SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: KLP who wrote (27275)4/1/2008 4:25:26 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Respond to of 71588
 
What are you talking about, KLP?

(What do you think 'Sadr City' is?)

It's the low-end Shiite slum area of the capital.

(And the al Sadrs, first the father, killed by Saddam, and now the son... have always draw strong support from the poorer strata of the Shiite communities.)



To: KLP who wrote (27275)4/1/2008 4:36:42 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Respond to of 71588
 
IRAQI POWER STRUGGLES

Spiegel Online
The Big Prize of Basra


By Bernhard Zand
spiegel.de


Fighting in Basra once again laid bare rifts in Iraq.

Photos of the fighting:
spiegel.de


Iraq had been enjoying a period of relative peace. But the spate of violence in Basra last week showed that dangerous divisions remain in the war-torn country. And everyone has their eye on the same oil-rich prize.

The images are so terrible that no one has dared publish them. They depict the bodies of 15 women, old and young, veiled and unveiled, bullet-riddled and severely disfigured. One is already half decomposed. A group of young boys in track pants stands behind the body. They found it on the side of the road, somewhere in Basra.

Human rights activist Mohammed Tariq al-Darraji sent the photographs of the dead women to almost 300 Iraq correspondents, together with a note in broken English practically begging for their interest. The photos, the note read, depicted "gruesome crimes" committed by "criminal militias." According to al-Darraji, a total of 40 women have been tortured, shot and beheaded in Basra in recent months, some for wearing nail polish and others for going out in public without a headscarf. "We ask the reporters of the United Nations," the note continued, "when you see these pictures, why do you not do your duty?"

That was two weeks ago, and no one took up his story. And it is indicative of the fate often met by stories from Basra. Baghdad is the yardstick for measuring success or disaster in Iraq, not this run-down port city on the Gulf. The structure of postwar Iraq reflects a bitter continuation of policies begun 20 years ago under former dictator Saddam Hussein: The systematic neglect of the southern province, which, based on its oil wealth, could easily hold its own with booming emirates like Kuwait and Abu Dhabi, but is in fact a cesspool.

But as of last week, Basra has finally captured the attention that human rights activists like al-Darraji had been begging for in vain. On Tuesday, 30,000 Iraqi soldiers and police arrived in Basra to liberate the city from the plague of militias and looters that has kept it in a stranglehold for years. The city was to be cleansed of "evil elements" block after block, as Iraqi National Security Advisor Muwaffaq al-Rubaie announced. "Anyone who gets in our way will be dealt with quickly, decisively and without mercy," he added. But far from achieving its intended effect, the government's military posturing did not appear to intimidate the militias, at least not initially. In Basra, they danced boldly in front of the government forces' destroyed tanks. In other cities, like Hilla, Kut and Amara, they fired on police with rocket launchers, and in Baghdad they resumed their attacks on the Green Zone with rocket-propelled grenades.

'Illegal and Haphazard Raids'

But by Monday, it looked as though the Iraqi government had dodged a potentially dangerous crisis. Last week, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki called the battle for Basra "decisive and final." But then his troops ran into trouble against the militia fighters loyal to Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr.

On Sunday, though, even as sporadic fighting continued in both Basra and Baghdad, al-Sadr ordered his troops to clear the streets. In a nine-point statement broadcast in Shiite mosques in Baghdad and southern Iraq, al-Sadr called for the "armed presence" in Basra to come to an end and exhorted his followers "to cooperate with the government to achieve security." In exchange, he asked the government to release those who have been detained but not charged and demanded a halt to "illegal and haphazard raids."

The Iraqi government on Monday said that military operations in Basra would come to an end by the end of this week.

The brief surge in violence comes after an extended period of reduced violence in Iraq, which many have attributed to an increase in the number of US troops in the country. But the Basra fighting exposed a number of potentially explosive divisions which remain and raised questions which months of relative peace had pushed into the background: How unified is the nation of Iraq? How solid is the hold on power for both Prime Minister al-Maliki and his adversary al-Sadr? And, finally, how much influence does Iran exert on its weak neighbor?

