The Obvious Confirmed: Sectarian Cleansing Major Reason for Drop in Violence in Iraq

It was for some reason a debatable point whether the sectarian cleansing of mixed neighborhoods contributed to the decline in violence. Reuters now confirms - and has visual evidence - to prove that the decline in violence in Iraq, specifically in Baghdad, was caused in no small measure by the massive sectarian cleansing that preceded the surge. The sectarian violence essentially cleansed neighborhoods of their minority populations, reducing opportunities for violence. Maggie Fox from Reuters explains:

Satellite images taken at night show heavily Sunni Arab neighborhoods of Baghdad began emptying before a U.S. troop surge in 2007, graphic evidence of ethnic cleansing that preceded a drop in violence, according to a report published on Friday. The images support the view of international refugee organizations and Iraq experts that a major population shift was a key factor in the decline in sectarian violence, particularly in the Iraqi capital, the epicenter of the bloodletting in which hundreds of thousands were killed..."By the launch of the surge, many of the targets of conflict had either been killed or fled the country, and they turned off the lights when they left," geography professor John Agnew of the University of California Los Angeles, who led the study, said in a statement. "Essentially, our interpretation is that violence has declined in Baghdad because of intercommunal violence that reached a climax as the surge was beginning," said Agnew, who studies ethnic conflict.

This really is not surprising (Petraeus even admitted this to be the case in his testimony in April).The violence in Iraq in 2005-06 was massive and as a result unsustainable. The reason is simple, if you are living in a neighborhood in which you are a minority and the majority in that neighborhood is actively killing minority residents - what do you do? You leave. You go to neighborhoods in which you are secure and which you are in the majority, where you have more protection. As a result of this flight, the intensity of violence often dissipates because there are less targets of opportunity. This is a common trend in ethnic conflicts and as I wrote about in December, was apparent in Northern Ireland in the early 70s. Violence peaked, neighborhoods homogenize, walls were built to separate, and violence went down. But the important point is that less violence did not mean peace. Instead, Northern Ireland remained fractured and its politics remained broken until very recently. Less violence is definitely a good thing, but the challenge of reconciling ethnically divided and fractured societies is extremely difficult. 

So when John McCain declares "victory" in Iraq and states that the increase of just 30,000 troops was the fundamental reason for the decline in violence, he once again proves that he has no idea what he is talking about.

Comments

[canobs]

Barack Obama (Jan. 10, 2007)
"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse. I think it takes pressure off the Iraqis to arrive at the sort of political accommodation that every observer believes is the ultimate solution to the problems we face there. So I am going to actively oppose the president's proposal."

Barack Obama (Jul. 22, 2008)
"I Still Would Not Support the Surge in Iraq"

Barack Obama (Sep. 4, 2008)
“I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated.”

[cindy4america]

No surprise at all.
John McSame never knows what he is talking about,
and Sarah Silly knows even less.

[MagisterLudi]

I ASSURE you, that there are very few geniuses in American politics. Robert Reich is the only talented person with clear eyed view of America. Predictably, he's is no longer in politics. The rest are pathetic blowhards, on both Rep and Dem sides.

[Fremon]

Why is this news now? Whatever bad reporting or bad media has not put this forward, there has been enough information out there that ethnic cleansing in Bagdad ovet the last year at least. The wall barricads have sectioned off neighborhood to lessen the killings. This cleansing probably has done more to reduce killings than the "surge" which is so widely touted. This administrations attitude is what are "a few killings" when we can propagandize how well we have done in reducing the fighting. Kind of sick when you think about it.

FOUR MORE YEARS OF CORRUPTION/LIES/AND INCOMPETENCE
VOTE MCCAIN/PALIN 08

[VANDERGRAAFK]

Surely, this news comes as no surprise. It would though to Senator McCain who prefers to tout his own double-down prescience in advocating the surge. What has always been lacking in the debate over Iraq is an understanding of the complexity of interlocking factors that usually explain such phenomena.

I, too, was dubious about the surge. On the one hand, I was dismayed by the sheer carnage that had pushed Iraw to the verge of civil war. On the other, I had doubts about the paucity of troops that were being proposed and the means by which surge advocate were going to expand U.S. presence. And for what purpose? To prop up one of the most dysfunctional governments ever?

Hardly anyone could have anticipated accurately the success of the American-financed Sunni Awakening, assuming they even knew of its existence. McCain might have (he was connected), but it never figured into his bet. He simply reasoned that more troops were required.

