On November 18, the Arabic language daily, Al Hayat, reported on the use of local militias as part of the broader US security strategy in Iraq. "In the beginning we were five people…after a few weeks of coordination with the elders of the area and tribal leaders we were able to recruit about fifty others."
He's not talking about a dot-com, folks.
Meet Abu Abd. Abu Abd is the leader of a new type of Iraqi militia. “A citizens revolt” in the city of Al Adhamiya brought about the formation of Abu Abd’s militia, made up residents’ sons fed up with Al Qaida’s extremist interpretation of Islam and arcane rules. According to Abu Abd, “After two days, our men pushed them (Al Qaida extremists) out of the city…they fled to the area of Kum without resistance.”
After the Al Qaida forces fled, “residents of Al Adhamiya came down to the streets, playing drums and music celebrating this ‘victory’.”
This sounds like a rosy story, but is the best option for fighting Al Qaida really arming local, sectarian militias? Yes, Al Qaida is a dangerous organization, but by paying and arming Iraq’s numerous militias, the United States is wandering into dangerous territory and setting the stage for even larger conflict in Iraq.
Stability is currently held, to a degree, by the massive influx of US troops in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq. This strategy of reinforcement also calls for the assistance of ‘concerned local residents (CLR’s),’ whom the US pays and arms to bolster local security and support US operations.
A recent article by The Guardian, a UK newspaper, discussed the same militia and outlined the problems one faces when arming citizens in such ways. The Guardian quotes a ‘senior Sunni sheikh’ from Al Adhamiya,
“It’s (working with the US) just a way to get arms, and to be a legalized security force to be able to stand against Shia militias and to prevent the Iraqi army and police from entering their areas…the Americans lost hope with an Iraqi government that is both sectarian and dominated by militias, so they are paying for locals to fight al-Qaida. It will create a series of warlords.”
“It’s like someone who brought cats to fight rats, found himself with too many cats and brought dogs to fight the cats. Now they need elephants.”
The creation of militias and warlords in Iraq is eerily reminiscent of Lebanon’s civil war during the 1980’s. Militias from each of Lebanon’s religious sects battled on the streets and sidewalks for more than ten years, charged by religious fervor and competition for territory.
The Guardian quotes Abu Abd as saying, “Ameriya is just the beginning. After we finish with al-Qaida here, we will turn toward our main enemy, the Shia militias. I will liberate Jihad (a Sunni area next to Ameriya taken over by the Mahdi army) then Saidiya and the whole of west Baghdad.”
This is a frightening prospect for Iraq, where sectarianism and territorial conflict could quickly plunge the country into bitter conflict that would far exceed previous strife. All-out civil war in Iraq is a terrible possibility and, with the presence of militias like Abu Abd’s, may be an inevitable outcome.
The US has made considerable progress towards stability and security in Iraq during the past six months, the numbers demonstrate that. The situation on the ground, however, is still tense and stability for Iraq remains, unfortunately, a distant possibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment