http://www.feralscholar.org/blog/index.php/2008/03/27/good-morning-vietnam/
Good Morning, Vietnam! 27th March 2008, 03:54 pm by Stan Goff Nouri al Maliki, at the behest of his American masters, has thrown the new Army of the Republic of Vietnam against the militias of the most powerful and cohesive popular movement in Iraq, that of Muqtada al Sadr. By all accounts, even with their American advisers, tactical air and intelligence support, this operation appears to be a stupendous failure; the Mehdi Army of Sadr is reported to be routing the Iraqi “government” forces at every turn. Moreover, it has ignited an uprising that stretches from Baghdad to Basra and all points in between. This flagrant violation of the ceasefire that the Sadrists renewed only days ago for six additional months, by the American-controlled puppet government, has set the stage for the most dangerous moment in Iraq for the occupation forces since the dual rebellions in Fallujah and Najaf in April 2004. It has also quite probably signed the death warrant for the Iranian-trained and supported militias of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), the foundation of Maliki’s last thread of legitimacy as an “Iraqi government.” The calculation is that this “strike” by Mailiki’s forces — many reported to have shed their uniforms and joined the Mehdi Army — will interrupt the breathing space that the US believes Sadr was using to rest, refit, and professionalize his forces… who the press calls “militants,” as it calls the Maliki forces “Iraqis.” The same US press, which has parroted the absurd claims of “surge success” for months now, a success that was based on successful ethnic cleansing in Baghdad combined with the Mehdi Army’s ceasefire, will now have to tie itself in rhetorical knots to explain how this success is now adrift in the columns of black smoke rising from one of the two main oil pipelines passing through the port-transit city of Basra, and why rocket-propelled grenades and mortar rounds are splashing onto the Green Zone like a storm. This past January, I pointed out in a Truthdig article, that “The principle aim of The Surge is to break the power of Muqtada al-Sadr. Sadr not only has the seats in the Potemkin parliament of Iraq that put Maliki (a leader in a relatively small Shiite party, the Dawa) into power against the SCIRI (the largest parliamentary faction); he commands the ferocious loyalty of two and a half million people and has an 80,000-strong militia concentrated a stone’s throw from the U.S.-protected Green Zone in Baghdad. Baghdad has about 6 million people; New York City has 8 million, just by way of comparison. The population of Sadr City, the “neighborhood” under the leadership of Sadr, is approximately that of Brooklyn.” If I could figure this out from Raleigh, NC, why can’t the press figure it out with reporters embedded at the Green Zone? Perhaps I just answered my own question. Just as was pointed out 32 months ago, the American occupation has been thrown into alliance with Iranian-backed partitionist Shia formations (by pressure from Sadr, actually), yet it cannot afford the dangers inhering in Iraqi partition. Yet the most popular nationalist, anti-partition Shia leader in Iraq — Muqtada al Sadr — cannot be relied upon to support either the occupation (part of the plan for permanent US bases in Iraq) or the oil law that lies near the center of the frozen heart of the occupation. And so, his power must be destroyed… if that is even possible. Now the US has plunged the knife into the back of even the obedient Kurds, allowing Turkish forces to rampage through Iraqi Kurdistan. The list of allies is shrinking; and the myth of “surge-success” evaporates. Good morning, Vietnam. Category: General | Comment (RSS) 3 Comments Cliss: Some comments - 1. Muqtada al Sadr seems to be pursuing a strategy of dividing US troops and drawing them out of Baghdad. There are reports of simultaneous bombings in both Baghdad and Basra. 2. Of the two cities, Basra is more vulnerable. If Basra falls, then US troops will be forced to move into Basra. Basra is the only port in Iraq - oil gets transported out of there, and it’s also an extremely important supply route for US troops - equipment, food, materials = incredibly vulnerable. This seems to be the plan - draw US troops out of Baghdad to defend Basra. Next: al Sadr supporters storm the Iraqi Government. Declare victory. Demand that the U.S. get out immediately. 3. U.S. strategy has been a series of misjudgements of the problems and the misapplications of the solutions. Problems which could have had a diplomatic solution had a bomb dropped on top of them. The US’s first option seems to always be pull out the heavy artillery; just drop bombs on the problems in the hope that they will go away. 4. If Basra falls, it’s doubtful they can bomb the city indiscriminately. There is an oil facility and the Port can not sustain any damage; plus the oil pipeline. Also roads need to be in good repair for the supply vehicles. 5. After the smoke clears, Muqtada al Sadr will emerge as the power broker in Iraq. He has shown himself to be shrewd, 10 steps ahead of the slow-moving U.S. behemoth. He’s a popular leader. He’s survived several assassination attempts. 6. The only real power the US holds in this situation is to divide and conquer. That’s a position of extreme weakness. 7. The Iraqi troops working for Al Maliki should be considered to be “chameleons” meaning, at the least sign of trouble, they will abandon their allegiance to this unpopular man and go with Al Sadr. 9. My only advice to Mr. Petraeus would be: “You underestimate Muqtada Al Sadr at your own peril. The problems you are facing defy a military solution”. 27 March 2008, 5:59 pm peggy: “The problems you are facing defy a military solution”. Exactly. I think this is true of every problem on earth that might be named. 27 March 2008, 8:06 pm Kevin: Stan, Great essay, but I have some questions about the deal cut with the Sunni insurgency. Although JAM’s (the Mehdi Army for those unfamiliar with acronyms) ceasefire was a significant factor in the “success” of the surge the MSM constantly harped about the deal cut by the Sunnis against the so called Al-Qaeda in Iraq as being the most important part of the surge. Case in point was when our Coward in Chief met with a Sunni sheik that used to fight the Occupation forces but then accepted American aid after a deal was cut. Also the so called normalcy that the MSM reported in Fallujah suggested this. As troop deaths declined (until recently) the MSM talked less and less about the Sunnis. I was wondering if you had heard anything about how the Sunnis have been reacting to recent developments with JAM in Iraq? I know it is a vague question but the MSM has been really lacking in Iraq coverage lately and info about recent developments have hard to come by. Unless of course you believe the MSM when they say things are getting better in Iraq. All I am trying to say is that Bush’s surge has been a success in that aspect since reliable info on recent developments in Iraq has been exceedingly difficult to come by. STAN: The deal wasn’t cut without big bucks. In Anbar, they have been paying guerrillas to not attack Americans and accept weapons and training “to fight al Qaeda,” a reference to foreign fighters as well as rival political Islamists from Iraq. This was in the wake of basically ceding Anbar and parts of Saladin and Ninevah to the political control of Sunni nationalists… who have the best of all worlds now. Free money and guns from the US to fight local rivals, local political control, the opportunity to build and strengthen, and eventually turn the guns on the occupation… after the US figures out how to deal with the fact that their only allies outside of the Sunni Triangle and Kurdistan (ie, most of Iraq) are also Iranian allies. It would be funny if it weren’t such a sea of horror. 28 March 2008, 1:00 am _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
