A Path to Victory in Iraq *Exclusive*

*EXCLUSIVE* A Path to Victory in Iraq

I've been given an exclusive and amazing peek behind the diplomatic scene in Iraq. The next few months should be very interesting. Gen. David Petraeus assessed Thursday what he needs to succeed in Iraq; 2,200 more soldiers; more time; and compromise.

... he said, the "critical" issue for Iraq was whether a spirit of compromise – elusive during four years of war – will emerge among Iraq's politicians. He said the US job is to provide security that could help calm sectarian passions and create space for politics to work.

"Any student of history recognizes there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq,'' General Petraeus, who helped pen America's new counterinsurgency manual before taking up his new post, told reporters. Instead, what's needed is political "reconciliation ... for people who felt that Iraq did not have a place for them."

... it will be "critical" to work with some of the militants who have been fighting to undermine the government. (Christian Science Monitor)

To achieve Gen. Petraeus' goals, Albrecht Gero Muth, former special adviser to UN Sec-Gen Kofi Annan, in Iraq, now advising the Hojatoleslam Moqtadir al-Sadar, has been kind enough to share behind the scenes diplomacy:

(March 6,2007) ... the objective of furthering the common objective of a timely victory for the United States Army in the Battle for Baghdad. [snip] 180 days and counting.

The plan calls for Taliban to take the lead with a spring offensive, with Hamas to follow suit. With JAM to revisit the issue of cooperating on the PM’s security plan for Baghdad in mid-summer. That leaves me 90 days to get the relevant parties onto the same song sheet. Which puts us into mid-June, which is about when GEN Petraeus will present a preliminary assessment to the President. At that time, JAM/ Sadrists will have to make an important determination as to whether to continue to cooperate or not. A determination, which will be based as much on actions to be taken by the al-Maliki Government, as on actions to be taken by the United States Government, either at the level of the military High Command, or the Administration.

I do not share the general assessment that the mess over here could not be cleaned up. In fact, a number of developments are discreetly evolving, which bode well, should we be permitted to translate the motion being generated into momentum. I like to think that, with the successful move of Iraqi and U.S. military forces into Sadr City this week, my earlier assertions on al-Sadr’s willingness to engage, constructively, stand confirmed. As I said in my statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, ongoing discreet talks on common ground should be further encouraged and expanded.

The next two weeks will be important in helping set the course of action for JAM and the Sadrist movement. On the Ides of March, I shall make formal presentation to al-Sadr, either recommending a break with the al-Maliki government, or for Sadrists to continue to participate in the government. That recommendation will be based, inter alia, on (1.) an equitable Cabinet reshuffle. Al-Sadr can learn to live with two Cabinet Ministers, two Deputy Cabinet Ministers, and two Permanent Secretaries, keeping the overall number of Sadrists in senior executive branch function to the distribution key, agreed upon as part of the Coalition Agreement. The PM has been reminded as to whom he owes his office, given that he was not, nor is now, Washington’s first choice. The PM has gained a new appreciation that it would be counter-productive for him to reopen contentious issues, which are best considered to have been redressed as part of the Coalition Agreement. (2.) success of the Iraq Conference, to be held in Baghdad, 10 March 2007, in helping advance linkage/ a constructive parallelism between non-interference by outside powers (Iran) and timely/ phased withdrawal of all foreign forces, regular and irregular. (U.S. and al-Qaeda) Within this context, all ears will be on AMB Satterfield and the Iranian delegate. The Arab League Foreign Minister Statement of 4 March 2007 has strengthened al-Sadr’s hand in advance of a timetable. His statement of 25 February 2007 must be seen in this context.

Continued participation of Sadrists in the al-Maliki government plays as much to advantage as disadvantage. The advantage of being part of the governing authority and able to advance/ control policy, in furtherance of the Sadrists’ larger political agenda, must be weighed against the disadvantage of being tied to Government policy on the PM’s security plan for Baghdad and his close proximity to the Bush Administration, especially as the security plan were to fail/ perceived to fail to meet its objective. Any attack in Sadr City now lies fair and square on the door step of the al-Maliki Government and the Bush Administration. That puts an added need for action/ ready success on Iraqis and Americans, whereas al-Sadr can continue to take a wait and see posture, awaiting for the popular outcry, We want al-Sadr. Now. One may await the spontaneous response by the women of Sadr City to the next major attack. Al-Sadr can best galvanize popular resentment of the PM and Americans outside of government and, in order to regain the initiative as a protest movement, in advance of a movement for national liberation from outside occupation/ interference, he may have to opt out to help pave his way back in.

A similar dynamic is at work for the Administration. It plays to America’s advantage to have Sadrists tied to Government policy, while exploring feasibility/ advisability of a possible entente cordial in expanding the security plan to the provinces and in helping position Shia Arab Iraq against Shia Non-Arab Iran in the forthcoming showdown. On the other hand, there is advantage in forcing Sadrists to the margin, especially should one have convinced oneself that the showdown must be confrontational.

