WAR Iraq-IS War (30 March 2016) Obama to decide on increasing troop levels in Iraq soon

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Velina Tchakarova ‏@vtchakarova 19h
India MFA in Iran.
India-Iran balancing China-Pakistan.
Russia is building triangles w/ them. geopolitics
Vikas Swarup
CgRjlSLWcAA3nC2.jpg




Alert 5 ‏@alert5 14h
Iraq took delivery of another 3 Su-25s
http://dlvr.it/L4vtBp


Enrico Ivanov ‏@Russ_Warrior 4h
New batch of Russian strike fighters delivered to Iraq — ministry
http://tass.ru/en/defense/870506 …
CgU7ROOWcAA4uyK.jpg

Yeah, it is a natural fit when you think about it.

Adding the implications of the Iranians and Turks talking last week (I wonder how much consultation the Iranians had with the Russians over that one?) and the hegemonic moves in the Middle East start looking like the Persians and Turks vs the Arabs. Interesting even more so when you think about the historical interactions between the three.
 

Richard

TB Fanatic
This has been going on for how long, 2 years maybe.........


Seems like the Iraqi troops are ineffective at best........
 

FREEBIRD

Has No Life - Lives on TB
"This is the war that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends
Some people started fighting it
Not knowing what it was
And we'll continue fighting it
Forever just because" (return to first line and keep going forever)

---with apologies to the great Shari Lewis for "The Song That Never Ends".
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...-year-pattern-tightening-noose-islamic-state/

World

Sending more U.S. troops to Iraq follows two-year pattern of ‘tightening the noose’ on the Islamic State

by Robert Burns
AP
Apr 20, 2016

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s decision to send still more American troops to Iraq, and to put military advisers closer to the front lines against the Islamic State, fits a pattern of ever-deepening involvement in a country whose war Obama exited with supposed finality in December 2011.

From the initial contingent of 170 U.S. soldiers who entered Baghdad as advisers in June 2014, after the Islamic State overran much of northern and western Iraq and seemed poised to threaten Baghdad, the troop total jumped to 1,550 six months later. It topped 3,000 in April 2015 and then edged higher. The latest increase, announced Monday by Defense Secretary Ash Carter, pushes the authorized total above 4,000. More increases seem likely.

What the Pentagon calls “tightening the noose” on the militants, critics call indecisive steps with limited chance to succeed.

One of the most vocal critics of Obama’s Iraq policy, Republican Sen. John McCain, dismissed Carter’s announcement that the U.S. would send another 217 troops to Iraq in support of the Iraqi security forces’ preparation for an assault on the Islamic State stronghold of Mosul. “Grudging incrementalism,” McCain called it.

Patrick Martin, an Iraq specialist at the Institute for the Study of War, is skeptical that the U.S. approach is sufficiently aggressive. “The addition of 217 advisers . . . is not going to be nearly enough to actually make a significant difference on the ground in the near future,” he said in an interview.

On the other hand, the U.S. offer to fly Apache attack helicopters in support of an Iraqi advance toward Mosul is a significant move, Martin said, noting that it would be the first time the Iraqis have accepted that kind of support since U.S. forces returned to Iraq in 2014.

Obama’s approach in Iraq has been tempered not just by his pledge to end U.S. military involvement there after he took office in 2009 but also by the Iraqis’ own political failings, which even now cast doubt on the durability of any battlefield victories that U.S. troops can help the Iraqis achieve. In 2007, at the peak of the Iraq war, the U.S. had about 170,000 troops there.

Rather than commit large ground combat units to Iraq or Syria, Obama in 2014 opted for providing a support role on the ground, backed by bombing from the air.

Obama was on his way Tuesday to Saudi Arabia to encourage Persian Gulf Arab countries to contribute more to the battle in Iraq.

Nearly two years later, the Islamic State has been weakened and squeezed but remains a credible threat. It not only holds territory in Iraq and Syria but also has spread to Libya and Afghanistan while launching deadly attacks in Paris and Brussels.

On a visit to Baghdad this week, Carter described the decision to deploy another 217 soldiers as “more of the same,” in the sense that it aligns with the U.S. strategy of providing more support to Iraqi forces as they gain momentum, while not doing the fighting for them.

“Our strategic approach makes sure that the defeat of ISIL is lasting,” he said, using a common acronym for the Islamic State. “It is to enable capable and motivated local forces to sustain the defeat. We are committed — I am committed — to doing more to accelerate that defeat. We want to do it as fast as we possibly can.”

It has taken this long to bring Mosul within the Iraqis’ gun sights because they have been slow to leverage U.S. training, partly because of sectarian conflict and political gridlock in Baghdad. Four months ago the Iraqis recovered Ramadi after collapsing there in May 2015, which prompted Carter to question their will to fight. They still lack essential ingredients for battlefield success such as close-air support for maneuvering ground forces, and it is not clear they will retake Mosul before 2017, even with additional American support.

Most of the additional 217 troops would be army special forces, who have been used throughout the anti-Islamic State campaign to advise and assist the Iraqis. For the first time, the advisers are authorized to assist the Iraqis at battalion level, meaning with smaller Iraq combat units likely to be closer to the front lines.

