Middle East News

ANALYSIS: Iraq crackdown strengthens radical cleric and Iran

Apr 1, 2008, 15:50 GMT

Cairo - When Iraq's Prime Minister launched an unprecedented offensive to assert his government's control over southern oil-rich Basra last week, he certainly was not planning what came about. Nuri al-Maliki, his ministers and generals vowed, and still do, to go after militias and 'outlaws' to the end. The main target of the offensive, though not officially declared, has been Mahdi Army of firebrand Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. But within days of the offensive, Sadrist militiamen were still keeping their turf and weapons, and giving government troops a hard time. Hundreds of people were killed and injured in the offensive. Many say the fighting in Basra, which spread to Iraq's southern cities and the Sadrists' strongholds in Baghdad, exposed the fact that Iraqi security forces were not prepared for this large-scale operation. 'I think the operation in Basra was not planned. It was hastily carried out,' Osama al-Nujaifi, a member of Iraq's parliament, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur, dpa. The timing of the offensive and the way it was directed were wrong, al-Nujaifi said. Al-Maliki himself flew to Basra to conduct the offensive from there. John McCain, the US Republican presidential candidate, was surprised by the blitz offensive. 'Al-Maliki decided to take on this operation himself without consulting the Americans,' McCain said Monday. 'I am surprised that he would take it on himself to go down and take charge of a military offensive,' McCain said. Iraqi Defence Minister Abdel-Qader al-Obeidi conceded that troops were meeting far more resistance than expected. Several multinational forces officials were aware that a major crackdown against militias in Basra was in the offing, but were led to believe by Iraqi army commanders it would be launched in June, according to media reports. When it was launched abruptly last Tuesday, some British officials said they had been given less than 24 hours notice, British newspaper The Times reported. Five days into the battle, al-Maliki found himself turning to his political foe, al-Sadr, for a way out. Behind the scenes, al-Maliki's emissaries were meeting with al- Sadr in Iran under the auspices of Brigadier-General Qasim Suleymani from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, media reports revealed. Al-Sadr, currently in the Iranian holy city of Qom, suddenly called his militiamen off the streets on Sunday a day after he defied al-Maliki and called his government a 'dictatorship.' Al-Sadr emerged as peace-maker and Iran consolidated its position as the main power broker in Iraq, analysts think. 'It has now become clear how far Iranian interference in Iraq's internal affairs has gone. It is clear how Iran is supporting rival factions involved in the fighting in Basra,' al-Nujaifu said. 'I think this interference will increase in the future,' he adds.

View blog reactions

Latest Headlines in Middle East

Talkback

Add your comment (no registration required)

page: 1 2 3

Darth TaterApr 1st, 2008 - 16:38:05

If Sadr (and Iran) were doing so well at winning in Basra, why the cease-fire? Could it be too many dead or wounded to be able to keep
a hold in the South of Iraq from his main rival there? Could it be he
expected the Iraqi government forces to fold early and often, but
instead they gave better than they got with little American help?

Report this comment

SP4: Monday MorningApr 1st, 2008 - 19:17:10

...quarterbacks above, neglect to mention this only turns out one way:

Bad

That being the case, go in and do it fast. If you're pimping yourself as the government, it's better to be seen as failing, if that is even the case here, than not being seen at all.

Not consulting with the Americans is a sign they feel confident and builds credibility.

There are lots of ways to measure success.

Report this comment

IdiotIraqisApr 1st, 2008 - 19:36:24

What ever happened to the good old days of Saddam.

Report this comment

MrBiteMeApr 1st, 2008 - 20:25:09

Oh ! Piss on Iran's radical cleric !