I have no issue with reigning in al-Sadr. Have been doing nothing since. If for now he is cooperating and there being no Iranians in his immediate vicinity, then I like to think that this is due, in some small measure, to my discreet influence on him. If there has to be a showdown then let it remain non-confrontational and nonviolent. Let’s opt for Sun over Clausewitz. Eventually, Americans and Sadrists will have to have a little chat on whether we are going to consummate the relationship and towards what end. As said, the coming 90 day-period will enable both sides to get their ducks in a row. The follow-on 90 day-period will be make or break: for Sadrists, as well as for the American war effort in Iraq. --Albrecht Gero Muth

Amazing information that makes those of us on the outside looking in sit back and take a deep, contemplative breath. Is it possible that these groups could actually come to some agreement and peace for Iraq prevail? The answer is a clear 'no' if the Democrats get their way. They are not willing to give General Petraeus time or more troops, as he has requested. We know the Democrats are in favor of diplomacy and 'talking' to all parties, but General Petraeus needs the time and troops in order to get the compromise necessary for victory in Iraq.

(March 9, 2007) ... I cannot pass up occasion to highlight the widely-noticed and well-received statement of GEN Petraeus of 8 March 2007. Especially those passages pertaining to willingness, on the part of the United States Army, to engage those elements of the Mehdi Army, amenable to participate in the political process, and the possibility for the Mehdi Army to reinvent itself, possibly as a “neighborhood watch,” as the GEN called it. [snip]

Also, Damien Cave in today’s edition of NYT references. Particular attention is invited to the passage, which addresses the job applications of various members/ former members of the Mehdi Army, which are pending with the various executive departments of the Government of the Arab Republic of Iraq. My earlier transmissions in this regard, including the message of 7 March 2007, in which I said, that the Hoyatoleslam Moqtadir al-Sadar could be swayed to relinquish Cabinet-level posts for a stronger hand in the career bureaucracy, notably the political directorates, references.

... It is assumed that the “Orange Juice formula,” available to the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, will also be available to a Cabinet Minister of the Arab Republic of Iraq, independent of party affiliation, with the objective of discussing those issues, “germane to Conference deliberations,” as AMB Satterfield is quoted to have told the Mayor of Sadr City. --Albrecht Gero Muth

In order for the 'orange juice formula' to take place, the parties must be within reach of the orange juice, so to speak. That possibility is available to all parties tomorrow, March 10, 2007. Could it be as simple as 'giving young Mahdi militants jobs as an alternative to lives of violence and by providing residents with proof of the government’s ability to improve their daily lives' that true peace could be achieved? Isn't it worth a try?

“Restoration of public order and restoration of sovereignty is linked, just as is national reconciliation and national liberation.”

The international conference, which will convene under the auspices of the Government of the Arab Republic of Iraq at Baghdad on 10 March 2007, the Shia festival of Ashoura, will be an important step on the journey ahead, in advance of restoring Iraqi self-governance and sovereignty. In acknowledging the operant dynamic at work between non-interference by outside powers/ the timely withdrawal of all foreign forces, regular and irregular, and the restoration of public order the Conference can make an important contribution to the National Liberation of Iraq and National Reconciliation.

It is with profound sorrow that the Hoyatoleslam feels compelled to note that, as GEN Petraeus has stated, “demons are intent on derailing the process about to be launched.” A further deteriorating security situation affecting the Shia faithful in both Baghdad and Karbala is making it increasingly difficult for the Hoyateoelslam to remain on the sidelines of what could turn into a crisis of leadership/ competence and credibility on the part of the Government of the Arab Republic of Iraq. A growing perception of incompetence on the part of the Government of the Arab Republic of Iraq and the Prime Minister of the Day, and “acquiescence on the part of the United State Government to the wholesale slaughter of the Shia faithful,” must be reversed.

Despite considerable pressures to deploy JAM in order to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the Shia faithful this weekend amidst mounting Sunni insurgent violence, the Hoyatoleslam has decided to continue to engage, constructively. GEN Petraeus has given assurances that Iraqi political and religious authorities will be given the authority and opportunity to help in ensuring the safety of the Shia faithful during the coming festivities. JAM/ Sadrists will abide by their commitment to help maintain public order and calm.

At the request of the U.S. High Command, in acquiescence with the Government of the Arab Republic of Iraq, the safety and well-being of the Shia faithful this weekend will rest solely with Iraqi and U.S. military and security forces. The Hoyatoleslam wishes them well. It is assumed that the volatility of the unfolding situation on the eve of Ashoura and the international conference is being fully appreciated.

