WP: Basra Assault Exposed U.S., Iraqi Limits

[laststeamtrain]

Basra Assault Exposed U.S., Iraqi Limits
Anti-Sadr Gambit Seen Aiding Cleric

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, April 4, 2008; A01

BAGHDAD, April 3 -- When Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki launched an offensive in Basra last week, he consulted only his inner circle of advisers. There were no debates in parliament or among his political allies. Senior American officials were notified only a few days before the operation began.

He was determined to show, his advisers said, that Iraq's central government could exert order over a lawless, strategic port city ruled by extremist militias. The advisers said Maliki wanted to demonstrate that he was a strong leader who could shed his reputation as a sectarian figure by going after fellow Shiites, and who could act decisively without U.S. pressure or assistance.

A week later, his ultimately unsuccessful gambit has exposed the shaky foundation upon which U.S. policy in Iraq rests after five years of war, politicians and analysts said. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top military commander in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker will report to Congress next week on Iraq's progress.

The offensive, which triggered clashes across southern Iraq and in Baghdad that left about 600 people dead, unveiled the weaknesses of Maliki's U.S.-backed government and his brash style of leadership. On many levels, the offensive strengthened the anti-American Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

The United States has spent more than $22 billion to build up Iraq's security forces, but they were unable to quell the militias. Maliki had to call on U.S. and British commanders for support. In some areas, such as Sadr's Baghdad stronghold of Sadr City, U.S. forces took the lead in fighting the cleric's Mahdi Army militiamen.

And it was Iran that helped broker an end to the clashes, enhancing its image and illustrating its influence over Iraq's political players.

<more>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040300309.html?nav=rss_world/mideast/iraq

[Alcibiades]

1. Sadr seems to be clever

Did it appear to anyone else before the war that the Mahdi army might be a problem? I had thought so. Why are they only dealing with this now?

Anyway, Sadr appears to be adopting a rope-a-dope strategy. He seems to be biding his time. The moment we stop propping up the current regime, who's the most popular Shiite leader? He is, and he gets one of his guys elected Prime Minister. In comparison to the morons who told us to start this cakewalk, Sadr and the Iranians seem to be Karl von Clausewitz.

Oh, and now Iraq is one step closer to not only a Sunni on Shiite civil war, but a fratricidal Shiite on Shiite civil war as well. I have a suspicion that before this is over the word "Iraq" will come to mean the same things that the words "the Balkans" or "Lebanon" mean today, i.e. the very model of instability. Heckofajob, Bushie!

[GoesTo11]

2. Just read the whole article. Wow.

This article doesn't seem to be sugarcoating it. It's looks pretty bad.

Worth a read - all sorts of details and quotes that are typically excluded from the narrative.