The extra U.S. troops also would include trainers, soldiers to provide security for the advisers, and maintenance teams and crews for the Apache attack helicopters that Carter said the Iraqi government has agreed would be needed to provide close-air support for ground forces in a Mosul assault. The U.S. also will provide additional sets of mobile artillery, known as HIMARS, to support Iraqi ground forces as they advance toward Mosul.

And those are unlikely to be the last additions to the U.S. military presence. Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told reporters Monday that the focus for now is on getting the Iraqis to fully isolate Mosul and set the right conditions for recapturing it.

“The next step of that, obviously, is to actually clear the city,” MacFarland said. “And when we get to that step, that will be another conversation that we’ll have” about U.S. support.

For now, he said, “We’re going to employ these additional authorities and capabilities and see how far it takes us. And then if it doesn’t take us all the way, we’ll come back and have another discussion and ask for more if we need to.”

Asked whether this was incrementalism, MacFarland said, “I would prefer to call it a step-by-step approach. We’re on the first step right now.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.antiwar.com/2016/04/19/turkish-troops-kill-32-isis-suspects-in-iraq-fighting/

Turkish Troops Kill 32 ISIS Suspects in Iraq Fighting

Turkish Tank Came Under Fire Near Mosul

by Jason Ditz, April 19, 2016

Iraqi government complaints about Turkey having a military presence in their country remain unresolved, but today those Turkish troops were engaged in a significant exchange of fire with ISIS forces, leading Turkish officials to claim 32 ISIS suspects killed.

The incident, in the town of Bashiqa (near Mosul), started when a Turkish combat tank, deployed as part of the “training” operation, came under fire from ISIS fighters. Turkish troops responded by blowing up a building in the area, killed 10 “ISIS fighters” during the firing. 22 other people fled the building, and were also killed as “suspects.”

Turkish officials have claimed massive ISIS death tolls in previous incidents as well, claiming to have killed 362 ISIS fighters in cross-border shelling into neighboring Syria. This, however, is the most significant exchange they’ve been involved with in Iraq.

Turkey says the troops in the area around Mosul are “training local forces” to fight ISIS. Turkish troops have also made deals to train Kurdish Peshmerga forces in Iraq, deals which have sparked arguments with the Iraqi central government.

Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz•ISIS Captures Industrial District of Major East Syrian City - April 19th, 2016
•Sen. Graham Blocks 9/11 Lawsuit Bill Amid Saudi Threats - April 19th, 2016
•US Paying Iraqi Kurds to Fight in Mosul - April 19th, 2016
•Kerry Meets Iran FM to Talk With US Compliance in Nuclear Deal - April 19th, 2016
•Biden: Overwhelming US Frustration With Israel - April 19th, 2016
 

cooter

cantankerous old coot
like I said in the past, in the beginning when isis was small,

Sarin and VX are cheaper....

and if they would have just grabbed a c130 or similar and sprayed the isis area one night, it would have been over with by now, but now isis is spread out all over , and is kind of hard to spray everywhere over there :whistle:
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
and if they would have just grabbed a c130 or similar and sprayed the isis area one night, it would have been over with by now, but now isis is spread out all over , and is kind of hard to spray everywhere over there :whistle:

You don't need to spray "everywhere", just their front line positions and that could be handled with 155 mm shells or a MK 81 or MK 82 bomb casings with special fillings. That's how it could have been done. Since that stuff isn't in US stocks any longer, we have to rely upon good old HE instead.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ian-casualties-air-war-against-isil/83190812/

New rules allow more civilian casualties in air war against ISIL

Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY 7:24 p.m. EDT April 19, 2016
Comments 117

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has approved airstrikes that risk more civilian casualties in order to destroy Islamic State targets as part of its increasingly aggressive fight against the militant group in Iraq and Syria, according to interviews with military officials and data.

Since last fall, the Pentagon has delegated more authority to the commander of the war, Army Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, to approve targets when there is the risk that civilians could be killed. Previously, authority for missions with the potential to kill innocents had been made by the higher headquarters of U.S. Central Command. Seeking approval from above takes time, and targets of fleeting opportunity can be missed.

Six Defense Department officials, all speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to describe how Islamic State targets are selected and attacked, described a sliding scale of probable civilian casualties based on the value of the target and the location. For example, a strike with the potential to wound or kill several civilians would be permitted if it prevented ISIL fighters from causing greater harm.

Before the change, there were some limited cases in which civilian casualties were allowed, the officials said. Now, however, there are several targeting areas in which the probability of 10 civilian casualties are permitted. Those areas shift depending on the time, location of the targets and the value of destroying them, the officials said.

The riskiest missions require White House approval, said one official, who is closely involved with current targeting plans.

David Deptula, a retired three-star Air Force general who led its intelligence and surveillance efforts, said easing the restrictions was a necessary but insufficient step toward defeating the Islamic State, or ISIL.

