|
WSWS
: News &
Analysis : Middle
East : Iraq
Iraq: European think-tank documents occupation failure in
Basra
By James Cogan
3 July 2007
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The situation in the southern city of Basra is a microcosm
of how the policies of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq
have destroyed the countrys institutions, shattered its
national cohesion and set the stage for intractable violence.
That is the conclusion of a June 25 report by the Brussels-based
International Crisis Group (ICG), Where is Iraq Heading?
Lessons from Basra.
Released amid the Bush administrations surge
of close to 30,000 additional troops in Iraq, the ICG report is
among the bleakest produced by any Western think-tank. According
to the report, British forces occupying the south of the country
have lost effective control over Basra. The city is now a battleground
of rival Islamic fundamentalist groups, none of which have any
loyalties to the US-backed central government in Baghdad. The
5,500 British troops still stationed in and around the city have
been driven by relentless attacks into increasingly
secluded compounds.
The ICG warns that American surge is on the same road to failure,
with profound consequences for the strategic and economic interests
of the US and European powers.
The executive summary declared: Basras experience
carries important lessons for the capital and nation as a whole.
Coalition forces have already implemented a security plan there,
Operation Sinbad, which was in many ways similar to Baghdads
current military surge. What U.S. commanders call clear,
hold and build, their British counterparts earlier had dubbed
clear, hold and civil reconstruction. And, as in the
capital, the putative goal was to pave the way for a takeover
by Iraqi forces. Far from being a model to be replicated, however,
Basra is an example of what to avoid. With renewed violence and
instability, Basra illustrates the pitfalls of a transitional
process that has led to collapse of the state apparatus and failed
to build legitimate institutions....
The ICG left little doubt as to why it considers the city to
be crucial. To neglect Basra is a mistake. The nations
second largest city, it is located in its most oil-rich region.
Basra governorate is also the only region enjoying maritime access,
making it the countrys de facto economic capital and a significant
prize for local political actors. Sandwiched between Iran and
the Gulf monarchies, at the intersection of the Arab and Persian
worlds, the region is strategically important.
In other words, control of Basra is vital from the standpoint
of realising the real aims of the invasion of Iraq: opening up
the countrys oil reserves to transnational energy conglomerates
and asserting US strategic and economic dominance in the Middle
East.
Basra, the report noted, was once one of the most cosmopolitan
and diverse cities in the Middle East. Christians and members
of other minorities lived in general harmony alongside the Muslim
population. While Shiites were the majority, much of the upper
and middle classes adhered to the Sunni branch of Islam. The city
had a tradition of tolerance and open-mindedness.
Dramatic changes were brought about, however, by the Iran-Iraq
war of the 1980s, the first US war against Iraq in 1991 and the
UN sanctions regime for the following 12 years.
The city suffered severe damage during both wars and its population
fell from 1.5 million to less than 900,000. In the final days
of the Gulf War, Basra was the focus of a Shiite uprising against
Husseins regime. Thousands of people were slaughtered by
the predominantly Sunni Republican Guard, leaving a legacy of
sectarian tension. Throughout the 1990s, UN sanctions and Husseins
economic restrictions on the city produced a staggering decline
in living standards and public services. The social crisis in
Basra was aggravated by the influx of tens of thousands of Marsh
Arabs who had been forced from their traditional lands by Baathist
repression and the deliberate draining of the Euphrates River
marshes. By 2003, the citys population had swelled to over
two million, with many living in poverty-stricken slums and shantytowns.
The urban poor in Basraas they did in Baghdad and numerous
other Iraqi citiesturned in the 1990s toward the Shiite
fundamentalist movement headed by Mohammad Sadeq al-Sadr. Sadr
combined strict Islamic morality with populist denunciations of
the oppression of the Iraqi people by both the US and the Baathists.
To a desperate population, the Sadrist current held out the false
promise of a Shiite theocratic state bringing social order and
prosperity.
Sadr was assassinated by Hussein in 1999 but his movement continued
under the leadership of his son, Moqtada al-Sadr, and Mohammad
al-Yaqubi, a prominent cleric who had considerable influence in
Basra. The other major Shiite force in the city was the Supreme
Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI)a pro-Iranian
tendency that directed its activities in Iraq from exile in Tehran.
The US and British forces who entered Iraq in 2003 did so with
little comprehension of the influence these Shiite fundamentalist
movements exerted. The view prevailing in Washington was that
the invasions shock and awe tactics would intimidate
the Iraqi population into accepting a puppet government made up
of relatively unknown pro-US political exiles.
Instead, the US military was rapidly confronted with a guerilla
war in Sunni areas of the country and barely restrained hostility
among the majority Shiite population. The only political forces
with sufficient influence to prevent a broader anti-occupation
rebellion were Shiite clerics and religious parties. In a policy
shift with far-reaching consequences, the Bush administration
elevated Shiite fundamentalists at the expense of the predominantly
Sunni and secular Baathist elite. Each of the various governments
that Washington has installed in Baghdad has been dominated by
Shiite factions, allied with Kurdish nationalist organisations,
seeking to appropriate the power and privileges of the former
ruling class.
