Showdown in Najaf
US wants al-Sadr, but Iraq's top ayatollahs give him their support.
by Tom Regan | csmonitor.com
Agence-France Press reports that US troops Tuesday briefly seized a key senior aide to radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Sheikh Hazem al-Aaraji was taken in for "questioning" as he attended a meeting of tribal leaders at the Sheraton Hotel in Baghdad. Mr. Aaraji last week led anti-US protests that gridlocked the city center. The Toronto Star reports Monday the US High Command in Iraq issued a "Wanted, Dead or Alive" order for Mr. Sadr, who is in Najaf, Iraq's holiest Shiite city. Sadr, the Guardian reports, has said that he is "willing to die" for the campaign to end the US occupation of Iraq.
Tuesday the US moved 2,500 troops near Najaf including armored units, but not without incident. The Associated Press reports that the convoy hit a roadside bomb and was attacked by gunmen. One American soldier was killed, while several others were wounded, including a US civilian contractor.
But despite the show of force, it won't be that easy to capture Sadr in Najaf, reports AP. The prospect of a battle there (especially around Sadr's office, which is very close to the Imam Ali Shrine, the Shiite religion's holiest site) upsets many Iraqis. AP also reports that the US commander of the force outside Najaf said his troops were aware that a "single shot in Najaf" could outrage Iraq's powerful Shiite majority. "Look at this as the Shiite Vatican," Col. Dana J. H. Pittard told reporters before the deployment.
On Monday, USA Today reports that the sons of Iraq's top Shiite clerics, including the son of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, met with Sadr and told him they will oppose any move by the US to capture him in Najaf.
Al Jazeera reported Tuesday that other Iraqi leaders have been trying to mediate a deal between the coalition forces and Sadr. They propose that in exchange for Sadr openly renouncing violence, the US will agree not to arrest him. Monday General John Abizaid, head of US Central Command, did hint at a "uniquely Iraqi solution" to the problem, despite his rhetoric about Sadr being wanted, "dead or alive."
GeoTV reports that Mr. Abizaid, in a conference-call briefing to reporters Monday, announced that he was asking the US Department of Defense to send several thousand additional troops (at least two brigades) to Iraq. He could not say how long they might be needed. The Seattle Times reports the US needs the soldiers to regain control of the roads in Iraq, which have become increasingly dangerous for US soldiers and foreign contractors. One contractor, in an e-mail to the Times, said the "rebels own the roads" in Iraq.
Halliburton, the US company that has a $3.2 billion contract for delivering most of the military supplies in Iraq, said Monday it had suspended some convoys, raising the danger of shortages in food, fuel and water if the situation continues. Privately, company officials expressed concerns about security provided to the convoys. Halliburton's fuel convoys are protected by US soldiers under the terms of a contract signed in December 2001.
In his conference call, Albawaba.com reports, Abizaid also attacked two Arab-language TV stations for "lying" about what was happening in Fallujah. Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, he said, were making it look at if US forces were targeting civilians during its anti-insurgency operation there over the past week.
"They have not been truthful in their reporting," Abizaid said of the two Arab television stations. "They haven't been accurate. And it is absolutely clear that American forces are doing their very best to protect civilians and at the same time get at the military targets there."
Al Jazeera spokesman Jihad Ballout defended the stations' coverage. "I don't think pictures lie. We have tried to be as comprehensive as possible," Mr. Ballout said from the station's headquarters in Qatar. A spokesman for Al Arabiya said its coverage merely reflected "both sides of the story."
Rory McCarthy, in an analysis for the Guardian, said some of the US's main problems in Iraq have been a "rigid adherence to military doctrine that has repeatedly caused problems," combined with a lack of diplomacy, and an inability to form strategic alliances.
George Lopez, international security expert at the University of Notre Dame in the US, told the Associated Press: "We have taken a low-level cleric and made him into a national symbol of resistance against the Americans, just before an Islamic holy day. And we have backed al-Sistani, our one major hope for preaching calm and patience among the Shiites, into a corner."
Fareed Zakaria, writing in Newsweek, also says this "rigid adherence" to a particular set of ideas about the way to move forward in Iraq can also be found in the White House.
The Bush administration went into Iraq with a series of prejudices about Iraq, rogue states, nation-building, the Clinton administration, multilateralism and the UN. It believed Iraq was going to vindicate these ideological positions. As events unfolded the administration proved stubbornly unwilling to look at facts on the ground, new evidence and the need for shifts in its basic approach. It was more important to prove that it was right than to get Iraq right.
Anne Penketh, the diplomatic editor of the Independent, looks at four possible scenarios for Iraq, including "Continued occupation," "Cut and run," "UN takes over," and "A fudge." Ms. Penketh writes that the "fudge" option is the most likely outcome.
Fudge: Escalating conflict means crisis management comes beforeplanning. Handover postponed as conflict deepens while talks with the UN bog down. Troop reinforcements discussed but not dispatched. Insurgents and terrorists are emboldened, sensing the occupiers are on the run.
Tom Friedman, columnist for The New York Times, writes that both sides need to change their tactics. The US needs to reach out for international support, and Arab nations around the region have to realize that a positive outcome for Iraq is in their best interests.
And that's why the Arab leaders need to talk to their sons and daughters. If the Arabs miss yet another decade of reform, because Iraq spins out of control while the world speeds ahead, they will find themselves outside the world system and dealing with plenty of their own Fallujahs. Talk to Arab youth today, and you will find so many of them utterly despondent at the complete drift in their societies. They are stuck in a sandstorm, where opportunities for young people to realize their potential are fading.
csmonitor.com |
