Exactly who's in charge in Iraq?

There's a lot going on in Iraq that's subtle, easily missed unless we read between the lines. The question of whether Iraq will end up with a political, military, or religious leadership seems to be the question of the day for many of us. Islamanazi brought the following to my attention this morning and I think it deserves close watch:

It’s suddenly looking very much like the hoped-for democratic, elected Iraqi government is going to be superceded by military rule. This excerpt from ABC News Online gives clear evidence of a shift in power:

“The spokesman for the Iraqi forces engaged alongside US troops in enforcing the Baghdad security plan, Brigadier General Qassim Atta, says many other districts already have or will have some form of barrier. [snip]

... Asked about the wall on Sunday, Mr Maliki said: “I am opposed to the building of the wall and its construction is going to stop”.

But Brig Gen Atta says nothing has changed. “We have begun construction of these barriers in many Baghdad areas… We will continue to construct security barriers in Adhamiyah neighbourhood,” he said.”

Brig. General Atta seems to be more in charge than his government. This may be the real shift in direction that our forces are taking. (go read it all at Islamanazi.com)

The debate continues as to whether it is even possible to have a democratic government in Iraq.

There is no example of the West successfully imposing a democracy on any Middle Eastern country. [snip] — a point made over and again by, among others, Bernard Lewis, a leading historian, scholar of the region and administration adviser.

Nor does the historical record offer any comfort on the matter of insurgencies. Since World War II, with hardly any exceptions, insurgencies have succeeded against occupying democratic powers. This is the case, without exception, [snip]

Needed concepts like the “loyal opposition,” and “federalism,” and confidence in an independent police and interior ministry — are absent in Iraq’s tribal society which lacks even an Arabic word for democracy.
(Generals dodge a bullet on Iraq war, By Stefan Halper, The Washington Times via Peace and Freedom)

A comment to the above article by no2liberals:

Not the least being the propagandist from the enemy within. Who could blame the Generals for refusing a position, where they will be given the same treatment, or worse, than Gen. Petraeus has received, from the Dhimmicrat Congress critters?

A View From The Right brings our attention to 'four vast underwater uranium enrichment sites along the banks of the Euphrates':

Melanie Phillips reproduces a lengthy memo from John Loftus of the Intelligence Summit to the U.S. Congress that tells a well-nigh incredible story: the Iraq Survey Group in 2003 found four vast underwater uranium enrichment sites along the banks of the Euphrates; but then the information about this important discovery was unaccountably lost, and John Negroponte, then head of U.S. Intelligence, has covered up these facts ever since. As I said, several aspects of this story seem too incredible to be true, but the memo is fascinating and worth a read.

What's going on with Moqtada al-Sadr, so-called national unity, oil-revenue sharing, and the Baghdad security plan?

The talks with the General Staff of the Turkish Army went exceedingly well. JAM and the Turkish Army find themselves in advance of common cause in destabilizing the Kurdish Autonomous Region. A series of direct measures have been agreed to, including political assassination, but of the Kurdish leadership. With the Turkish Army providing necessary logistical support to the JAM Political-Military Affairs and Special Operations Command.

Helping facilitate the deterioration of the Northern security situation will force Barzani to recall his troops from Baghdad, adding further pressures on the U.S. Army, with the objective of making JAM cooperation even more critical to success of the BSP. --Albrecht Gero Muth, adviser to al-Sadr

In response to "Moktada al-Sadr’s Gambit" in the New York Times, Albrecht Gero Muth, adviser to al-Sadr, has this:

He [Sadr] is not the most sophisticated/ or educated of chaps, as Dr. Hakim keeps impressing upon me.

The distinction between Sadrists separating from the government versus separating from the Parliamentary bloc is very important. If alone for underscoring the coordination of the move with Grand ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani. Moreover, because it provides al-Sadr with one leg, internal to government, just enough to keep the sub-Cabinet types in place and to continue to influence government decision making at the technical level, while having the other leg, external to government, where he gets to rouse the masses.