A failure of the Iraqi army's offensive would have been disastrous. But its far-from-convincing success is likely to have reverberations as well. Early next week, Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus, the US supreme commander in Iraq, will appear before the US Congress to present their second report on the security plan put in place last year. Until now, it seemed as if last year's cautiously optimistic prognoses were indeed coming to fruition. But the renewed violence now threatens to return Iraq to the center of the US presidential election campaign. US President George W. Bush praised the Basra offensive last Thursday as a "defining moment" of the Iraqi government. According to Bush, it will return the country to "normalcy," despite the fact that Prime Minister al-Maliki's decision was "bold." It was undoubtedly bold, but why did al-Maliki choose this particular moment to launch the operation?

Eight months ago Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr reined in his feared militia, the Mahdi Army, and proclaimed a cease-fire. The group promptly obeyed his orders in Baghdad and in central Iraq, where there was soon a dramatic decline in the rate of sectarian murders. The young preacher withdrew to Iran for religious study. There, and at his headquarters in Najaf, say his confidantes, he is now seeking to acquire the religious credentials he needs to ascend to the rank of ayatollah. He extended the cease-fire in February, against the growing resistance of his own lieutenants.

Repackaged as a Leader

At the same time, the Americans' portrayal of Sadr has also changed. The Evil One of the last civil war, a man wanted by authorities and dubbed the "most dangerous man in Iraq" by Newsweek, has been repackaged as a leader to whom General Petraeus now attests a sense of responsibility. US military officials speaking on Iraqi television refer to him respectfully as "His Excellency Muqtada."

They know that they owe their successes partly to his withdrawal, and still do today. "Sadr is not the enemy," Ambassador Ryan Crocker said last week in Baghdad. The Americans, he added, are battling "special groups" and "extremist military elements" that Sadr apparently "doesn't have under control." But this is not the view of Sadr's Iraqi rivals, who now seek to deprive him of his power.

* Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, an Islamist like Sadr, is the head of the DAWA Party, Iraq's oldest and now deeply divided Shiite political group. Unlike Sadr, Maliki does not have his own private army. He needed -- and received -- Sadr's support when he was elected prime minister two years ago. He now has other allies, especially the US Army and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI).

* The leader of the ISCI is Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, the cancer-stricken head of a Shiite dynasty that has been wrestling with the Sadr clan for influence in southern Iraq for decades. His son and designated successor Ammar controls a vast business empire supported by a militia known as the Badr Brigades. Established in Iran and politically far more flexible than the Sadr group, the Hakims' ISCI enjoys both Tehran's and Washington's goodwill.

* Mohammed al-Waeli, known as the "oil prince," heads the Shiite Fadhila Party, which dominates the lucrative oil smuggling business on the Gulf. As the governor of Basra, al-Waeli competes simultaneously with Sadr, the Hakims and Maliki's DAWA Party for economic advantage. He is supported by a militia as well as by Basra security forces which have been infiltrated by his militia.

Potential Wealth

All of the militias are vying for one grand prize: the vast oil reserves in the earth below Basra. The profits on those reserves may be sparse at the moment, but hardly any other nation on earth has so much potential wealth concentrated in one place -- or is so vulnerable in one place. The mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway lies only 100 kilometers (62 miles) from Basra, and it is less than 50 kilometers (31 miles) from the port at Umm Qasr to the open waters of the Gulf.

Iraq's key pipelines run along this narrow strip (one of then was seriously damaged in an attack on Thursday), and the lion's share of imports coming into the country enters through the port of Umm Qasr. This port, along with the Southern Oil Company and its pumping stations, refineries and loading terminals, are Iraq's crown jewels, without which no militia could be funded and the country would ultimately be uncontrollable.

The fact that Muqtada al-Sadr, the most powerful of Iraq's militia leaders, withdrew for religious study offered his rivals a great opportunity. "They think he is gone for good," says Iraqi national Mustafa Alani of the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. "The governors will be newly elected in October. His rivals believe that if they can eliminate Sadr in Basra, they will also break his back in the remaining provinces. But they are deceiving themselves. They will only make him stronger."

The Baghdad government's insistence that the goal of the offensive was to indiscriminately disarm all militias in Basra proved to be disingenuous within the first few days of the fighting. The neighborhoods controlled by the Hakims' Badr Brigades and the Fadhila militia remained calm, while fighting raged on the edges of the Hayaniya and Qibla neighborhoods, the Mahdi Army strongholds. "This is where the problem lies," says Alani. "The government is not a neutral party in this conflict." According to Alani, the government forces focused on Sadr's militia while ignoring their own allies.