"The gradualistic, painfully slow, incremental efforts of the current administration undercut the principals of modern warfare, and harken back to the approach followed by the Johnson administration," said Deptula, who now leads the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

The officials all say commanders go to great lengths to avoid killing innocents. They attack at night, for example, when buildings are less likely to be occupied. They select bombs that spew fewer deadly fragments and direct laser-guided bombs away from targets when civilians stray too close to ground zero. Military lawyers oversee operations to ensure laws of war are followed.

The increased tolerance for civilian casualties dovetails with the revised strategy Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced in October — the focus on recapturing Ramadi, Iraq, mounting more raids to capture or kill ISIL leaders and adding pressure to Raqqa, Syria, the capital of ISIL's self-proclaimed state.

Among the issues commanders consider before attacking is the target’s “non-combatant value.” A value of zero means it can be hit with no chance of civilians being killed — think of an ISIL machine gun emplacement in the desert.

The value rises in urban areas such as Ramadi, which Iraqi forces, backed by U.S.-led airpower, seized from ISIL in late December. Pockets of Ramadi and other areas of intense fighting have had non-combatant values of 10 or more, meaning that attacking them carries the probability of 10 civilian deaths, said the most senior of the six Defense officials. The area could be as small as a city block and permission to hit it could last for a matter of hours.

MacFarland, who took command in September, has also focused on ISIL’s source of income and stores of cash — oil infrastructure and banks. Black-market oil had been a key source of illicit income need to finance its operations and pay fighters. Civilians work on oil rigs or visit banks, forcing commanders to weigh the strategic value of destroying them with the probability that civilians will be killed.

Military planners can mitigate the risk by dropping leaflets, as they did last fall, warning drivers of tankers with illicit oil to flee before blowing them up. A bank could be struck at night, with the least-lethal bomb, at an angle that minimizes damage to nearby buildings, the senior official said.

The more aggressive approach has been reflected in the bombing statistics released by the Pentagon.

In November, pilots in the U.S.-led coalition had dropped 3,227 bombs in Iraq and Syria, a record number for a single month and more than twice as many as they had used in November 2014. Since then, the totals for bombs dropped per month eclipsed the previous year. In March, pilots dropped 1,982 bombs compared with 1,685 in March 2015, an 18% increase.

Minimizing civilian casualties

Although the military acknowledges publicly that its airstrikes have killed or wounded 26 civilians by accident, two officials, one currently involved in targeting and one former senior officer, say more innocent civilians may have died from the more than 40,000 bombs that have been dropped since the war began in August 2014.

By destroying nearly 6,000 buildings with bombs since the war began it’s a virtual certainty that the civilian toll is higher than 26, said a senior Defense official who is briefed daily on the war’s developments. Even if it is 10 times higher, the official said, it would be exceptionally low and reflects the U.S. military’s commitment to protecting the innocent.

Central Command, which oversees the war, investigates reports of civilian casualties. Claims, even tweets, are matched against missions flown to determine if coalition aircraft had conducted bombing runs nearby. Video from drones and other aircraft track every bomb dropped, one of the six Defense officials said. If the report is deemed credible, investigators assess whether strikes comply with the laws of war and that proper precautions were taken.

One such incident occurred on July 4, 2015, near Raqqa, Syria. Airstrikes destroyed 16 bridges there. A bomb also killed a civilian driving a tractor trailer.

Civilian deaths caused by Iraqi military operations, which occur jointly with the American-led bombing effort, are not counted, the senior official said.

In more than 15 years of bombing Afghanistan and Iraq, the Obama administration has put a premium on avoiding civilian casualties. The laws of war, military professionalism and the American public's aversion to killing innocents demand care and precision. Also, destroying the lives and property of non-combatants is considered self-defeating when the protection of local civilians is a priority.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said President Obama is “justifiably proud of the great lengths we’ve gone to to avoid civilian casualties — certainly greater lengths than our adversaries in this conflict.”

The White House, Earnest said, is still working on a promised report on civilian casualties.

Airstrikes are considered deliberate or dynamic. A deliberate strike can be planned for — a bank in Mosul for example. With time, commanders can choose the best time and weapon to minimize chances civilians will be harmed. Commanders, one official with experience in targeting said, are in a rush to get it right — not just to strike. No civilians were hurt or killed in the more than 100 tons of explosives dropped over two months of fighting, the senior official said.

A complicating factor for commanders is the urgency of the time-sensitive mission, also known as a dynamic target. For example, an ISIL militant attacking Iraqi troops from a rooftop machine gun nest in Ramadi is a legitimate, dynamic target. Commanders must judge if killing him puts residents on lower floors at risk of injury or death.

Soon after bombing extended to Syria in September 2014, commanders had pinpointed the seven buildings in Raqqa that ISIL used for headquarters, said a recently retired senior officer involved in targeting. The buildings, legitimate military targets, were deemed off limits because they were too close to civilians to be destroyed without wounding or killing innocent bystanders, the former officer said.

Targeters pore over hours of video from spy aircraft of potential bomb sites to determine when civilians are least likely to be nearby, the former officer said. Determining the "pattern of life" at the target can trigger the decision to bomb or not to bomb.

