Time wins the Basra Narrative sweepstakes
posted at 10:55 am on May 13, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
After Moqtada al-Sadr’s capitulation of Sadr City this weekend, I predicted that the mainstream media would follow the Basra Narrative and declare Sadr the winner after his surrender. Little did I know that Time Magazine would prove me right within hours of the post. Laughingly headlined “Al-Sadr Wins Another Round”, Mark Kukis explains how Sadr won by giving up his last power base in Iraq:
The fact that a leading figure in al-Sadr’s ranks announced the deal and pointedly rejected the Iraqi government’s key demand to disarm suggests that the cleric is still controlling the agenda tactically and politically despite the most serious challenge his power the Iraqi government could muster. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki set out to break the back of the Mahdi Army in March, when he launched an offensive against areas the militia controls in the southern city of Basra. The Mahdi Army fought Iraqi forces to a standstill there while unleashing a daily hail of rockets and mortars on the Green Zone that left al-Maliki’s government effectively the ones under siege. And when U.S. and Iraqi troops tried to press into Sadr City to chase the militia’s mortar men and rocketeers, they barely managed to establish a foothold on the southern edge of the neighborhood before the situation stalemated.
How long this new cease-fire will last is uncertain. Al-Sadr declared a cease-fire unilaterally last year only to see al-Maliki ignore it with the initial strike in Basra. But one thing is clear: the latest pause in the running fight between al-Sadr and the U.S.-backed Iraqi government offers no visible solutions to the problems at the root of the conflict. Al-Maliki wants to disband the Mahdi Army, or at least de-fang it, before provincial elections in the fall. The bloody nose the Mahdi Army gave al-Maliki in the latest crisis shows how unlikely that is. Above all, al-Sadr still wants the Americans to go. But the inability of Iraqi forces to operate independently during the recent fighting shows how unlikely that is - unless a new White House decides to reduce military support for an Iraqi government still unable to face down its toughest foe.
Another round? Kukis still thinks that Sadr prevailed in Basra by not losing in the first 48 hours. Even the New York Times acknowledged Maliki’s victory in Basra, noting that the residents now enjoy a relatively normal and liberated life in the city on which Sadr imposed a Taliban-like code. The Mahdis have disappeared from the south, and Maliki’s forces control Basra after several years of Sadr’s grip on the area. How exactly did Sadr win that round?
And in Sadr City, Kukis gives us the same Basra Narrative provided by the entirety of the American media at the end of March. Sadr’s forces announced the cease-fire, so they must be winning. Not exactly; that same agreement ceded control of Sadr City to government forces, and it specifically acknowledged that Maliki had the right to continue offensive operations against anyone refusing to surrender medium or heavy arms. In fact, just as in Basra after the agreement there, Maliki continues to pursue Mahdi elements militarily.
This time, most of the American media has wisely refrained from cheering on Sadr and reporting the operation as a massive defeat while Maliki beats Sadr. Kukis and Time should have done the same.
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
Oh, but al-Sadr did agree to disarm- individuals can keep their own small arms, but all heavy weapons and explosives must be handed over to the Iraqi Government.
pseudonominus on May 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Well I’ll be damned, I always though al-Maliki was the duly elected prime minister.
dmann on May 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Time editor Richard Stengel
mymanpotsandpans on May 13, 2008 at 11:05 AM
these posts about the NYT’s never surprise me anymore…
SoCalInfidel on May 13, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Uh…let’s see if we can clarify this for this poor, confused man.
Sadr=terrorist
Maliki=Prime Minister
amerpundit on May 13, 2008 at 11:06 AM
The MSM feels it must continue to spin Iraq to maintain the left’s/Obama’s narrative. Contemptable.
Though no mention this time of the trash. Progress or oversight?
moxie_neanderthal on May 13, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Its all about who has boots on the ground…
Maliki does… Sadr does not…
But I’m sure this writer still believes that Times pen is mightier than the sword… or modern arms in this instance.
