Building Another Wall
Well, we know one place in Baghdad where The Surge isn't working: Sadr City. According to this article in today's Los Angeles Times, efforts to build a wall in one small area of the Baghdad neighborhood have been stymied by the Shiite militia run by Moqtada al Sadr.
"Everyone knows we won't go past Route Gold," Boyes said, referring to the street along which the wall is being built, separating more than two-thirds of Sadr City from a rectangle where U.S. forces occupy a smattering of small bases. "It's a political thing."
It is also the same position the U.S. faced 15 months ago, when the first of 28,500 additional American troops arrived in Baghdad to help quell violence. At the time, commanders opted to not pour troops into Sadr City as they had done in other trouble spots, fearful that it would spark a bloody backlash from Sadr's Mahdi Army militia.
Little has changed in the 11-square-mile corner of northeast Baghdad, but the stakes are higher now. An Iraqi military offensive launched against Shiite militias in late March has drawn in U.S. troops and has led to near-constant fighting in Sadr City. Sadr has threatened "open war" if the offensive does not end. U.S. troop deaths have climbed to their highest level in seven months, mainly because of the clashes in and around Sadr City, and the additional American troops will be gone by July. On Saturday, the Iraqi government said it had struck a deal with Sadr's aides to halt the fighting, but the two sides disagreed on its terms and it was unclear what it would yield. [Emphasis added]
The area to be walled off is a small rectangle in the neighborhood which is essentially controlled by the Mahdi Army militia. The plan was designed to bottle up the militia in the hopes of containing it and stopping the rocket attacks on the rest of the city. Once the wall was finished (and, fifteen months later, it's still not finished), the US planned to install street lights and other amenities for those living in that little enclave. Presumably the US also planned to ensure the electricity to run those street lights, perhaps even planned to ensure adequate clean water and waste management to the new little paradise. So far, as noted, they haven't gotten very far, and for good reason.
The United States' predicament is a sign of Sadr's status as a political power broker. He controls 30 seats in parliament, and his weekly messages read out in mosques across Iraq have a huge effect on violence in Sadr City and other Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad.
Political issues are not easily resolved by military force, even (perhaps, especially) in an occupied country. The notoriously weak Iraqi government has finally figured that out and has engaged Moqtada al Sadr in negotiations to try to at least halt the bloodshed. While the actual terms of the agreement being touted this weekend as good news (and it certainly is, on several levels) are in dispute, at least some people are talking rather than launching rockets and grenades.
Unfortunately, that's something our administration doesn't do: it's not in the arsenal.
"Everyone knows we won't go past Route Gold," Boyes said, referring to the street along which the wall is being built, separating more than two-thirds of Sadr City from a rectangle where U.S. forces occupy a smattering of small bases. "It's a political thing."
It is also the same position the U.S. faced 15 months ago, when the first of 28,500 additional American troops arrived in Baghdad to help quell violence. At the time, commanders opted to not pour troops into Sadr City as they had done in other trouble spots, fearful that it would spark a bloody backlash from Sadr's Mahdi Army militia.
Little has changed in the 11-square-mile corner of northeast Baghdad, but the stakes are higher now. An Iraqi military offensive launched against Shiite militias in late March has drawn in U.S. troops and has led to near-constant fighting in Sadr City. Sadr has threatened "open war" if the offensive does not end. U.S. troop deaths have climbed to their highest level in seven months, mainly because of the clashes in and around Sadr City, and the additional American troops will be gone by July. On Saturday, the Iraqi government said it had struck a deal with Sadr's aides to halt the fighting, but the two sides disagreed on its terms and it was unclear what it would yield. [Emphasis added]
The area to be walled off is a small rectangle in the neighborhood which is essentially controlled by the Mahdi Army militia. The plan was designed to bottle up the militia in the hopes of containing it and stopping the rocket attacks on the rest of the city. Once the wall was finished (and, fifteen months later, it's still not finished), the US planned to install street lights and other amenities for those living in that little enclave. Presumably the US also planned to ensure the electricity to run those street lights, perhaps even planned to ensure adequate clean water and waste management to the new little paradise. So far, as noted, they haven't gotten very far, and for good reason.
The United States' predicament is a sign of Sadr's status as a political power broker. He controls 30 seats in parliament, and his weekly messages read out in mosques across Iraq have a huge effect on violence in Sadr City and other Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad.
Political issues are not easily resolved by military force, even (perhaps, especially) in an occupied country. The notoriously weak Iraqi government has finally figured that out and has engaged Moqtada al Sadr in negotiations to try to at least halt the bloodshed. While the actual terms of the agreement being touted this weekend as good news (and it certainly is, on several levels) are in dispute, at least some people are talking rather than launching rockets and grenades.
Unfortunately, that's something our administration doesn't do: it's not in the arsenal.
Labels: Iraq War
posted by Diane at 4:30 AM
2 Comments:
You are right! Walls do not solve political issues. In fact, walls cause more issues politically. How do they expect a soverign nation to accept walled sections? It is simply too stupid to contemplate.
Our military has been abused to the breaking point. Guarding pipelines, and building walls. I remember somebody saying repeatedly we are not in to Nation Building. Harrummph!
PEASANTPARTY
Don't forget the poppies. They don't guard themselves, and we can't trust those shifty Afghans to guard our poppies for us.
Post a Comment
<< Home