Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Iraq: Now the South Erupts

By Ali Al-Fadhily, IPS News. Posted April 11, 2007.


The eruption of demonstrations in the south of Iraq this week could rob the occupation forces of what was considered a critical bastion of support.
Advertisement

The southern areas of Iraq have long been said to be secure, and people there peaceful towards the occupation forces. Iraqis living in the south were also believed to be cooperative with the occupation to the extent that they supported administrative steps taken by successive Iraqi governments.

The majority of the population of the south are Shia Muslims, and Iraq has had Shia- dominated governments under the occupation.

But demonstrations against the occupation and the United States by hundreds of thousands of angry Shias in Najaf, Kut and other cities across the south Apr. 9 mark a sharp break from a policy of cooperation. Protesters demanded an end to the U.S.-led occupation, burnt U.S. flags and chanted "Death to America!"

Brig. Gen. Abdul Karim al-Mayahi, a police commander in Najaf, told reporters that at least half a million people joined the demonstration there.

Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, told reporters, "We say that we're here to support democracy. We say that free speech and freedom of assembly are part of that. While we don't necessarily agree with the message, we agree with their right to say it."

Clashes after the demonstration left at least one U.S. soldier dead and another wounded in Diwaniyah, 180 km south of Baghdad.

"We have been patient and we have sacrificed a lot thinking the situation would be better one day soon," Hussein Ali, a teacher from Diwaniyah told IPS. "The result we see now is that we were dragged into a swamp of hatred between brothers, and that all the bloodshed was for the sake of war leaders to get more power and fortune."

Fighting is continuing in Diwaniyah between the occupation forces and the Mehdi Army led by Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Additional U.S. and Iraqi troops have been brought into the city to make arrests and carry out door-to-door raids in search of illegal weapons and wanted militiamen.

Muqtada al-Sadr, quiet for a considerable period after clashing with U.S. troops early on in the occupation period, publicly called on his militia to attack occupation troops.

So far this month, five occupation troops have been killed every day on average, according to U.S. Department of Defence figures.

The new Shia armed uprising, which appears to be in its early days, is a further blow to occupation forces that are already stretched thin.

"Four years of patience and what do we get?" Ali Hashim, a merchant from the southern city Basra told IPS. "We got nothing but the loss of our country to those who spoke a lot but did nothing. The United States failed us and sold us cheap to those who would have no mercy on us."

Mahmood al-Lamy, a historian from Basra told IPS the situation there was critical.

"Basra is the biggest southern city and the only Iraqi city that has a port near the Gulf. It is now controlled by various militias who fight each other from time to time over an oil smuggling business that is flourishing under the occupation."

Lamy said residents fear that "the situation here will be a lot worse in the coming months due to disputes that are appearing between major parties."

Lamy was referring to the withdrawal last month of the al-Fadhila Party from the Shia Islamic Coalition Parliament Group, and the dismissal of two ministers from the al-Sadr movement as a punishment for contacting U.S. officials in Nasiriyah in southern Iraq.

The Shia political group is increasingly divided over many issues, and it seems unlikely that it will hold together. But many of the groups are increasingly opposed to the occupation.

"We were late to realise that we were wrong about U.S. intentions," Salman Yassen of the Basra city municipality council told IPS. "We waited four years while U.S. and Iraqi authorities kept us busy fighting each other while they were setting the plan of stealing our oil and tearing our country apart so that their allies would feel safe."

Four years of the occupation of Iraq have seen many changes in U.S. strategies, ambassadors and tactics, but the changes may be too little, too late.

"The delay in moving politically has cost Iraq, the U.S. and many other countries a great deal," former Iraqi police colonel Ahmed Jabbar told IPS in Baghdad. "The least to be said is that the world would have been better off without this occupation and the catastrophic security disturbance it has caused."

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: protests, iraq

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Shame they didn't understand the Bush family
Posted by: channing on Apr 11, 2007 9:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We waited four years while U.S. and Iraqi authorities kept us busy fighting each other while they were setting the plan of stealing our oil and tearing our country apart so that their allies would feel safe."

A sliver of hope was what they were seeking, and the neocons knew many Iraqi's could be pacified by cloaking their agenda in "freedom" while creating a shell-game of accountability and constantly shifting plans. This cloud of confusion technique has served them well, in the 2000 and 2004 elections, in the cover up of 911, in the building of empire-bases in Iraq.

That they cannot find any Generals to take on the neocon's Afghan/Iraq War "Czar-ship", read, Iraq oil fields pumping through Afghan pipelines, and the possibility of being "found out", says the neocon inner-circle is genuinely threatened. The political hey at home with congressional-subpoenas, may yet lead to an obvious, read, cannot be hidden from the public any longer, justification for impeachment. The Czar, like the Homeland Security Czar (as originally proposed), is the signature Rovian method for diffusing accountability... "the President didn't do it, it was the Generals! So off with their heads!", or "trickle-down accountability".

I am so sad that America has come to represent such murderous plunder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our troops are in the middle getting shot at by both Sunnis and Shi'ite Muslims.
Posted by: MountainMike on Apr 11, 2007 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 2003, George W. Bush was asked if he knew the difference between Shi'ite and Sunnis. His response was, "I thought we were fighting Muslims." Have we ever stopped to really try to understand Iraq and Iraqis?

We seem to have blundered our way into the middle of a civil war getting shot at from both sides. Our troops should not be in the middle of an Iraqi civil war. Being in the middle and surging more troops into the middle of this situation is insanity.

Al Sistani is the number one Shi'ite Muslim cleric, and he has recently changed his position of supporting a Sunnis-Shi'ite coalition government after witnessing repeated Sunnis militia attacks on Shi'ite mosques and communities. Al-Sadr is following through with this direction. Unfortunately, this points to Shi'ite militias and militia members infiltrating the Iraqi police and army will be engage in ethnic cleansing of Sunnis. This is already happening with Shi'ite police and army in uniforms during the day working for the government, and then forming death squads at night to murder Sunnis.

Unless Al Sistani can be brought back to support of a coalition government, this will mean a full civil war with the Sunnis being vastly outnumbered and possibly wiped out or moved out of Iraq. The result will be the exact opposite of the Saddam regime, Sunnis repressing Shi'ite Muslims. It will be a Shi'ite Muslim government oppressing the Sunnis.

So much for the "you broke it, you fix it" proverb. Our efforts to "fix it" seem to be more in the direction of breaking it even further. Previously, you had Saddam's palace as a symbol of the enemy for Shi'ite Muslims. Now you have the US building a green zone and 104 acre embassy at the site of the palace. Can anyone miss the symbolism here other that George W. Bush? Despite no real permission being granted by congress or the Iraqis, we are still in progress to building 14 permanent US military bases in Iraq. These are each mini cities, and how do you tell the locals that they have to move out because a golf course is going in for the Americans? Most importantly, the new Iraqi legislation will turnover long term control of the Iraqi oil fields to foreign oil corporations. This disconnects the Iraqi people from a large part of the revenues from their own oil fields. That revenue could help Iraqis address fundamental infrastructure issues like having electricity, running water, and other basic survival needs. And Americans had four years to establish progress on these needs and we have had four years of extreme contractor corruption with billions of dollars wasted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Native Americans and African Americans Know the Iraqi
Posted by: edgar_michel on Apr 11, 2007 10:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America is fighting for domination of Iraq, not the liberation of Iraq,

If America were fighting for liberty, then liberty would be flourishing among the American people themselves; which of course as we all know isn’t happening.

If America would be addressing problems connected to the industries that made it rich in order that it could present to the world a viable paradigm for progress, then the world would be beating a path to the doors of America, and that world power wouldn't have to anything to maintain its primal position. But America isn't doing that because it fears dwindling natural resources, it has launched a campaign of conquest and domination so that its ill begotten lifestyle that has been shown time and again to be unsustainable can perpetuate to the dismal end.

This will be the course unless we as Americans are willing to face the pain that has been caused in our name around the globe.

Perhaps it is the same as facing the pain the Europeans caused the Native Americans in this country. Perhaps it is the same as facing the pain that the European Americans inflicted on their African brothers in the interest of free labor and unfettered competition abroad. Perhaps if that pain was faced, absorbed and digested we would have incorporated the stability into the American culture that was enjoyed by many of the American nations that existed before the onslaught of the Europeans. Perhaps if that pain was faced, absorbed and digested we would have learned about the stability of cultures in Africa that could have been incorporated into the fabric of America making this a nation of understanding and industry.

The Cahuilla of California had a remarkable way of life that was literally decimated first by the Spaniards and second by the westward pioneering Americans. What the European American never bothered to do was learn from and assimilate the cultures they encountered.

What we are seeing in Iraq is exactly what took place two hundred years ago in our own country. We didn't learn then and we are not learning now, because we refuse to face the pain of our own insensitivity of our destruction of the environments we move into and for that matter the very life of earth itself. When you move to a new place, you have to adapt to the climate and conditions of the place you've moved rather than attempt to adapt the climate and conditions of the place to you.

If Europeans had married into the Indian nations in this country then the knowledge of the Indian nations would have been preserved and allowed to flourish. The Cahuilla were different tribes in and around Southern California that worked together as a tightly knit confederation. The bonds of the confederation were maintained though marriage. They also kept detailed family trees so that they knew their ancestors and their obligations. When a young man wished to marry, the woman he wished to marry could not be related to him less than five generations back. This forced the young man in some cases to venture as far as Yuma Arizona to find his bride. But when he did, there was an obligated gift giving ceremony in which the previous unrelated families, were joined through this young man and his bride, preserving the peace and ensuring cooperation in times of scarcity providing enough for all by their laws of sharing with those that fell on hard times.

This was more American than the European version of America, yet it was lost due to the Europeans ignorance and callousness of the richness he encountered.

It is for this reason that the United States will never win over the Iraqi people. What I see coming are reservations for native Iraqis so that the international rich can use their land without having to investigate their culture. No democracy, no understanding, just despotism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: perception Posted by: Ripcord
This is how it ends.
Posted by: oregoncharles on Apr 11, 2007 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When the Shia and the Shia-dominated Iraqi military realize that they don't need the Americans anymore - isn't that the point of all that "training?" - they will turn on them and drive them out. At that point, it becomes painfully obvious that "Support the Troops" really means "Get them the hell out of there", years too late.

There is no way a couple hundred thousand Americans can stand against 80% of the Iraqi population. (The Kurdish units would simply go home, then watch the Arabs kill each other from a safe distance. They might even keep their celebrations relatively subdued, except in Kirkuk.)

That's how it ends: in helicopters off the rooftops, just like in Vietnam. Soon, now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is how it ends. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: catastrophe will come Posted by: Ripcord
There goes our supply route.
Posted by: CriminallySane on Apr 11, 2007 10:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And that is very bad news indeed. We resupply through southern Iraq, since an overland* route is unrealistic from almost any other direction, and airlift is not sufficient to bring in the volume of materials needed.

It also impedes, and possibly seals off, any reasonable route for a withdrawal of troops, not that Bush or Cheney are even remotely concerned with anything even approximating acting in the interest of American kids in harm's way.

* Syria? Iran? The mountainous border with Turkey? The Saudi desert? Jordan might barely be willing, still, it's a long highway run through a very dangerous stretch of Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: von Clausewitz Posted by: Ripcord
NYT propaganda makes it into alternet
Posted by: ScottP on Apr 11, 2007 11:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Muqtada al-Sadr... publicly called on his militia to attack occupation troops

As Juan Cole noted on Monday at juancole.com (and yes, he speaks Arabic): "Although some journalists are writing that al-Sadr called for violent attacks on US troops, the communique he released on Sunday simply says that Iraqi Army troops and Mahdi Army militiamen should not fight one another and should not allow the Americans to manipulate them."

And so we should ask this author, why is he propagating MSM myths?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraqis must fight their own war.
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 11, 2007 1:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
U.S. soldiers and Marines do not belong in Baghdad PERIOD. They should only perform three missions: (1) guard Iraq’s borders, (2) kill Al Qaeda terrorists in urban areas like Anbar province and (3) train the Iraqi Army.

If our troops leave the city and a sectarian bloodbath occurs, so be it. In our Great Civil War, 620,000 Americans died before the North and South finally learned how to settle their differences peaceably. Tragically, I’m afraid, the Iraqis will have to endure a similar learning experience in Baghdad -- without our involvement.

Actually, I am quite confident that if we slowly withdrew our surged troops to bases outside Baghdad, peaceful conditions that had developed would continue. Iraq’s capital, which has seven million people, is a mixture of Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, Christians and Jews who generally speak the same language and have intermarried for decades.

Of 16 major neighborhoods, only one—Sadr City—is populated exclusively by Shiites. It seems to me, Sadr City excepted, the citizens of Baghdad have every incentive to make their neighborhoods safe, assuming our troops aren't present.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran and editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An American progressive's burden.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 11, 2007 1:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some posters on this site ask "What is a progressive?"

One answer is that we are such as hope not to make the same mistakes over and over again--as in Iraq, as this article makes clear.

Hells bells. How many times must we make the mistakes of Vietnam? How many times must we make the mistakes of Alcohol Prohibition? How many times--the mistakes of the Gilded Age? of the robber barons and monopoly capitalism? of giving away public resources to private interests? of racism, sexism, and exploitation of the poor?

We have faced all those before in our history. And we learned that the copy cat policies we follow today are bankrupt. So, yes, we are insane in the sense of doing the same thing again and expecting different results.

Progressives plead for sanity. Is anybody listening?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Greed, Arrogance, and Decepton have real consequences
Posted by: SevenStarHand on Apr 11, 2007 1:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The NeoCons and their supporters are now facing the Truth and Justice they purposely denied the peoples of both East and West. There are very few remaining on both sides of this so-called War on Terror, (aka the Neo-Crusades) who aren't aware of the great duplicity and Machiavellian character of the Bush crew and their cohorts.

Now Iraq and the War on Terror will soon do for the USA and the Vatican what Afghanistan did for the Soviet Union. And make no mistake about it, the ultimate driving force behind this latest convulsion of great evil has been the Vatican and its secret society cohorts. The "yellow cake" lies that helped start this war have been trace back to Rome. The time is long over-due to connect the dots and deliver long-awaited justice to the Vatican and conspiring world leaders and organizations.

As I have said in recent years, the worst potential outcomes need not occur and can be avoided. The question is, will the people of America open their collective eyes, see the truth, and finally act with true wisdom, before it is too late for everyone, everywhere. Money, religion, and politics are at the core of the great deceptions that now bedevil this planet. The only way to end these cycles of evil is to end these three great deceptions.

Here is Wisdom !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shiite chumps are finally getting wise to Bush and his republifascists
Posted by: chief of okeefe on Apr 11, 2007 5:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and it is good to see. 4 years and now they realize this was no liberation, but a conquest aimed at these goals:
1. Destroy another arab society as a unified country, in order to help Israel steal arab land, water, and sovereignty
2. Dominate Iraqi oil and thus dominate other oil-importing countries
3. Get revenge on arabs, any arabs, for 9-11
4. Justify huge war budgets which fatten war contractors and provide career paths for military officers, both key republifascist constituencies
5. Have fun with more war, chickenhawk republifascist's favorite spectator sport

But now, if the Shiites turn against the occupation en masse, then the writing will be on the wall. If the warmonger civilians and military personnel do not see that, then they well deserve the humiliation that is coming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who are the bad guys?
Posted by: bohdan on Apr 11, 2007 6:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When Russia invaded and occupied Afghanistan, we The United States, supplied the "insurgents" with arms and training. Russia, losing that war, eventually left defeated.

What difference is there with the American invasion and occupation --- two countries instead of one.

But how dare we condemn Iran and Syria for supplying and training the "new" invaders and occupiers of Islamic lands. It’s only natural.

And nobody's comparing anymore but it IS the Crusades all over again. As with all invading armies, we too will leave as a defeated, spent force.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A million man march
Posted by: robchapman on Apr 12, 2007 7:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article above quoted the Iraqi Chief of Security for the region stating a million marched to protest the Occupation and call for its end.

A million people out of a population of 17 million taking the time and making the effort to demonstrate their opposition to the Occupation.

Remind me, what does the word "democracy" mean?

Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]