'Erase Them'

"We never witnessed such attacks even under the regime of Saddam Hussein," a Sadr supporter in Basra complained after the first wave of attacks on Tuesday. "Maliki gave orders and said: 'Erase them.'"

But Sadr is not defenseless. His troops were mobilized within hours throughout the country, even in cities that had been relatively calm since his withdrawal. "You are our shell, and we are your shrapnel!" his supporters cried. The militia chief himself, who is said to be in Iraq again, remained cautious until last Friday, allowing his militia to use weapons only for "self-defense" and calling for negotiations -- which Maliki categorically rejected.

The Brussels-based think tank International Crisis Group (ICG) warned in February that seeking to destroy the Mahdi Army, which grew rapidly in reaction to the acts of terror committed by the Sunni al-Qaida organization, is a dangerous undertaking doomed to failure. According to the ICG, the Mahdi Army, the militia of Iraq's poor and disenfranchised Shiites, is already too deeply entrenched.

The Americans seem to have understood this. They are now taking the same approach with the Shiites that has already been effective with the Sunnis: They recruit tribal leaders, promising them material benefits in return for refraining from violence and cooperating politically. Tribal loyalties tend not to be as strong among Shiites as among Sunnis. Still, buying the support of Shiite sheikhs is a tried and true practice -- one that Saddam Hussein used to secure his power for decades.

But the Iraqi government, now little more than a vestige of the grand Shiite coalition that won the election more than two years ago, has opted for a different principle, and it too is one with which the Iraqis are all too familiar from the past: military offensives and street fighting in their own country.

Severe Regional Consequences

Even if the purpose of the Basra offensive was to demonstrate how far the Iraqi army has come under the training of the Americans and British, it is far from clear that Maliki will be able to assert as commanding a military position as the rulers of Iraq before him.

In his book "Republic of Fear," Iraqi exile Kanan Makiya describes the terrorist state that came to an end with the fall of Baghdad five years ago. Today the Lebanese weekly newspaper Al-Akhbar describes the nation it has become as a "Republic of Militias." According to the paper, everyone in Iraq is looking out for themselves, from the "Kingdom of Kurdistan" in the north to the Sunnis -- now equipped with their own alliances thanks to American help -- to the Shiite warlords in the south.

The fighting in Basra may have died down for now. But last week's fighting showed once again that the partition of Iraq is a very real threat -- and one that would have severe consequences in the region. It could even result in the nightmare scenario of Iran intervening in the south and Turkey in the north.

King Faisal I, who the British installed as the country's ruler in 1921, said: "There is still -- and I say this with a heart full of sorrow -- no Iraqi people but unimaginable masses of human beings, devoid of any patriotic ideas, imbued with religious traditions and absurdities, connected by no common tie, giving ear to evil, prone to anarchy, and perpetually ready to rise against any government whatever."

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

URL:
spiegel.de



To: KLP who wrote (27275)12/15/2008 4:56:27 PM
From: Peter Dierks1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
Disarming Ourselves
A new report warns Obama about our aging nuclear weapons.
REVIEW & OUTLOOK DECEMBER 14, 2008, 11:18 P.M. ET

Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo get more press, but among the most urgent national security challenges facing President-elect Obama is what to do about America's stockpile of aging nuclear weapons. No less an authority than Secretary of Defense Robert Gates calls the situation "bleak" and is urging immediate modernization.


Department of Defense
Robert Gates.
On the campaign trail, Mr. Gates's new boss appeared to take a different view. Candidate Obama said he "seeks a world without nuclear weapons" and vowed to make "the goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons a central element in our nuclear policy." His woolly words have given a boost to the world disarmament movement, including last week's launch of Global Zero, the effort by Richard Branson and Queen Noor to eliminate nuclear weapons in 25 years. Naturally, they want to start with cuts in the U.S. arsenal.

But the reality of power has a way of focusing those charged with defending the U.S., and Mr. Obama will soon have to decide to modernize America's nuclear deterrent or let it continue to deteriorate. Every U.S. warhead is more than 20 years old, with some dating to the 1960s. The last test was 1992, when the U.S. adopted a unilateral test moratorium and since relied on computer modeling. Meanwhile, engineers and scientists with experience designing and building nuclear weapons are retiring or dying, and young Ph.D.s have little incentive to enter a field where innovation is taboo. The U.S. has zero production capability, beyond a few weapons in a lab.