Romeo13 on May 13, 2008 at 11:10 AM
I hope they paid you for writing there story and headline…it’s a sad day that the MSM is so predictable that you can “predict” their stories before they happen.
right2bright on May 13, 2008 at 11:10 AM
The MSM in the United States are so far to the left and so anti American that they have become totally predicable. If it diminishes America . . . they like it.
rplat on May 13, 2008 at 11:14 AM
Sadr is the new Viet-Cong. Basra is the new Tet.
It’s a quagmire! The MSM narrative, that is.
Maquis on May 13, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Time mag. circa 1945, “Tojo wins major victory in Hiroshima!”
kirkill on May 13, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Where’s Tom_Shipley’s complaint about this being another media bias story?
kirkill on May 13, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Dude. I’d say his toughest foe is the American media. While I am no lover of Maliki, he’s managed to completely uproot Sadr in Basra, and forced Sadr to lose face with his Iranian puppeteers by giving up Sadr City. That is a one damn fine accomplishment. The Iranians have been largely responsible for insurgent progress in combat, with their provision of IED’s, money and weapons. Sadr was their last hope for a strong proxy presence in Iraq, and Maliki is pursuing victory to the end of the earth. Perhaps if Time was less concerned with co-opting real American heroic imagery for their ridiculous “green” crusade, they might pull their heads out of their @$$ and see another American victory in Iraq.
Flyover Country on May 13, 2008 at 11:35 AM
The behavior of the MSM is best understood by realizing that the MSM identifies itself as playing the role of Sadr, and sees the role of Maliki as being played by the American President. The MSM is objectively working to overthrow the elected American President by de-legitimizing his moral authority, and has been for the last 7 years.
drunyan8315 on May 13, 2008 at 11:35 AM
TIMEs‘ battle flag is a white cross on a white background.
TooTall on May 13, 2008 at 11:42 AM
What will be the TIME headline when Bin Laden is eradicated …..
A. Why Did It Take So Long?
B. OBL Death Will Spur More Terrorism
C. Is Bin Laden Really Dead?
D. Dem Urging Pays Off Big in Afghanistan
E. Muslim World Morns Death of Hero
F. Zahawiri Still On The Loose
I know, they’re so predictable it’s almost unfair to speculate.
fogw on May 13, 2008 at 11:43 AM
So if TIME says the cease-fire agreement was an EPIC WIN for Sadr, does that mean the fact that the cease fire has fallen apart mean it is now an EPIC FAIL?
BohicaTwentyTwo on May 13, 2008 at 11:46 AM
?????? True????? I heard of a couple of attacks but nothing recently. Have I missed something about this ‘daily hail’ of death?
Limerick on May 13, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, MB4…….
dmann on May 13, 2008 at 12:17 PM
So I guess the South won the Civil War, because at Appomattox the Southern Officers were allowed to keep sidearms.
rbj on May 13, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Present day Time Magazine reporting of Midway:
Japanese win historic victory in sinking 33% of the American carriers and a large percentage of combat aircratf. Midway defenders decimated, entire Air Force destroyed, and US Naval forces in disarray.
jukin on May 13, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Yep Ed! You called!
What a crock this article is! I can report more current and accurately than that sitting here in Texas!
BTW .. maybe the Time Mag. needs to pay attention to The Long War Journal.
In Pictures: Patrolling the Shorja Market with the Sons of Iraq By Bill Ardolino
Texas Gal on May 13, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Kukis should have closed the article with “I’m Muqtada al-Sadr, and I approved this ad.”
irishspy on May 13, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Does the fact that Sadr has no control over “his” Mahdi army mean he has won?
Does the fact that Sadr is holed up in Iran mean he has won?
Does the fact that the Mahdi army is taking an incredible beating and causalities mean that Sadr has won?
Does the fact that the Iraqi army has control of the neighborhoods and streets of Basra and is gaining the same control of Sadr city mean that Sadr has won?