The marginalisation of Sunnis has been the main factor in entrenching
the anti-occupation insurgency and triggering the bloody sectarian
conflict that is raging in Baghdad and other areas of the country.
Factional conflict
In Basra, the British also encouraged Shiite fundamentalists
to take over the post-Hussein state. Followers of Mohammad al-Yaqubi,
who formed the Islamic Virtue Party or Fadhila in 2003, control
most of the ministries in the provincial government and effectively
control the Oil Protection Force, a paramilitary unit that is
supposed to protect oil infrastructure. Supporters of Moqtada
al-Sadr are believed to control Basras port. Thousands of
Sadrist and SCIRI militiamen have joined the local units of the
Iraqi army and the Basra police. A smaller Shiite faction, Hizbollah,
is believed to control the Basra branch of the Customs service.
The ICG report stated: The end result has been monopoly
control by a variety of armed Islamist parties over Basra politics.
In the occupations early stages, they focused attacks on
former regime members such as Baathists and military officers.
Over time, their target list extended to anyone potentially threatening
their political or economic interests, be they Sunni or Shiite,
doctors, engineers, journalists, tribal chiefs or independent
traffickers. Engaged in a brutal scramble for resources and a
vicious cycle of attacks and counter-attacks, militias have become
by far Basras principle source of violence. This could well
foreshadow what will happen to the rest of the country once other
causes of strifemainly the fight against coalition forces
and sectarian violencerecede.
The parties, the ICG noted, fight most intensely over
the three most valuable assets: oil trafficking, control over
security forces and access to public services and resources. Evidence
suggests that local parties are massively involved in oil trafficking...
A representative of Basra Sadrists told the ICG: All parties,
without exception, steal and smuggle oil. While smuggling
and corruption have created fortunes for some, the bulk of Basras
population is enduring conditions that have only worsened since
the 2003 invasion.
Disputes over control of oil have produced what can only be
described as the ingredients for an intra-Shiite civil war in
Basra, which could erupt at any time. The Sadrists, whose main
base of support is in Baghdad, are demanding that oil revenues
should accrue to the federal Iraqi government and be shared across
the entire the country. SCIRI has called for control of all new
oil production to be ceded to a southern Iraqi region,
consisting of nine majority Shiite provinces and governed from
its power base, the Shiite religious centre of Najaf.
Factions within Fadhila are bitterly opposed to both federalism
and regionalism, advocating instead that the city model itself
on the small Gulf states, establish autonomy from both Baghdad
and the rest of southern Iraq and take the lions share of
revenues from the oil produced in Basra province.
In response to a spike of factional violence, the British military
announced in September 2006 that it was launching Operation Sinbad
to rid Basra of militias. As has happened in the areas being targetted
by the US surge, the Basra militias and armed groups
simply went to ground, while at the same time stepping up guerilla
attacks on British troops. A British soldier told the English
press: On the last tour we were not mortared very often.
This tour, it was two or three times a day... Toward the end of
January to March, it was like a siege mentality. We were getting
mortared every hour of the day. We were constantly being fired
at. We basically didnt sleep for six months....
By April, the British had called off Operation Sinbad. Within
weeks, the militias were back in the streets. The local Sadrist
and SCIRI branches have since formed an alliance and launched
an attempt to unseat the Fadhila provincial governor. Once Fadhila
has been defeated, the ICG predicts, the Sadrists and SCIRI will
turn against each other. The only thing that has prevented them
from physically disposing of Fadhila thus far is the threat that
British troops will be deployed in his defence.
The ICG concluded its report: The British appear to have
given up on the idea of establishing a functioning state... In
any event, time is running out.... Over time, local government
in the south could well resemble a small failed state; the government
might collapse, a victim of the ruthless struggle between unregulated
and uninhibited militias.... Basra teaches that as soon as the
military surge ends and coalition forces diminish, competition
between rival factions will itself surge. In other words, prolonging
the same political process with the same political actors will
ensure that what is left of the Iraqi state gradually is torn
apart. The most likely outcome will be the countrys untidy
breakup into myriad fiefdoms, superficially held together by the
presence of coalition forces.
The most significant aspect of the ICGs prediction for
Iraqa future of warlords, militias and civil waris
that it cannot advise a course of action that would produce a
different outcome. Apart from lecturing the US and British governments
on the need for the various Iraqi factions to adopt genuine
political compromises and a more inclusive system, the think-tank
has nothing to say. The truth is that the longer the US occupation
continues the more Iraqi people are being inflicted with ever-greater
forms of barbarism.
See Also:
Iraqi oil workers strike in
Basra
[9 June 2007]
Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr
makes bid for greater role in US-occupied Iraq
[29 May 2007]
Iraq: British troops battle
Shiite militia in Basra
[23 May 2007]
Iraq's "stable"
south descends into political chaos
[4 May 2007]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |