U.S., Iraqi troops enter Sadr City unopposed; Update: NBC sees progress from surge
posted at 9:05 pm on March 4, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
They said they were coming three days ago and now they’re in. 1,100 troops — in an area with 1.5 million residents. House searches have already begun, as has the construction of a small fort which some of the local Sadrists are insisting be manned by Iraqi personnel only. I wonder why.
The mini-bombshell:
On Sunday, Mr. Maliki announced that he planned to reshuffle his cabinet within the next two weeks, possibly eroding Mr. Sadr’s influence in the government. While the prime minister did not say which officials he planned to replace, two prominent Shiite politicians said in interviews on Sunday that the Health Ministry, the most powerful of the six ministries run by a Sadr loyalist, will be removed from under Mr. Sadr’s control.
Like Captain Ed says, the only way Maliki can start booting Sadrist ministers is if he’s prepared to lose the support of their 30 MPs, and the only way he’s prepared to do that is if he has 30 MPs from the opposition set to take their place in his coalition. I have no idea who those replacements might be; neither, it seems, does Ed. Iyad Allawi and Zalmay Khalilzad were in Kurdistan today reportedly to drum up support for a new coalition that would, presumably, seek to replace Maliki with the secularist Shiite Allawi (whose party includes Jamal al-Din). Theoretically that’s the best thing that could happen to Iraq, but god knows how the religious Shiites would react to being stripped of power.
Which brings us to Sadr. What’s the deal?
Even before Feb. 14, U.S. and Iraqi troops had begun targeting top and middle-level officials in Sadr’s organization, arresting several key ones and killing at least two who resisted. Even more critical may have been the intervention of Shia elders. Alarmed at the U.S. crackdown, Sadr had an 11 p.m. meeting with Sistani about a month ago, according to an aide to the grand ayatollah, speaking on condition of anonymity in keeping with practice in the cleric’s office. “He asked the sayyid what he should do about the attacks against him, and [Sistani] told him, ‘You have two options: bear the consequences, on you and Shias in general, or withdraw into a corner’.”…
A former Mahdi Army commander in Baghdad, Abu Hazim, says, “Sadr is following a strategy called ‘bending before the wind’ because he’s lost part of his control over the Mahdi Army. It’s not like it was in 2004,” when an uprising called by the young radical threatened to engulf much of the country.
A U.S. embassy officer tells Newsweek Sadr’s problem is that the longer he lies low, the harder it will be to reestablish himself later. I made that point myself last week vis-a-vis the other Shiite groups, like SCIRI, who might seize the opportunity to supplant him as protectors of the Shiites. Captain Ed makes the same point today vis-a-vis the surge:
The lack of response from the Mahdis appears to be a long-term strategy. They must understand that if the Americans and Iraqis can hold these neighborhoods for a substantial period of time, their chances of reinfiltration become smaller and smaller. A population freed from terrorists and protection racketeers will not easily allow their return, and if the Nouri al-Maliki government can clean out the police forces of collaborators, they will find it much easier to repel terrorists later.
Allegiances will shift to whichever group can provide security. That’s how Sadr became an icon in the first place. If we can make things safe(r), we’ll wean some of them away from him, but I’m not sure how we do that if we’re working off a de facto timetable where most Iraqis expect us to be gone in a year with a pro-Sadr government still in place. Maybe that explains the maneuverings with Allawi — the best (only?) way to keep Sadr and his lieutenants from coming home and setting up shop would be to get rid of the leadership that let them run wild. And I’m sure Maliki knows that, which is probably why he’s been such a team player lately. I can’t believe Bush would withdraw and leave the country in his hands, so probably he’s sticking with him for now while the surge builds momentum and political support and then in a few months he’ll try to replace him. The trick is doing it before the surge builds so much support that Maliki benefits from it.
Meanwhile, Gen. Petraeus is trying to build morale by taking a stroll through Shorja market. The market’s been bombed five times since August; the last attack on February 12 killed dozens of people. In southern Iraq, where the British are drawing down, Iraqi and coalition troops discover evidence of torture and links to bomb attacks … at an Iraqi Interior Ministry intelligence center. The Brits are also reportedly set to announce that an RAF helicopter that was shot down over Basra last year was targeted with an Iranian-supplied missile, probably with the involvement of Iranian agents due to the level of skill needed to operate the weapon. And finally, Iraqslogger ponders the Sunni equivalent of America’s Maliki problem: sure, the tribal leaders are on our side so long as we’re paying them, but what’s going to happen when we leave and they turn into warlords?
Update: Also via Iraqslogger, Brian Williams is in Baghdad and says it’s a mixed bag — but he’s definitely noting some improvement. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.


















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
No resistance, well that can’t be good. Murtha says Iraq will handle themselves and al Qaeda, but only upon our departure.
Free Constitution on March 4, 2007 at 9:12 PM
A couple things:
Al-Sadr knows what he is doing, as does Maliki.
General Petraeus also knows what he is doing.
The facts as we know them know are only bread crumbs compared to what the faction leaders, and army commanders in Iraq know.
