|
|
|
Map of the disposition of Iraqi and US forces in and around Sadr City and the progress on the barrier. The red portion has yet to be completed. Map courtesy of Multinational Forces Iraq. |
Mahdi Army fighters continue to attack US and Iraqi units as they work to complete the barrier along Qods Street in Sadr City. These attacks are occurring despite the truce agreed upon by the Sadrist political block and the Iraqi government. Iraqi and US forces said 10 Mahdi Army fighters during clashes in Sadr City and three more Mahdi fighters were killed elsewhere in Baghdad. Iraqi troops have also begun reinforcing the Shula neighborhood in Baghdad.
The Iraqi military said it killed eight “gunmen” inside Sadr City over the past 24 hours. The US military said it killed two Mahdi Army fighters from the night of May 12 to the morning of May 13 during five separate engagements. Three more Mahdi Army fighters were killed in the Mahdi-influenced neighborhood in New Baghdad and in northwestern Baghdad as they planted roadside bombs.
The attacks occurred during construction on the barrier along Qods Street, the main thoroughfare that divides the southern third of Sadr City from the northern neighborhoods. The US military used air weapons teams armed with Hellfire missiles, Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and infantry to beat back the attacks.
The US military does not believe the radical elements of the Mahdi Army will obey Sadr’s call for a cease-fire. “They are obviously not listening to any agreement, and hence why we call them Special Groups and rogue elements, ” said Lieutenant Colonel Steven Stover, the chief Public Affairs Officer for Multinational Division Baghdad, in an email to The Long War Journal.
While the Sadrists claim that one of the terms of the cease-fire agreement is that US forces will not operate in Sadr City, the agreement actually states the Iraqi military would try to limit a US presence in the area. Stover is unable to discuss future operations, but his statements indicate the US military is not planning to leave Sadr City.
“We are establishing a safe neighborhood for south Sadr City residents,” Stover said. “We built the wall to establish security for south Sadr City residents (and us) and established check points to degrade the enemies’ ability to maneuver, reinforce and resupply. As part of COIN [counterinsurgency], we’re going to try and make life real good for the south Sadr City residents as we did in other areas of Baghdad.”
A total of 593 Mahdi Army fighters have been confirmed killed in and around Sadr City since March 25, according to numbers compiled by The Long War Journal. More than one-quarter of the Mahdi Army fighters killed have been killed in US airstrikes.
As clashes continue in Sadr City, the Iraqi military moved additional forces into the Shula neighborhood in western Baghdad Sadr City. “Baghdad operations command have started replacing the troops stationed in Shula, and reinforcing them with further units,” said Brigadier General Qassem Atta, the spokesman for the Baghdad security operation. The Sadrists claim the Army arrested 30 of its members in a raid on a Sadrist office, but Atta denied this. “When the troops reached the electricity power station close to al Sadr’s office, they were exposed to fire by gunmen, forcing the troops to engage and chase the shooters.”
US and Iraqi troops have conducted numerous raids against the Mahdi Army and Special Groups leaders and operatives in the Shula neighborhood. On May 6, Iraqi troops arrested 35 hospital workers in Shula for aiding the Mahdi Army.
The hospitals in Sadr City are known to be infiltrated with Mahdi Army and Sadrist bloc members who continue to use the hospitals for criminal activities. The Mahdi Army used hospitals as staging areas for sectarian attacks and weapons storage depots. On May 3, US forces knocked out a Special Groups command and control center situated next to a Sadr City hospital. The Sadrist bloc ran the Health Ministry prior to withdrawing from the government in 2007.
For more on the recent fighting in Sadr City and the cease-fire, see Sadrist bloc buckles, agrees to let Iraqi Army in Sadr City.
26 Comments
Steady progress being made. Very detailed map from MNF-Iraq. Keep up the good work guys.
“the agreement actually states the Iraqi military would try to limit a US presence”
That would be very subjective at best. It proves to me there’s no agreement.
It would be interesting to know the allegiance of the militia killed. I’m guessing there are those reporting to Iran, those reporting to Sadr, and those reporting to no one. Is Iran giving up on Sadr City/Sadr or are they just throwing money at it trying to keep it going as long as possible?
Are we working under the assumption that Sadr and Iran are two seperate entities? This is the classic Islamist strategy…have proxies do the dirty work and sit back and deny involvement. Is there evidence that Sadr is acting in self interest?
Personally, I assume Sadr, Iran, Quds, and the Revolutionary Gaurd are all one entity covering each other from each side. Can someone clear this up for me?
Also, it is becoming more and more frustrating each day that we have not bombed Iran. What more do they need to do to get us to attack? Where is the line in the sand drawn? Or is there no line? These people need to be dealt with. I’m not pretending an attack would be simple or easy or without unintended consequences, but the situation is ridiculous.
The agreement between Maliki’s government and al-Sadr actually has nothing to say on the subject of the US Army, except in Clause 12 which requires Maliki to avoid recourse to foreign forces.
The truce does not appear to prohibit Mahdi Army attacks on non-Iraqi units.
rmwarnick,
Is the agreement available online someplace?