Al-Sadr acquiesces to the U.S. troop presence, however grudgingly even the surge, because, like the PM, he realizes that their presence is NOW essential to keeping the tilting ship from sinking. As I indicated in the Memorandum to General Pace of 10 April 2007, al-Sadr is willing to give the Americans a year, if not more, to make this work!!!

... al-Sadr does, not yet, (?) have the votes necessary to stage the Parliamentary insurrection, of which I spoke in the Food for Thought Paper of 6 March 2007. That is, yet, to come!!! If the parties, which include the United States, continue to take account of the political currents beginning to shift in al-Sadr’s favor and do not engage him, politically, on his agenda, i.e. Shia Empowerment and an enhanced role of the religious in Iraq’s public sphere ...

... Working on linking al-Sadr up with Arun Gandhi, the Mahatma’s grandson. Picture the two, walking arms-in-arm, from Kufa to Najaf, chanting, We Shall Overcome.

The military and political tracks are diverging.

The draft oil-revenue sharing bill, pending before Parliament, will be dead by end of May. Not worth the paper it’s printed. As I indicated, when it was passed by the government. Done solely for window dressing. To placate Washington.

General Petraeus may have set himself up for defeat, given, inter alia, the manifest shortcomings in manpower, political will and time to see the plan through. … To work, all elements of the plan would have to come together, flawlessly, which presupposes a level of coordination/ cooperation with the Iraqis which, to date, has been found wanting. Moreover, the military outflanks the political, running the risk of proceeding independent thereof.

Shortcomings in manpower? Lack of political will? Not enough time to see the plan through? Whose fault will it be if Iraq ends up in military hands? Or if Iraq ends up in Sadr's hands? Or perhaps if Iraq ends up in the hands of a weak, ineffective government? It won't be the United States military at fault. There will be plenty of fault to go around, starting with President George W. Bush not putting in enough troops at the beginning, ... spreading to an ineffective United States congress, ... to Iraqis more interested in killing Sunni/Shiites than uniting to save their country. And last but not least, blame goes to al-Qaeda who don't care who they kill.

The future of Iraq could change the future of the entire region. Right now that future could tip in any direction.

Comments

[Stormwarning]

Faultline, what does the "leftist controlled" media have to do with an objective view of the situation in Iraq?

- insufficient troop strength from the beginning

- inadequately armored troops and vehicles from the beginning

- strategic miscalculations

- misunderstanding of the cultural dynamics of Iraqi society

- underestimating the importance of al-Sadr

Aside from all of that stuff, I hesitate to venture the question of media ownership...or ownership in Hollywood. Its on a very thin razor blade that you walk when you cast aspersions on the "leftist owned" media.

[Faultline USA]

Debbie:

This is so frustrating! I’m still trying to understand the “wisdom” of building the wall. No matter how accurately you have tried to assess whose fault will it be if Iraq ends up in military hands, if we fail there the left will have the last say and the blame WILL fall on Bush . How could it otherwise given the state of the leftist owned MSM today?

[Angel]

Sigh..Debbie the civil war and the current situation appears bleak doesnt it?..:(

[Stormwarning]

Debbie, as I commented earlier in another thread, I have difficulty seeing a military (dictatorship) government emerging, but certainly, I can't be sure. As for Sadr, I still maintain that he's been a amjor factor since the beginning and nearly everything he has done recently has been to flex his clerical muscles.

But when you look at the Iraqi people themselves, I have to go back to my post, "The Seven Pillars and the Cultural Divide in Iraq" in which a number of basic cultural issues were discussed.

http://moonagewebdream.blogs.com/storms_counter_terrorism/2007/03/the_seven_pilla.html

It is no surprise that Iraqi versus Iraqi fighting has ensued. Because in reality, there isn't an Iraq. There are people, Kurds, Sunnis, Shi'a and as of my post last night, the Yazidis (among other small sects).

Again, though, I find it interesting that you, someone on the "right side" would make a negative statement about GWB. Miscalculations have been made. Both strategic and tactical.