ISIL leaders have complicated targeting by flying their black flags over residential buildings, inviting airstrikes so that they can blame the U.S.-led coalition for killing civilians, the senior official said.

USA TODAY
Leaflets prompt ISIL truckers to flee

The vast majority of strikes in Iraq and Syria belong in the dynamic category. It’s difficult to determine if innocent civilians have been trapped in buildings damaged or destroyed in dynamic strikes, the senior official said.

The calculation for civilian casualties changes based on the strategic value of a target and the local population’s sensitivity to foreign military presence, said the recently retired officer said.

During the surge in Iraq beginning in 2007, the non-combatant value for some targets was as high as 26 people, said the former officer. In Afghanistan, during the surge of troops there in 2010, the value was nine.

Contributing: Gregory Korte

USA TODAY
Air campaign shifts to ISIL's cash and oil
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-sends-legendary-b-52-bomber-action-against-182402057.html

US ups pressure on IS with first B-52 bomber strike

Thomas Watkins
April 20, 2016
Comments 32

Washington (AFP) - The US Air Force for the first time deployed a B-52 bomber against the Islamic State, the Pentagon said Wednesday as it ramps up a 20-month campaign to smash the jihadists.

The bombing mission, in which a hulking B-52 destroyed a weapons storage facility south of Mosul, comes the same week that Defense Secretary Ash Carter visited Baghdad and announced extra US troops, cash and equipment for the anti-IS campaign in Iraq.

In other signs of an increasing tempo, US commandos working with Kurdish troops conducted a raid targeting a senior IS group figure and the Pentagon said it has changed how air strikes risking civilian deaths are approved.

Under the new rules, authority now comes from the commanding three-star US general in Baghdad, instead of going through a four-star at the US Central Command's headquarters in Florida.

Baghdad-based military spokesman Colonel Steve Warren insisted the changes do not lessen oversight standards in determining when civilian losses are an acceptable risk.

"This does not translate to more civilian casualties, this translates to a more rapid execution of strikes," Warren said.

The Pentagon has acknowledged 26 civilian deaths due to US-led coalition strikes since the campaign began in August 2014 in Iraq, and credits the use of guided missiles in keeping the number relatively low -- though independent observers say the figure is far higher.

- More US troops -

Carter this week announced an additional 217 US forces would be deployed to Iraq as advisors, pushing the official count there past 4,000.

The Pentagon has also offered Apache attack helicopters for use in an eventual push on Mosul, Iraq's second city and which is under control of the IS group.

Separately, Danish lawmakers have approved a plan to commit seven F-16 warplanes, a transport aircraft and 400 military personnel to expand its fight against the extremists.

Monday's strike by a B-52 Stratofortress blew up an IS weapons storage facility in the town of Qayyarah, about 35 miles (60 kilometers) south of Mosul.

The enormous planes, originally designed in the 1950s, became a symbol of US might during the Cold War and the aircraft was used to conduct carpet bombing in Vietnam.

Warren said the B-52s are only being armed with guided bombs.

"There are memories in the collective unconscious of B-52s, decades ago, doing... arguably indiscriminate bombing," Warren said.

"Those days are long gone. The B-52 is a precision-strike weapons platform and it will conduct the same type of precision strikes that we have seen for the last 20 months."

Several B-52s arrived in Qatar earlier this month to replace a contingent of newer B-1 bombers that had been working in Iraq and Syria for about a year.

Warren also announced that US commandos in northern Iraq had targeted Suleiman Abd Shabib al-Jabouri, "one of ISIL's military emirs and an ISIL war council member."

The Kurdish regional security council said Jabouri was killed in the raid, conducted jointly with Kurdish fighters.

- 'Shoving match' -

The US military has since 2014 led an international coalition against the IS group in Iraq and Syria after the jihadists captured vast areas of territory across the two countries.

Despite major gains, including the recapture of the Iraqi city of Ramadi, the coalition has still not chased IS fighters from Raqa in Syria or Mosul, as well as several other important towns.

In Syria, vetted Syrian opposition fighters are clashing with IS fighters in the north, especially around the Manbij region, but have recently lost some ground to the jihadists.

It "has developed into a shoving match," Warren said. "We will continue to pressure ISIL but we expect them to fight hard to hold their ground."

Additionally, the IS group has tightened the noose on a regime-held enclave in eastern Syria, overrunning part of the city of Deir Ezzor, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

Elsewhere in Syria, a Russian- and US-brokered ceasefire grew ever more fragile as violence continued to flare up around Aleppo. IS and other jihadist groups are not party to the February "cessation of hostilities."
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ending_u_s_troops_to_liberate_mosul_from.html

Military analysis.
April 22 2016 11:48 AM

We Are Going to War in Iraq Against ISIS

It’s a small-scale conflict, but big questions about a political solution linger.

By Fred Kaplan
Comments 654

Almost five years after President Obama withdrew the last American troops from Iraq, the tidal waves of the war in that country are pulling him back in.

Obama has been resisting those tides, at first restricting himself to mounting airstrikes against ISIS, then sending trainers, then special operations forces initially as “advisers,” but increasingly in roles that place them on the edge of combat—and, very soon now, in the thick of it.


Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced this week that, for the coming battle to liberate Mosul, another 217 troops will be sent to Iraq (bringing the total to 4,087, not counting the few-hundred special operations forces); that they’ll move to the front lines with Iraqi soldiers on the battalion level (before, American troops tended to stay on bases); that they and the Iraqis will be supported in the air not only by drones and fighter jets but also by Apache helicopters—and on the ground by the new High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, which can fire waves of rockets or missiles from long range with great accuracy. (One military source on the ground says that these advanced artillery rockets have been pounding ISIS targets for a couple of weeks now.)


In short, we are going to war in Iraq against ISIS. It’s not going to be like George W. Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq: It will involve about 5,000 U.S. troops, not 150,000; and local forces—Iraqi soldiers, Kurdish peshmerga, and various militias—will be in the lead. But the United States will be directly involved in the fighting and quite possibly the dying. And although Carter and other senior officials say the U.S.’s mission isn’t changing it’s clear that, by any reasonable definition of “mission” and “changing,” it is.


What’s going on with U.S. forces in Iraq, in fact, is a living, looming case study in “mission creep.”


Several times in the past couple years, Obama has resisted the pressures of mission creep, saying that, yes, U.S. ground forces would push ISIS out of Mosul in reasonably short order, but then what? Unless Iraqi troops came in to restore order and keep ISIS out, we’ll be stuck there for years or decades.


The good news is that, over the past several months, a joint force of American special-ops officers and Italian carabinieri have been training Iraqi military-police units to do just that. They’ve done it, to some degree, after Iraqi troops and militias have retaken Tikrit and Ramadi. And they’re preparing to do it, on what would be a much larger scale, in Mosul (which is four to five times larger than those other cities).


So, at least in theory, that meets one of Obama’s conditions for dropping his resistance to getting U.S. troops more involved in an offensive military action.


But he’s also cited another reason for restraint: There’s no point in throwing American troops into this conflict without a decent prospect for a political solution. Specifically, as long as Iraq’s Shiite-led government doesn’t share power with the Sunnis, ISIS (or jihadist organizations like ISIS) can’t be crushed. The Baghdad government’s oppressive policies and corrupt practices might not have caused the rise of ISIS, but they’ve helped sustain it and legitimized the grievances that ISIS has exploited, encouraging even many moderate Sunnis to tolerate—or at least not rebel against—the presence of ISIS as the lesser of two evils.


Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has more inclusive inclinations than his predecessor, Nouri al-Maliki. And the American commanders in Iraq have done much to reinforce these tendencies, for instance paying the Kurdish peshmerga and the anti-ISIS Sunni tribal fighters through the Baghdad treasury—and thus building a sense of loyalty to and from the government—rather than giving them cash directly, as was done during the tribal co-optations of 2007 (as had to be done, since Maliki wasn’t willing to be the conduit). Another hopeful sign: The U.S. commander leading this tribal coordination is Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, who, as a colonel back in 2006, organized the Anbar Awakening, the first (and, for a while, pivotal) campaign in which Sunni militias cooperated with U.S. troops to beat back al-Qaida. When it comes to melding tribal politics and military entities in western Iraq, MacFarland has no equal.


Still, sectarian favoritism still dominates Iraqi politics; corruption is rife; and Sunnis have yet to be shown a compelling reason to turn against ISIS, and thus tilt in favor of the government, in large numbers.


The U.S. and its allies may succeed in pushing ISIS out of Mosul, and that’s a good thing on many levels. But as a report this week by the Soufan Group puts it, “Even the most decisive military victory in Mosul will be short-lived if the factors that gave rise to the current violence and turmoil remain unresolved. … Without true political and social reform, the battle against [ISIS] in Mosul will be repeated elsewhere in a few years.” The report adds: “Unfortunately, reform of this scale in a traumatized and divided nation is as unlikely as it is vital.”


This is what Obama and many of his top officials and generals have meant when they say (as they have repeatedly) that we can’t kill our way out of this crisis. Yet this is what they are preparing to do anyway, because, like a carpenter who tends to solve every problem with a hammer and some nails, it’s what they do best.


Which isn’t to deprecate hammers and nails; sometimes they’re precisely what’s needed to do the job. Obama has long realized this, but he has a tendency—often historically justified—to let others do the dangerous carpentry when America’s vital interests aren’t at stake. And so, when he first declared that ISIS must be destroyed, he tried to assemble a coalition of Muslim nations and militias to do the fighting on the ground, offering to support their effort with America’s combat specialties—precision airstrikes, intelligence, and logistical support. But it turned out there was no such coalition to be had, as its logical members—which included just about every nation and militia in the region—feared and loathed one another at least as much as they feared and loathed ISIS (a fact that ISIS has shrewdly exploited).


Yet Obama had declared, and has continued to declare, that ISIS must be destroyed—and so he stepped up the airstrikes (even though he knew that airstrikes alone can’t win a war), and he sought partners where he could find them, most notably the Kurds (even though he knew they would fight only to defend their own turf, not go chasing jihadists all over the country). And so he moved, incrementally but inextricably, toward deepening America’s involvement, widening its stake, heightening its risk.