One may hope that all parties are up to the task, ahead. Towards the end of advancing common cause one would hope for maximum coordination desirable/ possible in the coming days. JAM/ Sadrists stand ready to lend a helping hand. --Albrecht Gero Muth

According to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, “Democrats in the Senate have, at latest count, had 16 versions of various proposals to interfere with the president’s ability and General Petraeus’s ability to conduct this mission successfully.” The Democrats latest bill would make that number 17, all working against General Petraeus, President George W. Bush, our troops, and people like Albrecht Gero Muth. We can only pray for the time needed for VICTORY.
_________________________________________________________________
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, Big Dog's Weblog, Shadowscope, A Few Shiny Pebbles, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, Rightlinx, Right Celebrity, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, , Pirate's Cove, Overtaken by Events, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Right Pundits, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Random Yak, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Cao's Blog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Florida Masochist, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Allie Is Wired, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, High Desert Wanderer, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Comments

[Machiavelligz]

It is a shame Petraeus wasn't running the occupation from the get go.

But at least, with the appointment of Gates and Petraeus, we've seen positive moves toward victory.

Too bad the Democrats motto is give defeat a chance

[Debbie]

Thanks everybody. I was amazed and very thankful to get this amazing information. We sit back here in the US and don't really know all that is going on behind the scenes. It truly is a balancing act for the diplomats.

I am hoping for something very positive from this conference.

[Ernesto Ribeiro]

At last, we get a deep vision from the front. Objective, ample, well-researched. It uncovered many questions. Congratulations, Ms. Hamilton.

OK, Gen. Petraeus: HOW MANY time? WHAT A compromise of WHO? Sunnis, Shiites? Clerigs such as al-Sadr? Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a colaborator for Iran? May God hear you. Reconciliation or just conciliation? That peoples always hated each other. For 1300 years, Shiites were slaves. Americans gave them freedom, and opened Pandora’s box. Now, what’s the surprise? You can’t bring them democracy without a democratic culture, education, peace. For Muslims, it’s a joke. For good intentioned persons, it’s just an utopia.

The real question is: WHY the West would have to be tied to compromises in Iraq even after elections? ALL islamic people just hate us; and destroy Saddam didn’t change this fact. That’s the first important point in the article.

And for “people who felt that Iraq did not have a place for them" the best solution would be dividing Iraqi territory among Curds, Sunnis and Shiites. And a Neutral Zone for Christians and other “infidels”. That’s a solution for the roots of that problem: Iraq itself was stupidly and artificially created by British Empire. It NEVER should exist. That’s the second good point.

The next moves are practicable. I really can see an exit near. Democrats NEED work now, even to show more competence to manage Iraq problem. Then let’s bet in an equitable Cabinet reshuffle, success of the International Conference, neutralizing Iran and al-Qaeda. The exit door was there. And al-Sadr is the key. 10 March begins the counterclock.

[GUYK]

Bush has had to lead the fight on three fronts against three enemies..the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Terrorists in Iraq, and the America hating democrats in congress. Of the three I have came to the conclusion that the democrats may be a bigger threat to the security and survival of the USA than the Islamic terrorists..at least we can shoot the terrorsits..it is easier to ask forgiveness after they are dead than to get permission to shoot them tough. The democrats? Hell..we cannot even defeat them at the polls..they keep buying votes for a pack of cigarttes..then try to ban smoking.

[John E. Carey]

Debbie: Very nicely done!

John E. Carey
http://johnib.wordpress.com/

[Rosemary]

Hi Debbie. Great post. However I hate al Sadr. I hope he rots in hell, and I don't mind saying so. I want him dead. He has too much blood on his hands. We do NOT negotiate with terrorists. Period. Now I have to go vote for you. ;)

[Mushy]

Great insight and an important read - thanks Debbie.

[Longstreet]

Way to go, lady!

Best regards,

Longstreet

[Debbie]

Night Rider, you can only vote one time at RCP.

Thanks everybody. Blandy, I did put it up at RCP just now. Never done that before, and never sent out a group email before. Thanks to Fred I know know how to do it.

I appreciate all the kind words. And thankful to Mr. Muth for sharing this information with me.

[Night Rider]

Hi Debbie,

I voted, I had a different email address at the time when I signed up for Real Clear politics voting but I did vote just so that you know.

I don't know is how many times can one vote, it's been a long time ago since I have voted on Real Clear Politics?

[loshon hara]

Great article Debbie!

[Blandly Urbane]

Are you going to put this up at Real Clear? You should - this gives the possibility of success some ground to stand on.

Too bad the Dems are really only interested in themselves; we can't do this with them aiding and abetting the wrong side.

Great post and info - thanks Debbie and Fred for passing on the link to this post.

[Angel]

Is it possible that these groups could actually come to some agreement and peace for Iraq prevail? The answer is a clear 'no' if the Democrats get their way. ..Exactly Debbie!..Keep us posted..great work! :)

[Debbie]

Thanks everybody, and Fred I really appreciate what you are doing.

[TexasFred]

Debbie, I am sending this to my email group too, it's a great piece...

Fred

[Faultline USA]

Debbie:
This is an amazing exclusive! Congratulations. The complexity of the situation in Iraq boggles the mind. The only sure thing we can bank on is that the Democrats WILL attempt to sabotage General Petraeus and our President!!!

[Night Rider]

Hi Debbie,

I really think that they should give Gen. David Petraeus what ever he needs to get the Job done, he sure should have been the one doing this from the very beginning, this guy knows his stuff.