The End of a Ceasefire?

So, the news from Iraq today isn't good.

Iraqi forces clashed with Shiite militiamen Tuesday in the southern oil port of Basra and gunmen patrolled several Baghdad neighborhoods as followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr ordered a nationwide civil disobedience campaign to demand an end to the crackdown on their movement.

The potential impact is huge and this could be the beginning of the end of the decrease in violence that we've seen over the past few months.

No knows for sure what is going on yet but this seems to be an internal Iraqi fight. This is Shi'a on Shi'a violence. It is a power struggle between some combination of the various Shi'a factions in Iraq including: the Badr Brigades (loyal to the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq), Mehdi Army (loyal to the Sadrists), and the Iraqi Security Forces (Which include elements of a number of factions).

The Bush administration may try to blame this all on Iran and confuse the issue. Iran will likely get involved in any intra-Shi'a struggle because it has so many ties into Southern Iraq. But at the end of the day, this is about the still simmering civil war in the South and the fact that we still haven't figured out how to address it or facilitate a political agreement inside of Iraq.

The million dollar question is: what is "a nationwide civil disobedience campaign?" If it is strikes and protests that's one thing. But if it is the beginning of the end of the ceasefire that is something very different. We have to wait and see. The other central question is whether or not this is in fact a decision made by Sadr and the political leadership, or if it is rogue elements of his militia who are causing the fighting.

The issue is very serious. In fact it's huge. The drop in violence in Iraq has generally been attributed to four elements 1) More American forces and the change in tactics to counterinsurgency; 2) The Awakening movement; 3) The Sadr ceasefire; and 4) The ethnic cleansing and physical separation of the various sides.

It's hard to say for sure, which of these factors was the most important. The Bush administration will tell you it's all about the troop levels. I've tended to believe it's more of a mix and was most inclined towards the Anbar Awakening and the sectarian cleansing as the important factors. But when you look at the data it really seems to indicate that the Sadr ceasefire may have been the key.

If you look at the graph that the military has been using on civilian casualties it looks to tell a pretty clear story. The first major drop in violence came in early 2007 before the troop surge. It looks like it was mostly based on the fact that the worst of the sectarian cleansing in Baghdad had been completed (I outlined this argument more thoroughly a few months back).

The second drop in violence came in September. By that time the full surge had already been in effect for 2-3 months and the Awakening had been going on for a year. The Sadr ceasefire occured on August 28 and suddenly boom a big drop in violence. That could be a coincidence and it could be that all four factors came together. But the data seems to point to the fact that the Sadr Ceasefire more then anything else is what caused the drop in violence in the early fall.

If that is in fact the case, we really have to hope that this is only a temporary spat and that the ceasefire holds. If not, the situation could deteriorate very quickly.

Comments

[AsaNisMasa]

this could be Iraq's Tet Offensive...

[LizM]

Let's just hope that we don't end up with a Saigon-type withdrawal because the US may never recover...in many more ways than one!

[siegfried89]

I am a conspiracy theory buff. With the election less than 9 months away would it not be to the advantage of Republicans to surreptitiously escalate the violence in Iraq by reducing security and turning a blind eye? This could lend a bit of credence in the minds of those who may not be totally duped by their bogus "war on terror"; trumpeting they are the only ones who can save America and the world. Just a thought.

Not Duped by Bush
Plano, TX

[dlswriter]

We paid Sadr $330 Million to take a vacation. (Frontline, Bush's War). Looks like he spent it all and is looking for more.

The United States is now paying 88,000 members of the Awakening $300 a month to take part in the neighborhood patrols. Thats $26.4 Million a month.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303793.html?hpid=moreheadlines

The Petreus Surge is just soldiers with dufflebags stuffed with cash handing out your hard earned money.

[CatfishJohn]

.... near epidemic levels of asthma and obesity in the u.s. is the REAL reason the iraqis didnt greet us with "flowers and sweets' as Chalabi and Cheney predicted, as the Iraqi's are a thoughtful and considerate people...and if you consider bushco. allowed over 1,000,000,000 pounds of explosives and ands wepaonery to be whisked away form huseein's many open weapons depots right after bagdhad fell in broad daylight- our miltiary genuiuses chose not to secure even one of these weapons/explosives depots....you see the reality that both the sunnis and shias posssess a nearly endless supply of explosives and weaponery for the months and years ahead..."you did a heckuva job there tommy franks!'"...