Secretary Carter, who has long pushed for a more aggressive stance against ISIS, insisted in his speech that our new steps—the extra troops, the embedding with Iraqi battalions, the deployment of Apache helicopters and long-range accurate artillery pieces—don’t constitute a new strategy. Officials in the White House and the State Department say the same thing: What we’re about to do merely continues the strategy we’ve been pursuing all along.


This would be true only if the U.S. strategy were defined as “defeating and destroying ISIS,” in which case any action, along a continuum from Obama’s policies of the last two years to dropping tactical nuclear weapons, could be justified as part and parcel of the same strategy. But “strategy” isn’t such a broad term, and a military strategy must set down not only the goal of an operation but also the means to achieve the goal—the costs one is willing to bear and not bear, the risks one is willing to take and not take.


In that sense, the only meaningful sense, U.S. strategy in Iraq is on the verge of changing—and this is happening as a result of decisions that President Obama has made.


Whether Obama sees it this way is another matter. I suspect he does: This is a president who has something of an allergy to escalation, especially if it seems to be spiraling out of control. But I also suspect he thinks he can maintain his grip on the spiral. As I’ve written elsewhere, Obama has a keen legal mind, which serves him and his country well when he pokes holes in specious arguments for risky policies. But it also enables him to rationalize his own porous positions: for instance, that conducting joint raids falls in the category of “advise and assist,” or that special operations forces don’t constitute “boots on the ground.”


My guess is that Obama really won’t push U.S. ground forces beyond the scope and scale of Carter’s announcement. But he is president for only another nine months, and his successor may have less reticence in these matters. More than that, he has set the logic for his successor to escalate the fight and still think—or at least claim—that he or she is simply continuing Obama’s strategy under changing circumstances. In fact, if the campaign to retake Mosul begins, and the local forces—the Iraqi soldiers, the Kurdish peshmerga, and whatever sectarian militias can be drawn into the fight—are repelled, if they’re facing defeat despite the U.S. artillery and air support, would even Obama let them lose? Or would he give the green light to his generals’ plan (which they would no doubt recommend in this scenario) to let the American soldiers take a direct role in the fight, to drop the fig leaf of “advisers” and don the explicit tag of “combat troops,” which they’re coming close to resembling anyway?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-tuz-idUSKCN0XM1YV

World | Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:14pm EDT
Related: World, Iraq

Kurds and Shi'ites clash in northern Iraq despite ceasefire


Clashes between Kurdish and Shi'ite Turkmen fighters in an Iraqi town late on Monday cut the main road from Baghdad to the north for the second day in a row and threatened to undermine a ceasefire agreement reached by military leaders a day earlier.

The violence in Tuz Khurmatu, 175 km (110 miles) north of the capital, is the latest and most severe flare-up of tensions that have been brewing since Islamic State militants were driven back from the town in 2014.

Shi'ite paramilitary leaders and Kurdish peshmerga commanders had brokered a truce on Sunday to end fighting that killed at least 12 people on both sides, but it broke down before sunset on Monday.

Police sources in the town said shops were closed and the streets deserted. No casualties were reported at area hospitals, likely because the roads were considered too dangerous for travel.

Peshmerga tanks shelled Shi'ite Turkmen districts, while Shi'ite fighters launched mortar fire and sniped at predominately Kurdish areas, the police said. Five buildings in Shi'ite neighborhoods had been burned.

A Kurdish peshmerga fighter in Tuz Khurmato told Reuters his forces had been instructed to observe the ceasefire, but that armed Kurdish residents of the town were attacking Shi'ite Turkmen positions.

"Now you can hear the sound of RPG (rocket-propelled grenades) and rockets," he said, the sound of small arms fire audible in the background.

The clashes began late on Saturday when members of a Shi'ite militia hurled a grenade into the house of a Kurdish commander and his guards responded by firing RPGs, security sources said.

The tensions in Tuz Khurmatu risk further fragmenting Iraq, a major OPEC oil exporter, as it struggles to contain Islamic State, the gravest security threat since a U.S.-led invasion toppled autocrat Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Efforts to push back the ultra-hardline Sunni insurgents have been complicated by sectarian and ethnic rivalries, including a contest for territory which the Shi'ite-led government in Baghdad claims but the Kurds want as part of their autonomous region in the north of the country.


(Reporting by Ghazwan Hassan and Isabel Coles in Erbil)
 

Richard

TB Fanatic
Going from the heading has O decided yet or not or will he lose his Nobel Peace Prize........

Like the rest of us O has no ****ing idea what is going on in the ME..........even with all his advisors.......
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.antiwar.com/2016/04/26/iraqi-parliament-chaos-as-thousands-protest-outside/

Iraqi Parliament Chaos as Thousands Protest Outside

MPs Expelled After Early Session, Leading to Disputed Vote

by Jason Ditz, April 26, 2016

Thousands of demonstrators took to the area outside Iraq’s parliament, demanding reform as the legislative body attempted, and failed, to have an orderly session regarding the proposed new technocrat cabinet.

