Iran

Iran, Iraq, Political wind, War on Terror

The Appeasement Caucus

by  • 

Terrorists do not hold elections and they cannot win the War on Terror on the ground. Yet Senators Lugar and Domenici (as well a slew of Democrats in Congress) seem more concerned with their own reelection chances than the welfare of the Iraqi people or taking the fight to the enemy, as the Wall Street Journal indicates this morning:

The last of the brigades President Bush ordered for his military surge in Iraq only arrived in the country last month, and they have been heavily engaged with al Qaeda in the Sunni triangle around Baghdad as part of the new military strategy. So it’s especially distressing that Republican Senators should decide that this is the time to separate themselves from Mr. Bush on Iraq.

“I do not doubt the assessments of military commanders that there has been some progress in security,” Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declared on the Senate floor late last month. But that didn’t stop Mr. Lugar from concluding that its chances of success are “very limited.” Why? The “short period framed by our own domestic political debate” won’t allow it, he says. Instead, Mr. Lugar wants a “sustainable bipartisan strategy” along the lines recommended in November by the Iraq Study Group. Last week, New Mexico’s Pete Domenici noisily joined this bandwagon, as have several other Republican Senators, some of whom face tough re-election fights next year.

So let’s see. Mr. Bush and al Qaeda’s Ayman al Zawahiri agree that Iraq — not Afghanistan — is the central front in the war between them. But GOP Senators looking ahead to the 2008 elections have decided that the real front in the war lies not in Baghdad or Baquba but in the Beltway, and that a “bipartisan” redeployment is a worthier goal than backing the current battle plan.

The Washington Times also weighed in this morning:

It’s important to be at least somewhat grounded in reality about what is significant about the defeatist posture taken by Mr. Lugar et. al. — and what is business as usual for a certain type of Republican… In short, no one remotely familiar with their records would consider any of them to be among the Senate’s conservative intellectual giants. On the contrary, they are poll-driven politicians who want to hold on to power, and the polls indicate that many Americans are decidedly unhappy about the direction of the war.
…
The most pernicious thing about all the talk of bringing U.S. troops home is the fact that it would reverse the successes that American troops are achieving. For months, this newspaper has reported the story of how Sunnis in Anbar province in western Iraq are taking up arms against al Qaeda. The same thing now appears to be occurring in Baqubah, located in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad, in which American troops launched an offensive June 19 to dislodge al Qaeda forces. “The big news on the streets today is that the people of Baqubah are generally ecstatic, although many hold in reserve a serious concern that we will abandon them again,” blogger Michael Yon [Editor — See his latest dispatch here], who is embedded with U.S. troops in Baqubah, reported Friday. Similarly, Michael Gordon of the New York Times also reported Friday on the remarkable successes that U.S. troops in Diyala are having. It should also be noted that Iran — now a leading supporter of both Sunni and Shi’ite jihadists fighting U.S. forces in Iraq — has shown itself to be vulnerable to economic pressure — witness the riots over gasoline rationing that have swept the country.

So what do senators want to do? To throw the mullahs a diplomatic lifeline. Mr. Domenici, along with Sen. Ken Salazar, Colorado Democrat, and Republican Sens. Robert Bennett of Utah and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who both should know better, is supporting S. 1545, a bill to make the 79 recommendations of the Iraq Study Group (including talks with Tehran and Damascus) the official policy of the U.S. government. When you combine this foolishness with the parade of amendments calling for troop “redeployments” and setting timetables for withdrawal from Iraq by April 1, 2008, it’s clear that Mr. Reid and his “bipartisan” coalition of helpers are poised to send another unmistakable message of weakness to the jihadists starting today.

Instead of talking about withdrawing troops, Congress ought to conduct a full debate about finally confronting Iran. Senator Joseph Lieberman took up that gauntlet last week and we will see if anyone there other than he has such courage.