We're told Mr. Gates's alarm will be echoed soon in a report by the Congressionally mandated commission charged with reviewing the role of nuclear weapons and the overall U.S. strategic posture. The commission's chairman is William Perry, a former Clinton Defense Secretary and a close Obama adviser. Mr. Perry is also one of the "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse," the nickname given to him, George Shultz, Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn for an op-ed published in these pages last year offering a blueprint for ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

The commission's interim report is due out any day now, and the advance word is that Mr. Perry has come back to Earth. We're told the report's central finding is that the U.S. will need a nuclear deterrent for the indefinite future. A deterrent is credible, the report further notes, only if enemies believe it will work. That means modernization.

That logic ought to be obvious, but it escapes many in Congress who have stymied the Bush Administration's efforts to modernize. Britain, France, Russia and China are all updating their nuclear forces, but Mr. Bush couldn't even get Congress this year to fund so much as R&D for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. Senator Dianne Feinstein dismissed the RRW, saying "the Bush Administration's goal was to reopen the nuclear door."

In the House, similar damage has been done by Ellen Tauscher, chairman of the subcommittee on strategic weapons. Ms. Tauscher, whose California district includes the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, likes to talk about a strong nuclear deterrent while bragging about killing the RRW. She also wants to revive the unenforceable Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which the Senate rejected in 1999. Let's hope the Perry report helps with her nuclear re-education.

If Congress isn't paying attention, U.S. allies are. The U.S. provides a nuclear umbrella for 30-plus countries, including several -- Japan, Germany and South Korea, for example -- capable of developing their own nuclear weapons. If they lose confidence in Washington's ability to protect them, the Perry report notes, they'll kick off a new nuclear arms race that will spread world-wide.

In a speech this fall, Mr. Gates said "there is no way we can maintain a credible deterrent" without "resorting to testing" or "pursuing a modernization program." General Kevin Chilton, the four-star in charge of U.S. strategic forces, has also spent the past year making the case for modernization. "The time to act is now," he told a Washington audience this month.

The aging U.S. nuclear arsenal is an urgent worry. A world free of nuclear weapons is a worthy goal, shared by many Presidents, including Ronald Reagan. Until that day arrives, no U.S. President can afford to let our nuclear deterrent erode.

online.wsj.com



To: KLP who wrote (27275)8/24/2010 2:03:12 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
The King of Iraq
As U.S. troops leave the country, one man stands to benefit above all: Moqtada al-Sadr.
BY BABAK DEHGHANPISHEH | AUGUST 20, 2010

It would be hard to imagine a more unlikely meeting. Late in July, the tempestuous Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr traveled to Damascus from Iran, where he's been living in exile for the past three years. The trip looked at first to be a routine photo-op for Sadr and Syrian President Bashar Assad. That is, until Sadr met with Ayad Allawi, a top contender for the prime minister post in Iraq and one of the cleric's sworn enemies. Their mutual enmity dates back to a showdown in the holy city of Najaf in the summer of 2004. Sadr's Mahdi Army fighters had taken over the city and were using the Imam Ali shrine, one of the holiest sites for Shiites, as a base of operations. Allawi, who was interim prime minister at the time, gave American and Iraqi troops the green light to take them out, killing dozens of Mahdi militiamen in the process.

So it was no small thing for the two to meet in person. And they didn't just talk; they were laughing and hamming it up as if they were the best of friends. The photos and video footage from that meeting are some of the only public examples of Sadr smiling (the more common profile is a scowling Sadr, wrapped in a white martyr's shroud, pounding a pulpit). Sadr had good reason to be happy: He now holds the fate of his one-time enemy in his hands.

Sadr -- feared by some, reviled by others and revered by a broad swath of Iraq's urban poor -- is now a kingmaker in Iraqi politics. It's a role that Sadr, the scion of a prominent clerical family, has been building toward since 2003. Immediately after the U.S. invasion, thousands of his supporters packed the dusty streets of Baghdad's Saddam City neighborhood (later renamed Sadr City) for Friday prayers week after week. Sadr rallied their ranks around his parliamentary list in the 2005 elections, making a strong showing, and then used his political clout to help push Nouri al-Maliki into the prime minister slot in 2006. But the friendship didn't last: Sadr bitterly split from Maliki when the latter allowed American troops to attack his militia members. Depending on whom you ask, Sadr either sensed he was next to be targeted and fled to Iran or was convinced of that fact by Iranian officials, who urged Sadr to leave for his own safety. Now, as U.S. troops withdraw and negotiations are underway in Baghdad to form a new government, Sadr may be planning his return. If he does, he will no doubt face jubilant crowds once again.