Prime Minister Hayder Abadi’s arrival caused a considerable ruckus, as MPs opposed to his cabinet threw water bottles at him and hollered “treachery” for nearly two hours, until the early session was ended. This also saw the removal of all reporters, for “security,” amid reports that the protesters had entered the Green Zone.

The reporters weren’t the only ones expelled, however, as a number of the anti-cabinet MPs were forbidden from attending the later session of parliament, nominally because they were causing too much disruption. In this later session, five of the 16 cabinet candidates were voted in, though whether this is ultimately legal will be a matter of considerable debate since the expelled MPs didn’t get to vote.

This isn’t the only disputed voting in Iraq recently, as last week the parliament’s speaker was “fired” in a session held by the anti-cabinet faction, who claimed a narrow quorum was present, but in which photos show only a fraction of the claimed people were in attendence. The speaker was back today, and the MPs who were shouting insisted his presence was illegal.

Abadi is a member of the State of Law faction, the larger of two Shi’ite Arab blocs. Ironically, the opposition to his cabinet is overwhelmingly from his own bloc, along with the Kurds, while he is supported by the rival Shi’ite bloc, Moqtada al-Sadr’s, which dominates the public protests, along with the Sunni Arabs, including parliament’ss speaker.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/thousands-iraqis-answer-sadrs-call-protest-082202233.html

Iraqi MPs approve partial cabinet as thousands protest

Ammar Karim and Salam Faraj
AFP
April 26, 2016

Baghdad (AFP) - Iraqi lawmakers approved five of the prime minister's candidates for a new cabinet on Tuesday after weeks of delays and chaos at parliament, as thousands of people demonstrated for reforms.

But some MPs, who were barred from attending after chanting for the parliament speaker's removal and disrupting an earlier session, said they would mount a legal challenge.

Iraq has been hit by weeks of political turmoil surrounding Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi's efforts to replace the cabinet of party-affiliated ministers with a government of technocrats.

The crisis comes as Iraqi forces battle to regain more ground from the Islamic State group, and both the United Nations and Washington have warned that it could undermine the fight against the jihadists.

Iraq has also been hit hard by the plummeting price of oil, revenues from which account for the vast majority of government funds.

The proposed cabinet changes have been opposed by powerful political parties that rely on control of ministries for patronage and funds, and parliament has repeatedly failed to vote on a new cabinet list.

Lawmakers approved Abadi's candidates for the ministries of electricity, health, higher education, labour and water resources, MP Sarwa Abdulwahid and two parliamentary officials told AFP.

But they rejected some of Abadi's nominees, and the premier will present additional candidates on Saturday, the sources said.

Earlier in the day, some MPs prevented Abadi from speaking at parliament and threw water bottles in his direction, lawmakers and a parliamentary official who was present at the session said.

Some lawmakers also chanted against parliament speaker Salim al-Juburi, terming him "illegitimate" and saying: "Salim! Out, out!"

The protesting lawmakers were then barred from attending the second session at which the partial cabinet was approved, vowing to file a court case over the issue.

Parliament has repeatedly been hit by chaos in recent weeks, with MPs holding an overnight sit-in at parliament, brawling in the chamber and seeking to sack Juburi, electing an interim replacement who has chaired his own rival sessions.

Abadi called a week ago for parliament to put aside its differences and do its job, but the antics in the legislature have continued.

- Only 'poverty and killing' -

As the latest political turmoil played out in parliament, thousands of protesters demonstrated for reforms nearby, answering a call from powerful Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to do so.

The demonstrators, many carrying Iraqi flags, marched from Tahrir Square in central Baghdad to an entrance to the heavily fortified Green Zone where the government is headquartered, chanting that politicians "are all thieves".

The government "did not bring the country and Iraqis anything but poverty and killing," said demonstrator Abu Ali al-Zaidi, who travelled from Maysan province in the south for the protest.

"The political quotas and the parties that control everything are the reason for the failure of the government," said Abu Mohammed al-Sudani, a protester from Baghdad who carried an Iraqi flag.

Key government posts have for years been shared out based on political and sectarian quotas, a practice demonstrators want to end.

Ali al-Bahadli, a cleric from the Sadr Movement who was taking part in the demonstration, said: "We want the ministers to be independent, outside the control of the political parties and parliament."

Sadr, the scion of a powerful clerical family who in earlier years raised a rebellion against US-led forces and commanded a feared militia, had called for a mass demonstration in Baghdad on Tuesday to pressure the government to carry out reforms.

He organised a two-week sit-in at entrances to the Green Zone last month, calling it off only after Abadi presented a list of cabinet nominees.

Abadi called in February for "fundamental" change to the cabinet so that it includes "professional and technocratic figures and academics".

That kicked off the latest chapter in a months-long saga of Abadi proposing various reforms that parties and politicians with interests in the existing system have sought to delay or undermine.

View Comments (22)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-withdraw-idUSKCN0XO2EW

World | Wed Apr 27, 2016 2:45pm EDT
Related: World, Iraq

Kurds, Shi'ites agree to withdraw forces from north Iraq town after clashes

Senior Kurdish and Shi'ite Muslim leaders agreed on Wednesday to withdraw their forces from a northern Iraqi town in a bid to end violence that has killed more than 10 people in recent days.

