs. Shia, as it always is in Iraq)

Local people have also complained that some troops deployed in Mosul allegedly belong to the Shiite Badr Organization that have close ties with Iran and claimed that some troops are part of Kurdish peshmerga forces. Mosul is a multi-ethnic city with a long history of tolerance. The Sunni Arab community in the city fears that the neighbouring Kurdish Autonomous Region may lay claim to the Nineveh province.

(And Sunni vs. Kurds, as well. This is about the oil revenues, as that's what's worth their fighting over. The Shia and Kurds have oil-producing lands, and the Sunni lack those resources).

Report this comment