[SamEllison]

You have overlooked the importance of the Nov 06 elections here in the US. Rumsfeld was replaced and Iraqis knew that the Dems had won on the get out of Iraq ticket. Congressional delegations were meeting Iraqis in Jordan and Syria talking to the Sunnis. Sadr called for a cease-fire after a shoot-out during a religious ceremony that got out of hand. And finally, the reporting of civilian deaths changed leading up to the Sept report to congress by Petraeus and Crocker. We have to dig a bit deeper for the truth. Talking points are talking points after all.

[Woggles]

Well John McCain says we are succeeding in Iraq. I'm a little bit wary of his assessment
of the situation, but he truly believes this. Since he's convinced of success, then you have
to give him credit for sticking to his principles and core beliefs. And convictions are the
power you need to succeed, so he then must be correct, because of the strength of his
opinions. It's this kind of resolute determination that wins conflicts, so this means the
U.S. is therefore winning in Iraq.

[timothe]

We all know that Al-Maliki has not yet established himself as the leader of the Iraqi people. However, if he actually takes on Al-Sadr with his troops, it might show the Shiites that he intends to enforce the rule of law.

You can call it a civil war if you like, but it's really more like a showdown between Al-Maliki and Al-Sadr.
It is in our best interests that Al-Maliki wins. Right?

[dshwa]

His posturing against Al-Sadr might improve his standing amongst the Sunni, who veiw Al-Sadr as the worse of the two, but I doubt it.

Al-Maliki is getting skittish because it appeared that Al-Sadr was gaining too much influence in Basra and the Shia south, thus becomming a threat to Maliki's power base.

As for what's in our best interest, neither outcome is great for us. Al-Sadr wants us out or Iraq, and Al-Maliki is very close to the powers that be in Iran. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if Iran is secretly playing both sides against each other in an effort to stir up violence and keep us there. As long as we're bogged down in Iraq, we're less of a threat to them, and no matter which side wins, they get a close ally as leader of Iraq.

[vet64]

Well it's going to be pretty hard not to compare this Iraqi Civil War Debacle with Vietnam. the Neo Con think tanks on K street have wrapped themselves in the American Flag and pushed with their greed and avarice under the guise of patriotism. Neo cons my butt. Neo Nazis is a more apt name for this Treasonous sect. time to wake up and smell the coffee. We've been slickered very fancy!

[myths123]

I am so amused by several of the opponents of the war in Iraq. These were the same people who bought the Bush government line abt. Iraq and WMD willingly and did not think even once how wrong it was to invade a foreign country that had not done any military harm to the US.

Now that we are faced with a civil war and bloodshed at a huge scale and so many US casualties, these folks have suddenly decided that the US troops should come back home. The American invasion of Iraq caused the situation that is existing there currently. At the very least, America owes Iraq war reparations.

[FearlessFreep]

"At the end of the day, this is about the still simmering civil war in the South."

You mean Obama's race speech?

[dadw5boys]

There has to be violence and attacks till the Permenate U.S. MILITARY BASES in the Middle East are finished and ready for troops.

It is all in the plan. Plans within plans within plans. To protect the Saudis is what this ia ll about.

OH AND THE OIL ALWAYS THE OIL!!!!!!!!!

[LizM]

"But at the end of the day, this is about the still simmering civil war in the South and the fact that we still haven't figured out how to address it or facilitate a political agreement inside of Iraq." ... Ilan Goldenberg

Well, there is definitely a civil war simmering - has been for some time now - and not just in the southern part of Iraq in Basra governorate. And, you can ignore and dismiss Senator Biden and what he has been advocating now for the better part of three years to promote and facilitate a sustainable political settlement in Iraq but you certainly CANNOT claim that "we still haven"t figured out how to address [the simmering civil war] or facilitate a political agreement inside of Iraq"! "We" just seem to be oblivious to it or simply refuse to implement it.