In a counterfactual world, it would be interesting to imagine what would have happened had no Sunni Awakening occurred, the ethnic cleansing not be completed before the surge began, etc., would McCain be bragging about such unqualified success? Now, if the Iraqi government screws up the integration of the Sons of Iraq into the police and army, ... well, John, whaddyathink?

[jhNY]

I understand that in 1944, after the Warsaw Uprising, partisan attacks on German soldiers went down by nearly 100%, but of course that was only because all the people in the ghetto were removed. Our success in Baghdad is not so different, in that many would-be antagonists have been killed, driven away or fled. The good ol' USA, lurching from one success to another...

[akaJohnQ]

Don't let John McCain find out about this. It would burst his bubble. He thinks that the "surge" is solely responsible for the reduction in violence in Iraq.

[SEQUOIABISON]

I am still not sure what McCain means by Victory?

I was under the impression that we were simply there to help the Iraqi people dispose of a dictator, okay we did that he is gone, so what is our objective now?

McCain keeps talking about honor and victory in Iraq like we were fighting an enemy that attacked us when in fact we all know, with the exception of the Palin/McCain ticket that Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 911.

So I am still trying to figure out what they mean by complete and total victory in Iraq.

Do they mean victory for the private mercenary army we sent over there or do they mean a complete victory for the Military Industrial Complex, which is making a fortune on this war?

Obama/Biden

[dhinds]

Victory for McCain means maintaining the American occupation of Iraq. This bolsters his image as a military hero, promotes that idea military solutions are what the world needs and allows Hensely and Co. (one of his wife's corporations) to continue selling beer to our troops there.

[LemonMeringue]

Journalists DO YOUR JOBS

[Whinger]

Reports of Al Qaeda defeat will prove to have been greatly exaggerated.

Militants are like a tide, they ebb and flow, they will strike as and when opportunity knocks!

The USA and their allies will never taste true victory in Iraq it will always be unfinished business!

Was the death and suffering amongst civillians and troops worth the lies and fat cat greed?

[Stevealmi]

Take it one small step farther and you have a government that uses what means necessary to take our tax dollars and route them to specific private sectors that will do them the most good. Instead of infrastructure where it would create jobs and keep us safe, spend the dollars on conflicts with no resolutions that gain the privileged few tax dollars and oil revenue. The only solution to prevent socialism in the US is to break this "great" country into 5 or 6 pieces and thereby make the pie smaller. Maybe then the politicians would actually consider spending our tax dollars on the needs of the people.

[ArcticAquarium]

Actually just the other day I was pondering would it be possible for USA to divide itself into 2 different countries.

[likeicare]

Let's not forget the half-trillion dollars or so that the American taxpayer has borrowed from China to pump into Iraq, either!

Bribery is a long and well-honored tradition in the ME, and we sure learned that lesson well, didn't we? If Gen. Just Call Me God Petraeus hadn't plagiarized Col. MacFarland's idea to just pay the M-Fers to stop shooting at us, the death rates would still be at the same obscene levels that they once were!

See, if you throw enuf money at a problem, sometimes it DOES remedy it, right, Grover Norquist, et al?

[1differentdrummer]

I cannot name one issue John seems to have under control. No matter what the reason for a less violent Iraq, why are American boots on the ground there? What mission do our troops have? We have no business there. Anyone who is a conservative, other than in name only, would need to say that the US debt generated there is killing our economy.

[Rog49Thomas]

If the election were being waged in a country where careful consideration of the issues decided elections, this would no doubt be a comforting article.

But last time I looked the elections were in the USA.

You only have to fool enough of the people every four years to get elected.

[researcher]

iraqis give us our oil

and soon our economy is tanking

we also need iran's oil reserves

while we are at it lets take russia's oil

god bless america

truly god's country

:-)

we are imperialists to the core

even obama wants to enlarge the military

bankrupt america

the strong have always played on the weak

human thing

[ArcticAquarium]

Well all the "great" empires in the course of human history have had the tendency of breaking down and disappearing. And then there will be others to take its place.

[MagisterLudi]

I am sure the fact that Al Qaeda. according to most independent observes and Al Qaeda itself, has suffered a serious defeat at the hands of Sunnis has nothing to down it....right.
And the fact that both Sunni and Shiite mostly stopped attacking American forces also has nothing to do with it.... right.
During heated election campaign, objective analysis always becomes the first casualty.

[ArcticAquarium]

Al Qaeda are Sunnis. Of course if you have been listening to McCain you would think otherwise.

[MagisterLudi]

Arctic, my requirement for debate is simple: know something about the subject, and I'll gladly answer. So far this minimum hasn't been met ... consider studying the subject further then come back