Iraqi Army moves into Sadr City
posted at 8:30 am on May 20, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The Iraqi Army has now spread throughout Sadr City in operations this morning, putting snipers on rooftops and establishing checkpoints throughout the area. The new operation follows on the heels of an agreement from Sadrists not to resist a takeover as long as no American troops accompany the native soldiers into the slums. So far, no resistance has been shown, and residents appear happy to see the Mahdi Army take flight:
Iraq’s army moved on Tuesday to take control of Baghdad’s Sadr City, power base of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, in another step to stamp government authority over areas previously outside its control.
A spokesman for Iraqi security forces in Baghdad, Major-General Qassim Moussawi, said soldiers had launched “Operation Peace” in the sprawling eastern Baghdad slum early on Tuesday.
Iraqi soldiers, who previously controlled only the outer perimeter of Sadr City, advanced deep into the poor suburb, home to 2 million people, without meeting any opposition, he said.
“We are taking control of three-quarters of the city. What is left is the final quarter,” he said, referring to an area where Iraqi security forces had previously ventured only rarely.
Reuters avoids the Basra Narrative in this report, noting the progress of the Maliki government in establishing sovereignty throughout Iraq:
The operation — on the second anniversary of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s swearing-in — marks the latest step by the government to extend control over areas of Iraq that were under the sway of Shi’ite militias or Sunni Arab insurgents.
Maliki personally oversaw the offensive against Shi’ite militias in Basra, which is now under Iraqi army control, and earlier this month he flew to Mosul in the north as his forces launched a push against the Sunni Islamist al Qaeda.
The lack of effective resistance in Sadr City shows how far Moqtada al-Sadr’s star has fallen in Iraq. At one point, the Mahdis had a huge power base in Sadr City thanks to their protection of its residents from Sunni terrorist attacks. When those attacks lessened, the Mahdis turned into thugs, imposing Taliban-like social restrictions and extorting payment in protection rackets. They lost the hearts-and-minds battle on their own, and now Sadr City wants a future without Sadr.
Of course, some wags will still spin this as a victory for Sadr, but that argument has already worn thin. The Iraqi central government has grown strong enough to claim sovereignty over all of Iraq, and Sadr has weakened to the point where capitulation is the only option left to him. Sadr, in the end, proved himself as inept a politician as he was a general.
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
Well, this is good news, but Time is also correct in that the offensive did not achieve what it set out to do.
The real issue is the strength of the national government. Right now it seems stronger than it has in a long time, due to Sadr’s involvement. I kind of get the sense that everyone is still unsure about this government, and that powerplays are in the future. But we’ll see.
Tom_Shipley on May 20, 2008 at 8:41 AM
I wonder if Al-Roto-Reuters will also ignore Mookie being martyred???
doriangrey on May 20, 2008 at 8:42 AM
Once again, President Bush has been vindicated. He said, “We will stand down as the Iraqi Army stands up” (paraphrase), and that’s exactly what we are doing. The Iraqis are increasingly bearing the brunt of the security operations and fighting.
Thanks to George W. Bush, we can expect to have a stable Iraq for years to come, backed by an American presence—that is, if a certain naive Democrat does not take office in January and start unraveling all that has been accomplished.
You have to ask that certain Democrat, whose initials are BHO, whether he wants to turn Iraq over to the Iranians, and let al Qaeda back in. Then watch as he stammers and stumbles searching for answer his MoveOn minions will accept.
MrLynn on May 20, 2008 at 8:42 AM
Erratum:
“. . .searching for answer his MoveOn minions will accept.”
should be
“searching for an answer his MoveOn minions will accept.”
(When will HA allow us to edit our posts?)
MrLynn on May 20, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Preview is your friend…….. :)
doriangrey on May 20, 2008 at 8:48 AM
I guess the Iraqis have not read the Democrat talking points. Namely that there has been no political progress therefore the the surge has failed and it is time to abandon the ship.
moxie_neanderthal on May 20, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Well you certainly know it wasn’t the democrats who haven’t paid any attention to what is happening in Iraq…… /s
doriangrey on May 20, 2008 at 8:53 AM
While the Iraqi Army is 0 for 2 on naming their operations (Operation Peace in Sadr City? Operation Mother of Two Springs in Mosul? WTF!), it’s good to see that they are progressing successfully. So much for that “civil war” the MSM always wanted.
