THE TRUTH ABOUT SOUTHERN IRAQ

In the United States, little attention has been paid to a deteriorating situation in southern Iraq and that may be due to the fact that since the war began there has been a widespread misconception that the Brits have everything under control in that Shia-controlled part of the country.
However, the truth is not difficult to find and in particular the reasons why southern Iraq, and particularly its major city, Basra, have been out of the headlines. For a start, there has always been a belief on the part of major figures in Washington that the majority Iraqi Shias support the occupation. To think otherwise would run contrary to perceived neocon wisdom and would imply that the American-led occupation is not only opposed by Sunni insurgents but also by the majority Shias. But, facts now emerging show that the British have failed to stabilize Basra where assassins are killing one person per hour and where British troops spend most of their time in barracks to avoid being killed by roadside bombs and to avoid having to confront angry mobs.
The uncomfortable truth about the dangers and hatred British troops face in southern Iraq, especially in Basra, was evident at the beginning of May when a British Lynx military helicopter, filled with anti-missile technology, was shot down and five servicemen on board killed. When soldiers from the British quick reaction force rushed to the crash site they were confronted by hundreds of jubilant Iraqis, some of whom were heavily armed Shia militiamen. In an ensuing confrontation, at least five Iraqis, including a child, were shot dead. The British at first denied shooting anyone but later admitted they fired at “selected targets.”
Five hours of rioting followed before a curfew was called and calm restored but from all accounts the curfew has not stopped the daily sectarian carnage, mostly carried out by Shia militias and assassins from within the police force. It is particularly depressing for the British that they trained that same police force which they now describe as corrupt and riddled with killers and criminals. In truth, it is an organization run by militias and assassins from within the country’s Interior Ministry. Against that backdrop, the citizens of Basra and other centers in the south have limited electricity, and have difficulty making ends meet. They face rising food and gasoline prices in a market in which everything is in short supply. Overall, there is an atmosphere of fear and chaos.

The security nightmare was not contemplated by US or British planners prior to the 2003 invasion. Just weeks before the “shock and awe” bombing campaign was launched to signal the start of the war, the then US Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, one of the leading neocons who planned the war, provided the following optimistic assessment of what US soldiers could expect when they liberated Basra from the Saddam regime:

“I think that when the people of Basra no longer feel the threat of that regime, you are going to see an explosion of joy and relief.”

Wolfowitz, like his fellow neocons in Washington, failed to understand that the Shias of southern Iraq had bad memories of the US and of President Bush senior. They could not forget how, after the first Gulf War ended, Bush snr. told them to oppose Saddam and they did, but at a horrendous cost. After the US and its allies left Iraq, Saddam sent his death squads to southern Iraq to slaughter the Shias. No one knows how many were executed and buried in mass graves but reliable sources point to tens of thousands. The fact that America turned its back on them and left them to their fate created bitter memories. Those memories were again brought into focus in 2003 when the present President Bush launched his “shock and awe” bomb blitz. In Basra innocent women and children were killed when some bombs hit civilian centers.
The neocon strategists who predicted that Basra would quickly welcome the US and British as liberators also failed to understand that the Shias throughout Iraq had close ties to their fellow Shias in Iran. Those ties have been strengthened since the 2003 invasion, especially in the south which straddles the border with Iran. In the past year, as the US has threatened Iran, the influence of Iran in Iraqi politics has increased and there has been strong evidence of Iran supporting Iraqi insurgents. For example, the British claim their soldiers are being killed by sophisticated infra-red bombing devices supplied to Iraqi Shia militias by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Therefore, contrary to the perceived wisdom that the only forces opposing the US-led invasion are Sunnis insurgents and Al-Qaeda affiliates, the violence in southern Iraq shows that Shias are also opposing the occupation. According to the British military most of the attacks on them have come from the Mahdi Army, a powerful militia loyal to the firebrand Shia cleric, Moqtada-al-Sadr, who runs part of Baghdad known as Sadr City. In September 2005, British troops arrested Sheik Ahmed al-Fartusi, the leader of Mahdi Army in southern Iraq, and two of his relatives. British officials said the arrests were related to investigations into the killing of six British soldiers.
The British have targeted other militias and that has not found approval with the governor of Basra. In January 2006, he threatened to call for mass demonstrations after British troops arrested 5 police officers. The governor immediately contacted the Iraqi central authorities and demanded the transfer of all security in southern Iraq from the British to the Iraqi security forces. The British trace many of the problems they face to June 2003 when a mob trapped six British military policemen in a police station in Majar-al-Kabir and killed them. Since then the British have lost the support of the local population and have faced intermittent rioting and insurgent attacks. One incident which highlighted the volatility of the situation was in September last year when a mob set fire to a British armoured vehicle and Mahdi militiamen fired mortars at a British base. All of that happened after tanks demolished a police station in an operation to release two members of the elite British Special Air Service who were being held by Iraqi police. The SAS soldiers had been working undercover in Basra when they were arrested, beaten and locked up in the police station for interrogation. The British military command knew from the outset the two SAS soldiers would be tortured to give up their secrets and then shot. The Iraqi police were asked to hand over their SAS captives and refused and it was at that point the British commander decided to dispense with niceties and sent in tanks to punch a hole in the side of the police station. When that was done, elite British reaction troops stormed into the station and freed the two undercover soldiers.
On May 22, British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, whose approval ratings, like those of George Bush, have plummeted as a consequence of declining public support for the war in Iraq, visited Baghdad and tried to sound upbeat. Within 24 hours, one of his officials told a leading British newspaper that British troops could be in Iraq for at least another four years and there was no likelihood of troops being withdrawn from Basra any time soon. The bulk of Britain’s 7,200 troops are in southern Iraq.