Sadr's political comeback was the result of careful and deliberate planning. More than a year before the elections in March, Sadr and his top aides set up an election strategy committee they dubbed the "machine." The goal was to game the electoral system as best as they could. A team of seven pored over the election law, dissected district maps, and built an extensive database of voters in every province. In the end, Sadr's Free Movement party won 39 seats in parliament, giving his followers a decisive vote within the National Iraqi Alliance, the dominant Shiite bloc of which they are part. And that's exactly why Allawi shuttled to Damascus for the meeting: He needs Sadr if he hopes to become prime minister.

It would be easy to write off Sadr's electoral success as a fluke. But the reality is that the cleric's brand of religious nationalism, coupled with his carefully cultivated image as the defender of the Shiite community, has struck a deep chord with tens of thousands of Iraqis. Moreover, he's got the one thing that his rivals don't: "street cred." Sadr can, rightfully, claim that his movement is one of the few on the Iraqi political scene that's homegrown. Compare this to the Sadrists' top rivals in the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI). For years, they've tried to fight the image that they were brought in on American tanks and are beholden to both Washington and Tehran, even changing their name because the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq sounded too Iranian. They tried appropriating the image of Iraq's most senior cleric, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, to woo more supporters (there are still posters up around Baghdad showing the late ISCI leaders Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Hakim and Abdul Aziz Hakim beside Sistani). Nothing worked. ISCI got wiped out at the polls in March and also had a pretty dismal showing during provincial elections last year.

The Sadrists, by contrast, aren't going anywhere -- which puts Washington, among others, in a bind. Sadr's supporters are more than just a political party. The cleric is clearly following the Hezbollah model, creating a populist political movement backed by a battle-hardened militia. The language Sadr uses when discussing the U.S. presence in Iraq -- resistance, occupation, martyrdom -- could easily have been taken from a speech by Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah. All this has discouraged U.S. officials from holding talks with Sadr -- something they've never done since 2003. It's not exactly like Sadr has gone out of his way to open up a dialogue, either. In fact, Sadr and many of his top aides have made it clear that the Mahdi Army won't disarm as long as there are American troops on Iraqi soil.

So what does Sadr want? One issue that has come up again and again in the negotiations to form the government is detainees. In a recent interview with Al Jazeera, Sadr estimated that there are as many as 2,000 detainees linked to his movement, most swept up in U.S. operations in 2007 and 2008, whom he would like to see released. The cleric has claimed that he doesn't want to mix the issue of detainees with the negotiations to form the government, but representatives from major political blocs who have held talks with the Sadrists dispute that claim, noting that Sadr has blasted Maliki for holding the prisoners and withheld his support. No doubt whichever candidate Sadr ultimately backs for the premiership will have to make major concessions on the detainees. He may also have to promise to lay off the Mahdi Army.

But the detainees are only a short-term bargaining chip. What Sadr is after is power itself -- and if his past record is any indication, he won't be shy about using it. There are any number of issues he could block or help push through parliament. Sadr has previously butted heads with Kurdish groups about the final status of Kirkuk, an oil-rich city that the Kurds claim as their capital. He is a proponent of putting oil revenues under central government control, a position at odds with the Kurds as well as some rival Shiite groups, such as ISCI. Women's rights groups have already voiced strong concerns that the Sadrists could block their attempts to reform laws that cover property ownership, divorce, and child custody. Some even fear that Mahdi fighters will again target women's rights activists, as they did in Basra in 2007 and 2008.

Sadr's ambitions don't cover Iraq's domestic agenda alone. His high-profile trips to Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere indicate that he wants to be seen as a prominent regional player. He would like to promote his Mahdi Army as a member of the so-called "axis of resistance" made up by Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have made their names by confronting the United States and Israel.

For now, Sadr is undoubtedly pleased by his opportunity to have a key vote in who becomes the next prime minister. And it's hard to miss the irony from a man who has built his image on being among the people. He's not casting that vote from Baghdad, where he could rally millions of supporters, but from a comfortable perch hundreds of miles away in neighboring Iran.

foreignpolicy.com