Report this comment

----BR----Raised in New York City-------Apr 1st, 2008 - 20:31:19

What a numbnuts analysis that was!!?!?!??? What do you take the readers for? Fellow arab wingnuts??? We're just not that stupid out here.
Muqtada called it quits because he knew the Americans would be no more than 5 steps behind Maliki in this offensive. Imm glad it was a surprise, because at least this gives the rest of the free world hope that Maliki is beginning to become the commander-in-chief he must in order to shit- can this 'wannabe somebody' Sadr!! Sadr is finished now and he knows it.
Not even Ahm in my dinnah jacket is going to bring any further influence to Basra nor the north of Iraq anymore. Get your fat ass out of the way Sadr---You're far too radical to have a positive influence inside Baghdad.
Either get lost or face a few F-16's and MOAB's til u learn what an honest military will do to you.

Report this comment

rock n roll fan .Apr 1st, 2008 - 21:23:07

all i ever want in my life ,is to have Sex with Farrah Fawcett !

Report this comment

Darth TaterApr 1st, 2008 - 21:29:48

Contrary to SP-4's opinion, there is much positive here: talk to someone
who has been on the offensive in urban warfare (whether a Marine in Hue during Tet of 68 or one of the men involved in Somalia during the Black-
Hawk down incident or one of the current vets) there is every advantage
to the defender in this type of warfare. Yet, the Iraqi national forces
managed to take 1/3 or so of Basra. Despite the bluster of Sadr's militia,
they know that they were being beaten and their morale will have taken a blow - they'll be less willing to try this again. Correspondingly, the
Iraqi national forces have gained morale, confidence and cohesion that
they otherwise might not have had.

Secondly, this is a message to others who would rather fight than cooperate
that there is now a willingness and ability in the Iraqi national forces
to work for stability and security even to the point of combat.

Report this comment

A very good aspect.Apr 1st, 2008 - 23:37:30

'SP4: Monday Morning

...quarterbacks above, neglect to mention this only turns out one way:

Bad'

Dead Mahdi militia are always a good thing. kicking the legs out from under one off one of Iran's proxy's is priceless.

Report this comment

al-Maliki's people begged for the helpApr 2nd, 2008 - 01:46:34

www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/32055.html

Iranian general played key role in Iraq cease-fire

BAGHDAD — Iraqi lawmakers traveled to the Iranian holy city of Qom over the weekend to win the support of the commander of Iran's Qods brigades in persuading Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr to order his followers to stop military operations, members of the Iraqi parliament said.

Sadr ordered the halt on Sunday, and his Mahdi Army militia heeded the order in Baghdad, where the Iraqi government announced it would lift a 24-hour curfew starting early Monday in most parts of the capital.

thinkprogress.org/2008/04/01/mccain-sadr-facts-wrong/

As Mother Jones’ Jonathan Stein notes today, McCain’s description of what happened is “completely misleading” and wrong. In fact, Sadr’s call for a ceasefire only came after members of Maliki’s political party traveled to Iran to broker a deal with him:

The backdrop to Sadr’s dramatic statement was a secret trip Friday by Iraqi lawmakers to Qom, Iran’s holy city and headquarters for the Iranian clergy who run the country. There the Iraqi lawmakers held talks with Brig. Gen. Qassem Suleimani, commander of the Qods (Jerusalem) brigades of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and signed an agreement with Sadr, which formed the basis of his statement Sunday, members of parliament said.

Ali al Adeeb, a member of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s Dawa party, and Hadi al Ameri, the head of the Badr Organization, the military wing of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, had two aims, lawmakers said: to ask Sadr to stand down his militia and to ask Iranian officials to stop supplying weapons to Shiite militants in Iraq.

According to the AP, “the peace deal between al-Sadr and Iraqi government forces” not only “left the cleric’s Mahdi Army intact,” but it also left Maliki “politically battered and humbled within his own Shi’ite power base.”

Report this comment

McCain got this one wrong tooApr 2nd, 2008 - 01:49:02

thinkprogress.org/2008/04/01/mccain-sadr-facts-wrong/

As Mother Jones’ Jonathan Stein notes today, McCain’s description of what happened is “completely misleading” and wrong. In fact, Sadr’s call for a ceasefire only came after members of Maliki’s political party traveled to Iran to broker a deal with him.

Report this comment

page: 1 2 3

Add your comment (no registration required)