What happens now inside Iraq?
Dec 16, 2003
SADDAM’S capture provides a huge psychological boost to the US-led forces in their fight to pacify Iraq. It will remove much of the fear felt by many Iraqis as long as he remained on the loose
SADDAM’S capture provides a huge psychological boost to the US-led forces in their fight to pacify Iraq. It will remove much of the fear felt by many Iraqis as long as he remained on the loose. But it will not end the violence against US-led forces.
In Washington and London, analysts have been predicting for months that capture or killing of Saddam would take the heat out of the conflict. The logic of this argument was that, as long as he was free, he was a continuing poison in the system, the dragonhead of the resistance.
Toby Dodge, an Iraq specialist at Warwick University and the International Institute of Strategic Studies, said Saddam’s capture would be important psychologically.
“For Iraqis, Saddam was always a highly-polished spectre: his image was omnipresent. To see the ignominy of him being shaved and pulled out of a hole is one more step in the liberation of the Iraqi psyche. But this would not be the end of the violence, nor a weakening of the insurgents, Dodge added.
“I think (the capture) will mean increases in attacks US forces over the next few weeks to show they are independent of Saddam.â€
There was optimism in Washington and London after the killing in July of Saddam’s two sons, Uday and Qusay, that their removal would weaken the insurgents. In fact, in the following fortnight 18 US soldiers were killed, and the insurgents have since become better organised, and even more deadly.
Said Aburish, author of a biography of Saddam, said the portrayal of the opposition to US-led forces as having been principally motivated and led by Saddam was wrong.†This is the new big lie. This guy does not command two people.â€
The insurgents should be seen as more broad-based than just Saddam loyalists, and they had complex and multi-layered motivations. His analysis is supported by the circumstances in which Saddam was found. It would have been difficult to run a campaign when concentrating on his own survival, stuck in an isolated farmhouse.
The attacks on US soldiers and international agencies such as the UN have come from a mixture of groups. The main group is referred to as FRLs, former regime loyalists from Saddam’s Ba’ath party and his irregular force, the Fedayeen.
They began operations independently, in separate pockets of the Sunni Triangle, the area to the west and north of Baghdad, and in the capital itself.
For them, Saddam will be as much of a figurehead in a US jail or an Iraqi court as he was in hiding. US forces say Izzat al-Douri, now the most senior leader left on the US wanted list, has been co-ordinating these groups. He was commander of Iraq’s northern region in the war, and the US said he was almost captured two weeks ago.
Mustafa Alani, an analyst at the Royal United Services Institute in London, speaking to Reuters predicted a fall-off “in operations sponsored by former regime loyalistsâ€. But he added: “This is not the full story, because they are not the only group involved.â€
There was a growing body of opposition that was motivated by nationalism. Many of them were relieved Saddam’s rule was over but were ashamed it took American troops to do it, and wanted them gone.
Dodge said the capture of Saddam might, perversely, strengthen the opposition. “Today, the insurgency was de-Ba’athified. So now it can claim to be the authentic voice of nationalist opposition to Americans.†Many Iraqis were initially willing to give the US forces a chance, but have joined the fight in response to heavy-handed security.
There is another element to the opposition. Many Iraqis have said they would welcome the chance to attack US forces because they know there are Jewish soldiers in the ranks.
The US and British governments have emphasised the presence of al-Qaida — and its offshoot, the Kurdish-based al-Ansar group — and other foreign Islamist fighters in Iraq.
The chance to fight Americans has attracted fighters from round the Middle East, but their importance so far may have been exaggerated. There are growing worries in Washington and London about the Shia, the Muslim majority in Iraq, who suffered under Saddam and have been relatively benign since the US occupation but are showing increasing signs of restlessness.
Tensions between Sunnis and Shias peaked last week in Baghdad, a worrying development for US and British forces.
After eight months of fighting, US and British military intelligence do not know exactly who they are fighting: the insurgents remain in the shadows. Even with Saddam removed, it is difficult to beat an enemy who cannot be readily identified.
Guardian
In Washington and London, analysts have been predicting for months that capture or killing of Saddam would take the heat out of the conflict. The logic of this argument was that, as long as he was free, he was a continuing poison in the system, the dragonhead of the resistance.
Toby Dodge, an Iraq specialist at Warwick University and the International Institute of Strategic Studies, said Saddam’s capture would be important psychologically.
“For Iraqis, Saddam was always a highly-polished spectre: his image was omnipresent. To see the ignominy of him being shaved and pulled out of a hole is one more step in the liberation of the Iraqi psyche. But this would not be the end of the violence, nor a weakening of the insurgents, Dodge added.
“I think (the capture) will mean increases in attacks US forces over the next few weeks to show they are independent of Saddam.â€
There was optimism in Washington and London after the killing in July of Saddam’s two sons, Uday and Qusay, that their removal would weaken the insurgents. In fact, in the following fortnight 18 US soldiers were killed, and the insurgents have since become better organised, and even more deadly.
Said Aburish, author of a biography of Saddam, said the portrayal of the opposition to US-led forces as having been principally motivated and led by Saddam was wrong.†This is the new big lie. This guy does not command two people.â€
The insurgents should be seen as more broad-based than just Saddam loyalists, and they had complex and multi-layered motivations. His analysis is supported by the circumstances in which Saddam was found. It would have been difficult to run a campaign when concentrating on his own survival, stuck in an isolated farmhouse.
The attacks on US soldiers and international agencies such as the UN have come from a mixture of groups. The main group is referred to as FRLs, former regime loyalists from Saddam’s Ba’ath party and his irregular force, the Fedayeen.
They began operations independently, in separate pockets of the Sunni Triangle, the area to the west and north of Baghdad, and in the capital itself.
For them, Saddam will be as much of a figurehead in a US jail or an Iraqi court as he was in hiding. US forces say Izzat al-Douri, now the most senior leader left on the US wanted list, has been co-ordinating these groups. He was commander of Iraq’s northern region in the war, and the US said he was almost captured two weeks ago.
Mustafa Alani, an analyst at the Royal United Services Institute in London, speaking to Reuters predicted a fall-off “in operations sponsored by former regime loyalistsâ€. But he added: “This is not the full story, because they are not the only group involved.â€
There was a growing body of opposition that was motivated by nationalism. Many of them were relieved Saddam’s rule was over but were ashamed it took American troops to do it, and wanted them gone.
Dodge said the capture of Saddam might, perversely, strengthen the opposition. “Today, the insurgency was de-Ba’athified. So now it can claim to be the authentic voice of nationalist opposition to Americans.†Many Iraqis were initially willing to give the US forces a chance, but have joined the fight in response to heavy-handed security.
There is another element to the opposition. Many Iraqis have said they would welcome the chance to attack US forces because they know there are Jewish soldiers in the ranks.
The US and British governments have emphasised the presence of al-Qaida — and its offshoot, the Kurdish-based al-Ansar group — and other foreign Islamist fighters in Iraq.
The chance to fight Americans has attracted fighters from round the Middle East, but their importance so far may have been exaggerated. There are growing worries in Washington and London about the Shia, the Muslim majority in Iraq, who suffered under Saddam and have been relatively benign since the US occupation but are showing increasing signs of restlessness.
Tensions between Sunnis and Shias peaked last week in Baghdad, a worrying development for US and British forces.
After eight months of fighting, US and British military intelligence do not know exactly who they are fighting: the insurgents remain in the shadows. Even with Saddam removed, it is difficult to beat an enemy who cannot be readily identified.
Guardian