LT Nixon on May 20, 2008 at 8:54 AM
But but but the MSM is never wrong…. there will be a Iraqi civil war… just you wait and see… Even if the MSM has to completely fabricate it…
doriangrey on May 20, 2008 at 8:57 AM
It is stories like this that make me want to dust off all the old DNC talking points about what a wonderful benevolent dictator Saddam Hussein was and how Iraq was so much better under a guy who threw people off buildings than under a new government.
There is a special place in Hell reserved for the likes of the defeatocrats who have prolonged the war because they don’t like the political ramifications of American success.
highhopes on May 20, 2008 at 8:59 AM
I’m not sure how you arrive at that conclusion.
They’re setting up checkpoints, the Mahdi Army agreed to give up it’s heavy weapons, and interference with the gov’t’s attempts to “provide basic services” isn’t going to gain the militia any support.
trubble on May 20, 2008 at 9:00 AM
Oh c’mon people!
Everybody knows the only reason the surge is working is due to the Iraq government knowing the Dems are going to win the white house in November and will hold Iraqi’s accountable.
swami on May 20, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Who’d they hear that from? Jim McDermott?
highhopes on May 20, 2008 at 9:09 AM
Al Sadr’s real end will come when he swinging from a lamp post.
patrick neid on May 20, 2008 at 9:17 AM
Given the timing, this is obviously a Rove operation.
Akzed on May 20, 2008 at 9:21 AM
Powerplays? Shocking! I’m sure glad mature democracies like ours don’t have to suffer those….
“Mother of Two Springs” is Mosul’s nickname. If our national guard needed to restore order in NYC, I could see it being called Operation Big Apple.
Kafir on May 20, 2008 at 9:22 AM
October ‘08:
“Nobody has been more supportive of our action in Iraq than I have.” - Obama
WisCon on May 20, 2008 at 9:24 AM
At the bottom of the article,
What are they going to charge him with I wonder? A hate crime? Conduct unbecoming?
As for the rest, I’m very glad the Iraqis are capable of carrying out such an operation on their own. It means our troops have done their job very well and enables them to be gradually withdrawn from a position of strength and I dare say victory.
Yakko77 on May 20, 2008 at 9:37 AM
Yes it did — The Times is wrong in claiming defeat even before the fight was waged…things don’t always go according to timelines and plans, but we can say that victory is near here.
Richard Romano on May 20, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Iraqi Army moves into Sadr City
Suprisingly from today’s NYT’s:
“No American ground forces accompanied the Iraqi troops, not even military advisers. But the Americans shared intelligence, coached the Iraqis during the planning and provided overhead reconnaissance throughout the operation. Still, the operation was very much an Iraqi plan.”
Also:
“The timing of today’s operation was kept secret. Late Monday night, the Americans removed several slabs in the concrete wall they had erected so that Iraqi forces could pass through. American M1 tanks guarded the gaps throughout the rest of the night until the offensive began.”
One can only assume that there was no New York Times inbeds available during this operation or it would have published on the front pages for all to see.
Rovin on May 20, 2008 at 9:59 AM
Looking good…
KarmiCommunist on May 20, 2008 at 10:13 AM
I disagree. I think they just held their tongues.
bnelson44 on May 20, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Basra - check
Mosul - check
Sadr City - check
It’s official. Maliki is a bad a$$.
The Iraqi people are seeing that the Prime Minister will eventually win all the battles.
This must be good for the Iraqi Army’s recruiting efforts, and it will serve as a future deterrent to those that would otherwise attempt to perpetrate such crimes against the people.
blink on May 20, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Rovin: “Surprisingly from today’s NYT’s”
Not so surprising! Michael Gordon is one of the best reporters in Iraq, and one of the very few who is and has been in country for quite awhile now. Although he doesn’t yet have the intellectual reach of John Burns, he’s made a really promising start. I don’t even have to check the byline anymore to know whose pieces I’m reading, because he’s so resfreshingly straightforward. I only wish the NYTimes editorial board were reading his reports too.
JM Hanes on May 20, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Ed, are you sure about all this. How could the failed government created by the defeated American forces do anything?
