Shifting sands in Iraq

Nothing is written in stone when it comes to Iraq. The last few weeks I've been talking about the United States backing the Shia and now the New York Times thinks it's the Sunni we are arming. If you count supporting the Iraqi military units and police, "allied with the Americans, with arms, ammunition, cash, fuel and supplies", then yes, we are arming the Sunni and Shia.

American commanders are turning to another strategy that they acknowledge is fraught with risk: arming Sunni Arab groups that have promised to fight militants linked with Al Qaeda who have been their allies in the past. [snip]

American officers who have engaged in what they call outreach to the Sunni groups say many of them have had past links to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia but grew disillusioned with the Islamic militants’ extremist tactics, particularly suicide bombings that have killed thousands of Iraqi civilians. In exchange for American backing, these officials say, the Sunni groups have agreed to fight Al Qaeda and halt attacks on American units. Commanders who have undertaken these negotiations say that in some cases, Sunni groups have agreed to alert American troops to the location of roadside bombs and other lethal booby traps.

But critics of the strategy, including some American officers, say it could amount to the Americans’ arming both sides in a future civil war. The United States has spent more than $15 billion in building up Iraq’s army and police force, whose manpower of 350,000 is heavily Shiite.

If these groups turn against al-Qaeda and start helping the United States and the coalition, isn't this a good thing?

There is more information on a Saddam-Iraq-al-Qaeda connection prior to September 11, 2001.

... pre-war documents posted online by the Pentagon included a letter from a member of Saddam's intelligence apparatus indicating al-Qaeda and the Taliban had a relationship with the regime prior to the 9/11 attacks. A letter by the member of Saddam's Al Mukabarat to a superior, dated Sept. 15, 2001, reported a pre-9/11 conversation between an Iraqi intelligence source and a Taliban Afghani consul. The information had been released on the orders of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte, and the letter was reviewed by an independent Middle East analyst who concluded it appeared genuine. The letter indicated bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan were in contact with Iraq – noting a specific visit to Baghdad – and said the U.S. had proof Saddam's regime and al-Qaeda were cooperating to hit a target in the U.S. The documents also suggested the possibility the U.S. could strike Iraq and Afghanistan if an attack on the U.S. proved to be tied to bin Laden and the Taliban. (WND)

It seems that Iran and Syria are behind the latest attempt to kidnap Israeli soldiers, while at the same time they are active in Iraq (and still going forward with their nuclear programs).

The proxy war continues, as appeasement fails once again. Israel offers the Golan Heights and Iran and Syria order the Palestinians to kidnap Israeli soldiers. [snip]

"This operation was an Iranian and Syrian way to explode things and have another card on the table," said a Palestinian security official. (

WND and Jihad Watch, cross posted from The American Israeli Patriot (read it all here))

Turkish troops are massing along Iraq's Northern border ... again.

Kurdish leaders say they doing all they can to contain anti-Turkish rebels, and that they want a peaceful and strategic relationship with Turkey. [snip]

The Kurdistan Regional Government's representative to the United States, Qubad Talabany, is the son of Iraq's president Jalal Talabany. He says that Kurds will participate in Iraq as long as it remains a federal system with a weak central government. (NPR)

Iraq the Model talks about the escalation of insanity which "began with a highly offensive joint statement by president Talabani and Masoud Barazani president of Kurdistan" published on al-Mashriq newspaper on June 6.

With regret and puzzlement the political bureaus of the KDP and PUK were informed about the statement dated April 29, 2007 that announces the formation of a political front that includes, in addition to the Islamic Party and Wifaq* movement, long-time traitors of the Kurdish people, the orphans of Saddam the butcher and chauvinist elements who are enemies of the rights and aspirations of the Iraqi people in its two major ethnicities, Arabic and Kurdish…

The meeting that was set up by the intelligence services of foreign countries led to the formation of a political front that is against the democratic march of the Iraqi people and working to destroy their constitutional achievements… (more)

Omar concludes:

... the Kurds are careful about protecting their alliance with the Shia alliance not out of patriotic feelings. It’s about the tactical cooperation through which the Kurds want to put article 140 — which will decide the future of Kirkuk — into action. This is because the Shai alliance doesn’t care much about Sunni Kirkuk. After all there’s much more easy oil to be had in the south.

And so it goes. September is fast approaching. If Iraqis, Sunni and Shia, will continue to turn against al-Qaeda ... perhaps there is hope they can work together to bring peace and a stable government to their country. I hope so.

See Death Tolls and the blogosphere today at Wake Up America

Comments

[spree]

Awesome post and thanks for the link!!

[Layla]

The situation is quite complicated in Iraq. And this is just more damning proof.

[David M]

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 06/11/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.

[Phil]

Hi Debbie,

Did any of them think that It could amount to the U.S. arming both sides against us?