Does the fact that Sadr continues to try and work out peace agreement after peace agreement(I mean surrender agreement)mean that Sadr has won?
Does the fact that the local citizens are embracing the Iraqi government and rejecting Sadr’s militia mean that
Sadr has won?
Does the fact that the Sunni,Kurdish,and Shia leadership
has joined with Maliki in the fight against Sadr mean that
Sadr has won?
Does the fact that Sistani and other clerics have given
their support for the Iraqi government mean that Sadr has won?
If this is Time’s idea of winning,than I guess the Germans,Italians,and the Japanese kicked our a$$ in WWII instead of the other way around.
That is a lot of history to rewrite.
Watching the MSM spin this progress into defeat is about as hilarious as watching liberals justify using military force in Burma but it was a “huge mistake” to take out a genocidal terrorist madman like Saddam that was responsible for two wars,hundreds of thousands killed with WMD’s,support of terrorism,genocide of almost 1 million of his own people,trying to assassinate an American President,firing on our aircraft,and making a mockery of UN sanctions.
No wonder liberals are so depressed and bitter all the time,it has got to be exhausting keeping up with all these lies and hypocrisy that they call “enlightenment”.
Baxter Greene on May 13, 2008 at 1:39 PM
Oh, I see how this “not getting your azz kicked constitutes a win” thingy works!
The Atlanta Hawks, the lowest seed in the NBA playoffs, took on the top-seeded (and proud owners of the best record in the entire NBA) Boston Celtics in the first round. The Hawks forced seven games, where the Celtics prevailed four games to three.
According to Time’s logic, the Hawks really won, since they weren’t crushed like every one thought they would be. Got it. Thanks for the clarification, Time, but I’d like to hear an explanation as to why I still see the Celtics in the playoffs instead of the Hawks.
crushliberalism on May 13, 2008 at 1:45 PM
With all this apparent good news I am going to suspend disbelief and send an email to John McCain with my advice on how he can win this election.
Dear John, my friend. I can call you my firend I hope.
Obama has announced that if he becomes President he will have all American combat troops out of Iraq in 16 months, with things in Iraq going so great you should announce that if you become President you will have all American combat troops out within 9 months of your taking office.
Obama’s head will explode and your election will be in the bag.
MB4 on May 13, 2008 at 1:46 PM
In related news, Japan wins the War in the Pacific, as they force the U.S. Navy to sail into Tokyo Bay, thus giving them the “home field advantage” for the ceremony onboard the USS Missouri.
exhelodrvr on May 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Sadr has won the hearts and minds of the Shi’ite street, and it’s only those bitter people who cling to their guns with purple fingers who voted for Maliki. This is a temporary strategic re-deployment by the invincible Mahdi Army, prior to permanent redeployment in Okinawa, from which they shall vanquish the infidels and send them to be tortured in Abu Ghraib, where there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. The Great Prophet Kukis (peace be unto him) has spoken. /sarc off
Has Baghdad Bob changed his name to Kukis and gotten a job with Time Magazine?
Steve Z on May 13, 2008 at 3:46 PM
I’m not convinced that Mark Kukis had any ill intent.
I think he’s just really stupid.
blink on May 13, 2008 at 10:17 PM
I’m not sure Mark Kukis had any ill intent.
It seems like he’s just really stupid.
blink on May 13, 2008 at 10:18 PM
MB4 on May 13, 2008 at 1:46 PM
Sorry I wasn’t on when you arrived, had to get going on the yard stuff. I hope you don’t mind the liberty I took including your name as part of an All American Classic, I still smile when my minds eye sees the speaker blarring out the stooges names!
dmann on May 13, 2008 at 10:29 PM
That would explain a lot.
MB4 on May 14, 2008 at 2:02 AM
OK, we’ve seen this one enough times to get it…
major john on May 14, 2008 at 4:34 AM