[Paul]

Why is the global war on terror being framed as a conflict between Shia factions in Iraq?

Because islamic Jihadism is not a credible threat to the US.

[PioneerKing]

How can America win a civil war in a country that it does not fundamentally understand; when America has not been able to address the remnants of its own Civil War?
Sen. McCain's approach to foreign policy and national security is rooted in a cold war theory that, contemporaneously, was useless and currently is an even more outdated approach to resolving our national security concerns.
None of the main stream media has bothered to ask Bush/Cheney/McCain - how they hope to maintain the troop levels that they speak of; when military recruitment is at an all time low and dropping.
Based upon Cheney's thoughtless comments about our "volunteer soldiers," it is apparent that the republicans are not supportive of our troops and the impact that the war, and the multiple re-deployments, have on our soldiers and their families.
The members of the republican congress, the republican talking heads and, the republicans elected at local, county and state levels, have all shown that, disproportionately, it is not their sons and daughters who will fight in Iraq.
Even, Sen. McCain's son's deployment to Iraq did not find his son fighting on the streets of Baghdad or Falluja. Sen. McCain's son was kept from harm and his tour will end shortly and he will not be re-deployed multiple times to Iraq.
How can America win a civil war in a country that it does not understand when America has not been able to address the remnants of its Civil War?

[jdmccl]

So we are still fighting our own civil war that ended 1865. And we cannot pacify a couple of Militias since we are still fighting our own Civil war. We also lost the cold war and McCain doesn't know anything about military strategy but the other two have all the right answers. I know the framers meant to have a civilian to head the military but that"s like choosing a Marie Antoinette or Benedict Arnold (he isn't, but his wife sure sounds like she has hated America until recently). We always knew Al Sadr was going to emerge from his hole. He was nice enough to propose a cease fire but now he wants to revoke his all encompassing hold on all Shia fighters? Bring them on, our solders have been complaining about months of boredom and are more than capable of finishing the job. When the good general gets his southern strategy moving, watch out oil robbers.

[EspritDeVoltaire]

May try to blame it on Iran? The floors in the White House right now are probably a slippery yellow from their unrestrained glee.

[MizJ]

I feel so sorry for the Iraqi people. At least they had some measure of living under Saddam, bad as he was, with electricity, running water, cheap gas. Now they are dodging bullets, bombs and IEDs,
Al Qaeda, Blackwater, US soldiers, warring factions, and an inept political system. Safety and security must feel like a thing of the past to them. It will be generations before they ever forgive us and I am sure they must want to tell the US to shove "democracy" up our ass. And who could blame them. They are living our 9/11 catastrophe daily.

[outnow]

At first, I thought that you were referring to the Civil War in America.

Can we win an occupation? What is winning? To whose advantage? These are questions that need to be asked. Better sooner than later.

The U.S is funding both sides and so is Iran.

[nikto]

What?

Can't we continue to bribe them with US Taxpayer $money$ to stop the violence?

SEND MORE CA$H, QUICK!!!!

I can say that, because, hey, I'm a taxpayer, and...

IT'S OUR MONEY.

[BBackSoon]

The idea never was to win.

[SamThornton]

HuffPost's Pick

Have to chuckle cynically each time I see the phrase, "Anbar Awakening," or one of it's clones. Last time I checked, paying people not to shoot at you was called the Protection Racket.

The people who used to practice the Protection game best we knew as Gottis, Capones, and Bonannos. Now they're Ahmads, Abduls, and Abus. Same difference, except instead of plying their trade against shopkeepers, the modern Protection Racketeers are practicing it against military commanders and our politicians.

Another new wrinkle, in addition to the cash, we're also supplying the crooks with combat weaponry so they can really blow us away if we miss a payment. It's almost like our Generals and politicians are mainlining Drano directly into their brainpans.

For this we have service academies and think tanks?

[dshwa]

Think tanks are useless. Half of them already know the answer and are just thinking up justifications for it.

[Singha]

Yup