And what happened to Tom, the troll, Shipley? Too much unspinable good news for him?
snaggletoothie on May 20, 2008 at 11:09 AM
They call that COIN
bnelson44 on May 20, 2008 at 11:12 AM
So for thousand of lives and tens of thousands of wounded and hundreds of billions of dollars, and all that just so far, we get the complete dhimmification of the American President.
But, of course, as Commander Guy would say, “Islam is a Great Religion of Peace”.
Such a deal.
This is definitely not my father’s Oldsmobile.
MB4 on May 20, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Look at what is happening in Sadr City. See any American troops going in there right now? No? You know why? Well partly because one fool who should have known better used a Koran as target practice and now the people of that city have a reason to hate Americans.
So pack that in your father’s Oldsmobile.
bnelson44 on May 20, 2008 at 11:24 AM
The Iraqi central government has grown strong enough to claim sovereignty over all of Iraq …
I wish the President and Gen. Petreaus would hold a presser with a stack of maps, telling and showing us what was going on over there, speaking as if to children so that even the libs could understand. Does anybody remember Gen. Schwarzkoft doing this after the Gulf War? It was a great presentation, exactly what Bush needs to do.
Tony737 on May 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM
If no American troops are going into Sadr City, then I say, very good.
Get a clue someday. Those who hate infidels do so because the Koran tells them to.
My father’s “Oldsmobile” was WWII.
In 1945, our government was of one mind regarding state Shintoism. Lewis quotes Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, who wrote: “Shintoism, insofar as it is a religion of individual Japanese, is not to be interfered with. Shintoism, however, insofar as it is directed by the Japanese government, and as a measure enforced from above by the government, is to be done away with. … There will be no place for Shintoism in the schools. Shintoism as a state religion — National Shinto, that is — will go. … Our policy on this goes beyond Shinto. … The dissemination of Japanese militaristic and ultra-nationalistic ideology in any form will be completely suppressed.”
And it was, with fabulous results.
Obviously, there have been no analogous U.S. efforts to “de-jihadize” Islamic public culture even as the United States has spent lives, limbs, money and years trying, essentially, to stop the jihad in the Islamic Middle East — not even, to take a manageable example, in the U.S.-funded Palestinian Authority, where state-run media continue to incite Islamically motivated violence against Jews and Americans. And then there are all those U.S.-fostered constitutions that enshrine Sharia law — just the sort of ideological concession our forebears would never have made.
- Diana West
MB4 on May 20, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Hmmm… lets see… your contention is that shooting a Koran made it so American troops would not be in harms way, and that the Iraqi army would then take care of business…
Dam, lets shoot some more Korans.
Romeo13 on May 20, 2008 at 11:37 AM
I was expecting Mosul to explode and still have trouble believing that al Sadr has been permanently sidelined, but the dominos appear to be falling so fast, it’s almost spooky. I’m holding my breath and hoping there are no big progress-shattering surprises on the way. It’s hard to believe that the Iranians would just concede defeat or that AQI would just slink off in utterly unspectacular fashion. I worry about al Sistani’s safety, particularly, in the run up to elections both here and there. Assuming the bad guys aren’t just lying low and/or regrouping, assassination strikes me as the one thing that might still relight the fires where suicide bombings and general mayhem no longer work.
JM Hanes on May 20, 2008 at 11:53 AM
I hope he keeps it up.
tgharris on May 20, 2008 at 12:08 PM
bnelson44:
“See any American troops going in there right now? No? You know why? Well partly because one fool who should have known better used a Koran as target practice and now the people of that city have a reason to hate Americans.”
That’s absurd. Al Sadr has always claimed that his whole raison d’etre was fighting the American occupation. Denying entry to American troops in Sadr City was the face saving concession that greased the skids. It’s a reverse briar patch win-win.
JM Hanes on May 20, 2008 at 12:08 PM
The Iraqi central government has grown strong enough to claim sovereignty over all of Iraq,
what about the kurdish regions? Is the PKK? still in control of the border egions or maybe it’s turkey that’s in control. either way I don’t think it’s Iraq. The Kurdish border is still a stornghold for Iran’s influence. That needs to be dealt with and I have no doubt that’s next on the list. Look’s good. McCain was right. And BHO proves everyday he doesn’t know what he is talking about.
unseen on May 20, 2008 at 12:10 PM
The main difference between the two scenarios is that Shintoism was a strictly Japanese national religion. As far as I am aware, they made no attempt to impose it upon others, or even fought the war in the name of Shinto.