Searches have begun
The Sadrist news-site Alkufanews.com has posted the agreement (in Arabic, with a note from Moqtada al-Sadr). Badger at Missing Links has translated the clause I referred to.
rmwarnick,
Thank you. Yes the truce does not appear to prohibit Mahdi Army attacks on non-Iraqi units. I don’t think anyone here ever said it did. Anyway, US forces have said that if fired upon they will fire back and I guess effective today, government forces and forces aligned with government forces can attack those with medium to heavy arms.
I am hearing that there is a minor revolt going on in the Mahdi forces were some commanders are not going along with the truce at all. Have you read anything about that?
rmwarnick,
Alkufanews.com is down
The truce does not prohibit the US from operating in Sadr City, either, as the Mahdi Army and “Badger” claimed it said. BTW, I am talking about statements Sadrist made when the truce was discussed over the weekend. The Sadrist website contradicts what its spokesmen have said in the past.
I suppose everyone can agree that the U.S. government isn’t a party to the truce agreement, which is why the fighting continues.
From BAGHDAD (AFP)
“The US army said its Iraqi counterparts had sent humanitarian aid to Sadr City and were moving to restore utilities and improve sanitation in a neighbourhood where there had been little garbage removal.”
“Over 44,000 different types of meals were delivered (Wednesday), 114,000 bottles of water, appliances, generators,” a US statement said. “It was a large project to undertake and a very big step for the Iraqi Army.”
Its terrific to see that amid the chaos of the war zone MNF are immediately supporting the everyday Iraqi.
This course of action is one of the deadliest against the criminal elements and Iran.
I suppose everyone can agree that the U.S. government isn’t a party to the truce agreement,
Yes
which is why the fighting continues.
No, I think that assumes too much, especially since the IA are also being attacked.
“Al-Sadr movement intends to lay down their arms on Thursday despite provocative measures undertaken by security forces in Sadr city and other areas, sowing seeds of mistrust among against the deal brokered with the government,”
I don’t know, a delegation goes to Iran. Doesn’t talk with Sadr but talks with the Iranians and the next week there is a cease fire. What do you make of that?
`Angry’ Iran sharpens tone with Baghdad’s leaders
It would be interesting to know how much control Al-Sadr really has over his own militia and how much control Iran has over it as well.
The routine breaking of ceasefires declared by Al-Sadr indicates either Al-Sadr is a liar that cant be negotiated with or he doesnt have control over his own militias. It could be a combination of both.
What’s the benefit to Maliki of having signed anything and not just said it’s over for Sadr’s militia and kept pounding them? This is the same thing that happened in Basra. The US and IA start pounding on the Mahdi and just when it looks like he’s finished there’s some agreement and it all stops. The Mahdi in Basra were finished but not Sadr. Is Maliki trying to keep Sadr but not his milita?
It’s called civilization – you offer the enemy the chance to take quarter and accept terms, and if not taken and accepted, or in this case, accepted but rogue elements wont abide – then the army isn’t faulted for having to wage a campaign to destroy the uncooperative elements of the enemy.
Maliki and his staff deserve credit for this political manuvering.
Let me offer a possible alternative explanation for Maliki’s willingness to agree to a cease-fire. The Iranians want the Green Zone government to dial down its support for the U.S. occupation, according to the Associated Press.
I’ll offer an alternative to the “possible alternative”
MattR:
“What’s the benefit to Maliki of having signed anything and not just said it’s over for Sadr’s militia and kept pounding them? This is the same thing that happened in Basra. The US and IA start pounding on the Mahdi and just when it looks like he’s finished there’s some agreement and it all stops. The Mahdi in Basra were finished but not Sadr. Is Maliki trying to keep Sadr but not his milita?”
Granted, it is a delicate line when your own military is aggresively pursuing resident militia members. From the beginning in Basra, Maliki has offered locals an out through offering amnesty for the laying down of weapons.
My guess this is as much accomodation politically as it is a result of lack of IA forces to occupy and hold.
That said, rarely is an occupation successful where foreign troops (i.e. MNF) are seen to be persuing a campaign to eliminate a local militia. The psy-ops costs are just too great to be effective.
Reigning back, as Bill or DJ has mentioned, allows for those that want to, to disarm voluntarily. Then, as skirmishes continue, the perception can be spun that only those remaining in the fight are those “criminal” elements who chose not to abide by the decree of illegal militias.
Seems to me to be effective geopolitically as well as militarily.
I wonder how much Maliki is advised by US military personnel. That will make for some interesting post-war reading. Petraeus seems to have this COIN strategy planned to the nth degree.
Wonderful job by the General.
I do not understand COIN. How can there be serious armed resistance after 5 years? Do we know who our enemies are yet? Do we lack the capacity to defeat them? Machievelli said it is better to be feared than loved. Don’t we believe that anymore?
Brett, it’s not in our national interest to be feared. That costs too much becuase we’d have to occupy their country forever. The British tried it and failed, the Russians tried it in Afghanistan and failed, and it could be said we tried it for the first few years in Iraq, and it failed. Love is not going to happen because our cultures are too different. What Petraeus is aiming for is trust. If the Iraqis trust us to help them reach their goals then they’ll stick with us.
“Machievelli said it is better to be feared than loved. Don’t we believe that anymore?”
I thought we learned after WWI that it was better to be loved, and to help rebuild, solidify democracy, and even become allies in the long run, in order to secure a lasting peace.