"If the Americans reach an agreement with the local [Baathist]
resistance, there won't be any room for foreign fighters,"

"The United States is not our strategic enemy. Our strategic enemy is
Iran. We want to end the war with America." That is why they insist on
direct talks with the Americans. During Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's
reign, they refused to deal with the Iraqi government. "Now their
position appears to have softened," the diplomat says. "They will talk
to this government, but the United States must be involved as well."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8770160/site/newsweek/

Talking With the Enemy

Part of what's bringing these people to the negotiating table is their
fear that Iraq's insurgency is being taken over by jihadists.
By Fareed Zakaria
Newsweek

Aug. 8, 2005 issue - Gen. George Casey's remark last week that the
United States might begin to draw down troops in Iraq reminds me of
the words of another George almost 40 years ago. In 1966 a Republican
senator from Vermont, George Aiken, had a solution to the morass in
Vietnam: "Declare victory and get out." Casey's remarks were not in
the same vein, but the basic idea appears to be similarâ€"redefine
success to a less demanding level. There's only one problem: the Iraqi
insurgency has not yet agreed to this plan. And if it doesn't, leaving
Iraq will mean that a large part of the country will remain highly
unstable and serve as a training ground for jihadist terror groups.
Avoiding that outcome must be the minimum definition of success in
Iraq. The good news is there is a real prospect of achieving this new
(more modest) goal.

The Iraqi insurgency is, broadly speaking, made up of two parts: a
rebellion directed by Baathists and former generals that styles itself
as nationalist; and a radical Islamic terror movement, filled with
foreigners. America's goal must be to split the insurgency, which can
be done only by co-opting some important elements of the Baathist
movement. A senior non-U.S. diplomat, who has spoken to all the key
figures in Iraq over the past two years, tells me that for months
leaders of the insurgency have been putting out feelers that they
would like to talk with the United States about a settlement. (U.S.
and Iraqi civilian and military officials have confirmed various
aspects of this story.) So far the United States has refused to go
down this path. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's description of
contacts between Army officers and local insurgents is accurate, but
these contacts have been few and far between and, more important,
neither side has any authority to negotiate anything. Salih al-Mutlaq,
whose National Dialogue Council has links to the insurgents, argues
that negotiating with them would cripple the jihadists. "If the
Americans reach an agreement with the local [Baathist] resistance,
there won't be any room for foreign fighters," he says.

My diplomatic source argues that the people he has talked to appear
credible and are willing to be tested (by ceasing their attacks for a
week, for example). Their message to him has been, "The United States
is not our strategic enemy. Our strategic enemy is Iran. We want to
end the war with America." That is why they insist on direct talks
with the Americans. During Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's reign, they
refused to deal with the Iraqi government. "Now their position appears
to have softened," the diplomat says. "They will talk to this
government, but the United States must be involved as well." They
don't want sporadic conversations but rather a real political process.

Part of what's bringing these people to the negotiating table is their
fear that the insurgency in Iraq is being taken over by jihadists. The
latter kill civilians and foreign diplomats, and blow up mosques,
which gets them publicity but enrages the Iraqi public. The Baathists
claim that they are conducting a classic "resistance" against foreign
and Iraqi government forces only.

Some politicians in Iraq are farther along on this route than the
United States government is, and none more so than the ever-supple
Ahmad Chalabi. According to the diplomat, Chalabi has talked to some
of these Baathists and has discussed their demands with Iraq's two
most senior political leaders, Abdel Aziz al-Hakim and Prime Minister
Ibrahim Jaafari. Hakim is said to be opposed to their demands, and
Jaafari is ambivalent. (A spokesman for Chalabi in Baghdad, Entifadh
Qanbar, denied Chalabi had talked directly to "masked" insurgents, but
he confirmed he has had discussions with groups like the National
Dialogue Council. Allawi has long advocated such talks.)

The Baathists have several demands, chief among them the restoration
of the Baath Party. "Again, here they have shifted," the diplomat
says. "They would be willing to rename the party, but they believe
that they should be allowed to contest for votes in Iraq and be a
political player in the country." They also want a clear statement
from the United States that its forces will leave Iraqâ€"not right away,
but within some reasonable time frame. In addition, they want the
release of people imprisoned for what they claim are "political
crimes"â€"i.e., being Baathists. Their other demands mirror the concerns
of many Sunni leaders. "They are willing to make an exception for the
Kurds," says the diplomat, "but they don't want a constitution that
creates a weak center and strong regions." They are also opposed to
the single-district electoral system, which places them in the company
of many American and Iraqi experts.

Zalmay Khalilzad's arrival as the new U.S. ambassador in Iraq provides
an opportunity to test these waters. Khalilzad is a superb diplomat
who understands that insurgencies are difficult to defeat by military
means alone. (And he knows that talking to people does not mean
acceding to all their demands.) The United States has shifted its Iraq
policy substantially over the past year. Having disbanded the Army and
de-Baathified the government, it now advocates aggressive moves to
co-opt the Sunnis. It should explore this next big step.

Write the author at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
<font face=arial size=-1><a 
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hp1baoi/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705323667:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1122950877/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992
">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to