Islam, on the other hand ….
OldEnglish on May 20, 2008 at 12:11 PM
I found this to be pretty rich (from the bottom of the article):
The Sadrists could “retake control” at any time…but the cost to Sadr “would be huge”. So Sadr is giving in, because it would cost too much to hold out….but he could take control at any time. In the meantime, the Iraqi government is sinking roots in Sadr’s turf. Obviously a sound strategic move by Sadr…?????
tgharris on May 20, 2008 at 12:51 PM
So you are saying that Islam is even worse than Shintoism?
Well, I am not going to argue with that.
MB4 on May 20, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Yes, tg, when four thousand soldiers march into your neighborhood and demand that you lay down your arms and stop the general thuggery of manipulation and intimidation, AND the balance of the nation thinks you’re fighting a lost cause, “strategically” removing yourself from the battlefield is a sound move.
Rovin on May 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM
JM Hanes,
“It’s hard to believe that the Iranians would just concede defeat or that AQI would just slink off in utterly unspectacular fashion.”
AQI has been so badly damaged, they very likely don’t have much left. The Iranians, on the other hand, probably realize that this is not the time or place for a showdown; not only would it be a tactical mistake, it would also be a strategic mistake with the US election heating up.
exhelodrvr on May 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM
I’m not as surprised by Sadr City as I am by Mosul. AQI must have spent a lot more trying to hold there, earlier, than I expected. Of course, we have been pressing the rat line from Syria, and disrupting them around Tall Afar - so maybe it isn’t too surprising after all.
I think the JAM saw what happened when they fought back in Sadr City. They died. They got blowed up real good by Air, by Abrams or by small arms fire.
A lot of the ‘gunmen’ will drop their arms and say “Who, me? Never heard of the Jaish Al Mahdi”. It’ll be kind of like trying to find self-professed SS members in late 1945, early 1946….
major john on May 20, 2008 at 1:49 PM
That’s exactly what we want them to do. We want this to end.
bnelson44 on May 20, 2008 at 2:11 PM
Seriously. This is starting to look an awful lot like victory. With the Sadrists being defanged Basra and now Sadr City, and AQI being ground into paste in Mosul, is there any other area of the country that is a real trouble spot right now? And with the IA doing so much of the work lately, a light is starting to appear at the end of the tunnel. I trust Petraeus to tell us when things are good to go, and they will probably want to keep the troop levels up through the elections in October, but if nothing major happens between now and then, I get the distinct feeling that major troop draw downs will be announced by the end of this year.
Dudley Smith on May 20, 2008 at 2:31 PM
When self-preservation is the goal, you are probably right.
tgharris on May 20, 2008 at 2:39 PM
exhelodrvr:
“AQI has been so badly damaged, they very likely don’t have much left.”
This may very well be true, which is why I turned my attention any potential single act which could prove devastating enough to tip the balance back into chaos. Every day the government consolidates its reach makes that scenario less likely, but it’s not yet unthinkable. AQ is not entirely without resources that could be directed toward such an undertaking.
“The Iranians, on the other hand, probably realize that this is not the time or place for a showdown; not only would it be a tactical mistake, it would also be a strategic mistake with the US election heating up”
Yes again. We’re clearly looking a tactical retreat with a lot of diplomatic window dressing. What I’m wondering is whether it represents a game changing failure and thus a real Iraqi victory, or whether it is stop gap designed to camouflage a dramatic shift in the nature of their insurgency.
I read somewhere that the Iranians basically had al Sadr under house arrest, although it may only have been a rumor. If true, however, is this because he represents a threat to Iranian operations? Or if it’s the result of some sort of deal making, who are their Iraqi counterparts? The government? Insider factions? Or are they just keeping al Sadr on ice till they need him again — and making sure he knows who his masters are?
All of which is to say, I wouldn’t be nearly as sanguine about those hearts and minds in Sadr City, and elsewhere, as Ed is. You only have to look at Lebanon to see that Iran is not even close to scaling back its ambitions and that it is nothing if not tenacious.