Iran, Iraq, War on Terror

Iraq: Maliki objects to Sadr City raids; civilian casualties down

by  • 

The Los Angeles Times reports a successful U.S. led raid into Sadr City to capture or kill terrorists believed to have ties with Iran angered Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki:

July 1, 2007 – BAGHDAD — A U.S. search early Saturday for fighters allegedly linked to Iran turned into a battle in which the military said it killed 26 militants. The Iraqi government rebuked the Americans for carrying out the raid in a Baghdad neighborhood without its permission, and local leaders said many innocent bystanders had been hurt.

The raid could stir further difficulties for Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, whose relationship is already rocky with Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr. Maliki, in charge of a fractious coalition government, is locked in a confrontation with Iraq’s leading Sunni bloc, which holds 44 seats in the 275-member parliament, over an arrest warrant for Iraq’s culture minister, who is a Sunni. The Sunnis have withdrawn from the Cabinet over the warrant for Asad Kamal Hashimi in the slayings of two sons of an independent Sunni legislator.

The military could face a backlash from Maliki’s government over the early morning raids in Sadr City, the bastion of Sadr’s Al Mahdi militia and home to more than 2.5 million people. A failure to stand up to the Americans might further erode backing for Maliki’s fragile coalition government among the general Shiite population, which forms the bulwark of his support.

Maliki, who has been in a tug of war with U.S. commanders over raids in Sadr City, quickly issued a statement criticizing the Americans for not clearing the operation with the Iraqi government. He said the government “refuses” to permit the U.S. to “carry out any military operation in any Iraqi province or city without first acquiring permission from the leadership of the Iraqi forces.”

The U.S. military said the 26 militants who were killed had attacked soldiers with small arms, rocket-propelled grenades and roadside bombs. The troops also detained 17 militants during the operation against extremists with “close ties to Iranian terror networks,” the military said.
…
Maliki has signed off on raids in Sadr City on a case-by-case basis, but this time he seemed unwilling to back the targeting of Sadr’s militia.

Last fall, Maliki blocked the Americans from carrying out raids in Sadr City. But with the start of the U.S. troop buildup in February, the military secured a guarantee from Maliki to be allowed to go after Sadr militiamen if they were considered “rogue members” affiliated with Iran.

With Maliki in danger of a Sunni withdrawal from the political process, the prime minister might be rethinking his strategy toward the Sadr loyalists, whose six Cabinet members quit in April and whose 33-member bloc started boycotting parliament two weeks ago to protest the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra.

In other developments … In south Baghdad, an armor-piercing bomb believed to have been manufactured in Iran killed a U.S. soldier and wounded three, the Army said.

While the Associated Press reports civilian deaths dropped by 50% last month and the surge is making progress, casualties among both Iraqi and U.S. forces remain high:

July 2, 2007 – Baghdad — Iraqi civilian deaths dropped to their lowest level since the start of the Baghdad security operation, government figures showed yesterday, suggesting signs of progress in tamping down violence in the capital. But American casualties are running high as U.S. forces step up pressure on Sunni and Shi”ite extremists in and around Baghdad.

At least 1,227 Iraqi civilians were killed in June along with 190 policemen and 31 soldiers, an officer at the Iraqi Interior Ministry”s operations room said. The officer spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the figures.
…
June’s figures were the lowest monthly tally this year. In January, President Bush ordered nearly 30,000 troops to Iraq in a major push to stabilize the capital so that Iraq”s leaders can hammer out power-sharing agreements for a lasting peace.

The Baghdad security operation began in mid-February, although the last of the American reinforcements arrived in Iraq only last month… the figures suggest a downward trend, which may be a result of U.S. military pressure on insurgents in Baghdad and the surrounding areas, as well as a shift in focus by extremists toward American targets.

The commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Fil Jr., told reporters on Friday that American and Iraqi security forces now control 48 percent to 49 percent of the 474 neighborhoods in Baghdad, up from 19 percent in April
.