The fact that there was minimal resistance to the initial coalition occupation of Sadr City doesn’t really tell us anything definite about any of the long term plans of any factions.
Lawrence on March 4, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Which is why the surge was not a good idea for the long term, the very concept of ’surge’ implies ephemerality.
But it’s good to know they know avoiding Americans ensures there longevity.
Free Constitution on March 4, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Will They wait us out?
Are they doing just what was predicted laying low till the heat passes?
Cripes, this gets more dime store pulp everyday.
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on March 4, 2007 at 9:42 PM
The NYT also admits there are “signs of progress“:
see-dubya on March 4, 2007 at 10:01 PM
NBC? Surge? Progress???
THE END IS NIGH! REPENT!!! REPENT!!!
fusionaddict on March 4, 2007 at 10:04 PM
But we are going to now get reverse physcology from the dems
“look the surge worked now we can leave !”
Wait werent you idiots against the surge from the start ?
“No we just wanted debate on the issue. We needed to force Bush to take a better stance on Iraq”
Be prepared for the stench or hypocracy from the halls of Congress in the coming days.
William Amos on March 4, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Hold on. I’ll be right back. I have to burn down a few buildings in my city because the “jesus tomb” special on discovery is offending me!
*a few minutes later*
Okay. I’m back now. I feel much better! Random mayhem ignites my religious fervor!
lorien1973 on March 4, 2007 at 10:51 PM
Oh, is that on? I was watching South Park.
fusionaddict on March 4, 2007 at 11:14 PM
This starts to sounds as faux happy as the crooked cops in a Raymond Chandler novel who call the mafiosos to hide the roulette wheels before the raid and to play along with the arresting officers by staging a penny poker game.
I would have believed this 2 schtick years ago, when they failed to crush Sadr and his Madhi Army.
profitsbeard on March 4, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Like pol pot and the cambodians solved their issues? Murtha is dumb.
csdeven on March 4, 2007 at 11:59 PM
ABC Radio News just said that Sadr City is named for Mookie. Don’t those dummies know that it’s named for his father, Mohammad Mohammad Sadeq al-Sadr (محمد محمّد صادق الصدر)? Sheesh.
The Monster on March 5, 2007 at 12:04 AM
The Monster on March 5, 2007 at 12:04 AM
Isn’t pere Sadr named for the suburb?
In English, he would be Mohammed Mohammed Sadeq from Sadr?
billy on March 5, 2007 at 12:39 AM
Really……… do you think he has any “balls” to cover this story?
PinkyBigglesworth on March 5, 2007 at 1:10 AM
Heck, color me dumb. I thought sadr was named after mookie.
DOH!
csdeven on March 5, 2007 at 1:27 AM
Monster–wasn’t it originally Saddam City, and they changed it after 2003?
see-dubya on March 5, 2007 at 1:44 AM
If the drive-bys are reporting progress, things must be going pretty well. Very, very nice to hear. Now let’s let our boys win this fight before the libs enforce surrender.
Patriot33 on March 5, 2007 at 2:07 AM
The traitor left must be having fits at the news. No doubt the Democrats are thinking that they should not have tried playing politics with the issue. Too late.
Murtha’s “star” is sinking fast, the nutroots are screaming “LIES, ALL LIES.” And even idiots like Williams are stuck with yellow and brown flicks on their faces, and they know it.
They are all desperately praying for a military defeat of historic proportions or they need something they can gin up and call a defeat, like ‘68 Tet.
These people, and I include some who post here at H/A, are openly rooting for the enemy, and they sicken me.
georgej on March 5, 2007 at 3:02 AM
I wonder how long Mookie keeps their loyalty in the face of his own pruning of the Mahdi Army and his waning influence on the ground.
As Ayatollahs go, Sistani really seems to get it.
Pablo on March 5, 2007 at 6:30 AM
It’s funny how the media feels it has to appear to be onjective by running slightly optimistic stories once every 3 years. Plus, since the dems control Congress, they can’t make them look too inept.
darwin on March 5, 2007 at 6:59 AM
The best way to prevent Mookie Al-Yuckmouth from coming back? Predator. Hellfire. Boom.
Tony737 on March 5, 2007 at 7:17 AM
I agree, this is going to well for the media to let it last. I’m waiting for the next “blockbuster” story out of Iraq along the lines of Abu Ghraib or Haditha to get splashed all over the international news and throw things into an uproar. They’ve probably been sitting back and holding a story like that for just such an occasion.
Dudley Smith on March 5, 2007 at 7:40 AM
I always remember the Murphy Laws of Warfare.
If an attack is going good or unopposed it is an ambush.
It falls somewhere after remember your weapon is made by the lowest bidder but before believing in the buddy system since it gives the enemy somebody else to shoot at.
LakeRuins on March 5, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Of course Al-Sadr is just waiting us out. It’s what they do best and sadly, because of political pressure at home, we usually accomodate.
NBC still has to shove all the killing and mayhem in our faces, then grudgingly mention one or two things might be getting better.
Ya gotta know Murtha is secretly wishing for redeployment (retreat) before we win this war.
oakpack on March 5, 2007 at 4:06 PM