JM Hanes on May 20, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Sadr City is a slum. Just like the slums in Beruit. In a slum whoever provides services to the people is the organization that gains their backing. In Beruit that is Hezbullah. In Sadr City it was JAM. Now, it looks like, it will be the Iraqi government. That is a giant step forward for Iraq.
bnelson44 on May 20, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Dudley Smith:
I do trust Petraeus to get as much of the job done right as anybody on earth. I’ve begun to think, or rather feel, that by January 20, he may have enough progress sewn up that even Obama can’t turn back the clock, but that’s a seriously close call. With constant, widespread, violence largely eliminated, relief will be quickly followed by discontent if there are no measurable improvements in people’s daily lives. This is not just an infrastructure problem. The cultural change required to stand Iraqis on their own feet when they’ve spent their lives utterly dependent on dictatorial central government is a challenge of enormous dimensions, even without compelling time constraints, and reconciliation is a cultural and economic, not just political, proposition. Iraq will be inherently unstable until that happens.
I’m not trying to diminish the miraculous turn around we’re watching, or gainsay the attendant optimism. I’m just having a too-good-too-be-true moment, steeling myself for potential setbacks, and praying that there is, indeed, enough time to make something like irreversible gains before the year is out.
JM Hanes on May 20, 2008 at 3:34 PM
I can certainly identify. I always look for the gotcha, too. But one difference between Sadr City and Beruit is that, in Lebanon the Iranian-back faction is stronger, militarily, than the government. As the Iraqi military gets stronger and more competent this becomes vanishingly unlikely to happen in Iraq. The Iraqi forces are approaching 500,000. This may, in fact, be why we see Iran doing things that appear to be uncharacteristically reasonable. What’s the point in trying to antagonize a government that is firmly in control, and may be on the verge of a military capacity that could really hurt you, both at home and in the region?
jl on May 20, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Right on Tom…!
For all you fine folks who sit before your keyboards in undies, PJ’s and smoking jackets…I prefer to sit nude. But; that’s just me.
Little history lesson here…
T_S just stated…”…their power plays are in the future…”
Mao Tse-tung; “Guerrilla fighters must be able to live among a friendly population like fish in water…”
Gen. George Washington; “ The task now was not to win the battle, but to save his army. On Thursday morning, Aug. 29, 1776, Washington ordered that all available boats be brought across the East River to Brooklyn Ferry. For the operation he had in mind…”
Beware, Tom Shipley’s caution…and mine…
“To live to fight another day, to lose a fight or competition but not be completely defeated and therefore be able to try again in the future…
Such is the guerillas means!
Such are the goode General’s dilemmas!
Olde soldier sends…
J_Gocht on May 20, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Does it matter if they stand and fight to the last man or throw down their weapons and flee.
Since when gaining ground be considered anything but a victory? Yes, just one battle in a larger war. But ground gained just the same.
Hog Wild on May 20, 2008 at 8:00 PM
Sorry for the late reply.
I should have added that Shinto was separated from official life in post-war Japan in order to facilitate a complete reorganization of the Japanese political system.
Islam is not a national trait, and, yes, it is much worse than Shinto.
OldEnglish on May 20, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Iraq knows they are about to get a new enemy if the dems win so they are doing what they can while they can.
tomas on May 20, 2008 at 8:32 PM
…and you quote ,Sir?
or perhaps your own self?
Regards/s
J_Gocht on May 20, 2008 at 8:36 PM
They do not throw down their weapons and flee… they melt into the dark of night and place them under the earth, in an unseen place.
Olde soldier sends…
J_Gocht on May 20, 2008 at 8:54 PM
I seek my own counsel most times sir. I trust myself more than anyone else on most occassions. But if you’re fishing for a quote….
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest thing. The decayed and degrading sense of moral and patriotic feeling is worse. A man that has nothing which is he is willing to fight for, nothing he cares more about than his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself”.
Jon Stuart Mill
I understand your point and don’t ignore the tactical play of a “false surrender”. But if we continue to train and prepare the Iraqi military to deal with such situations when they arise, that too is something we want. Confidence is an important tool in team building. If the Iraqi government and military is building confidence, that is indeed a good thing. It will give them something to reach down and check for when it counts.
Try to remember we are dealing with Islamic army’s and not the U.S. military, where reaching down and finding a pair has rarely been a problem.
Hog Wild on May 20, 2008 at 11:29 PM