The clashes in Tuz Khurmato, 175 km (110 miles) north of Baghdad, marked the latest violence in the town since Islamic State militants were driven back in 2014 by Kurdish peshmerga and Shi'ite militia, nominal allies against the Sunni militants.

Mayor Shalal Abdul said that under the deal, local police would take control of Tuz Khurmato - home to Kurds, Shi'ite Turkmen and Sunni Arabs.

A Kurdish official in the town, Kareem Shkur, said the peshmerga and Shi'ite militias would pull out once the police forces achieved a balance between the town's various ethnic and sectarian groups, estimating that would take around one month.

In the meantime, Tuz Khurmato will be secured by a unit from each force coordinated through a joint operations room.

Previous agreements have broken down and residents of Tuz Khurmato were skeptical the deal would be implemented.

Fighting began several days ago after members of a Shi'ite militia threw a grenade into the house of a Kurdish leader. A ceasefire was declared on Sunday, but sporadic mortar and gunfire continued until Wednesday.

Tensions in towns like Tuz Khurmatu risk further fragmenting Iraq, a major OPEC oil exporter, as it struggles to contain Islamic State, the gravest security threat since a U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Efforts to push back the Sunni insurgents have been complicated by sectarian and ethnic rivalries, including a contest for territory which the Shi'ite-led government in Baghdad claims but the Kurds want as part of their autonomous region in the north of the country.


(Reporting by Isabel Coles)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/w...e-call-for-partitioning-the-country.html?_r=0

Middle East | Iraq Memo

With Iraq Mired in Turmoil, Some Call for Partitioning the Country

By TIM ARANGO
APRIL 28, 2016

With tens of thousands of protesters marching in the streets of Baghdad to demand changes in government, Iraq’s Shiite prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, appeared before Parliament this week hoping to speed the process by introducing a slate of new ministers. He was greeted by lawmakers who tossed water bottles at him, banged on tables and chanted for his ouster.

“This session is illegal!” one of them shouted.

Leaving his squabbling opponents behind, Mr. Abadi moved to another meeting room where supportive lawmakers declared a quorum and approved several new ministers — technocrats, not party apparatchiks — as a step to end sectarian politics and the corruption and patronage that support it.

But like so much else in the Iraqi government, the effort fell short, with only a handful of new ministers installed and several major ministries, including oil, foreign and finance, remaining in limbo. A new session of Parliament on Thursday was canceled.

Almost two years after the Islamic State swept through northern Iraq, forcing the Obama administration to re-engage in a conflict it had celebrated as complete, Iraq’s political system is barely functioning, as the chaotic scenes in Parliament this week demonstrated.

With the surprise visit to Baghdad on Thursday of Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., who as a senator famously called in a 2006 essay for the partition of Iraq in to Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish zones, it seems fair to ask a question that has bedeviled foreign powers for almost a century: Is Iraq ever going to have a functioning state at peace with itself?

“I generally believe it is ungovernable under the current construct,” said Ali Khedery, an American former official in Iraq who served as an aide to several ambassadors and generals.

Mr. Khedery said that a confederacy or a partition of Iraq mighty be the only remedy for the country’s troubles, one he called, “an imperfect solution for an imperfect world.”

Mr. Khedery is now a sharp critic of American policy in Iraq, saying it has consistently ignored the realities of the country’s underlying political problems. Iraq, he said, “is a violent, dysfunctional marriage, and we keep pouring American lives and dollars into it, hoping for a miracle. We should instead seek to broker an amicable separation or divorce that results in self-determination for Iraq’s fractious communities.”

Writing last year in Foreign Affairs, Mr. Khedery said Washington should “abandon its fixation with artificial borders” — a reference to the map of the Middle East drawn by the British and French after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I — and allow Iraq to break up.

With the Islamic State now in control of territory in Iraq and Syria, expanding into Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, and having carried out attacks in Paris and Brussels, it is perhaps easy to forget that the group rose in the first place as a consequence of the failure of politics in Iraq — in that case, the sectarian policies of Mr. Abdi’s predecessor as prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, a Shiite.

American officials have said that maintaining Iraq’s unity is still their policy, but United Nations officials in Baghdad have quietly begun studying how the international community might manage a breakup of the country.

The political problems of Iraq have been made worse with the collapse in the price of oil, the country’s lifeblood, the grinding war against the Islamic State and, more recently, fighting between Shiite militias and Kurds in the north that analysts worry could foreshadow a new, violent struggle in the country.

Iraq, it seems, is stuck in a cycle of history that endlessly repeats.

Almost 100 years ago, Gertrude Bell, the British official and spy who is credited with drawing the borders of modern Iraq after World War I, fretted about the project. In creating a new nation, she wrote, “we rushed in to this business with our usual disregard for a comprehensive political scheme.” A forthcoming documentary, “Letters From Baghdad,” explores the life and legacy of Ms. Bell, demonstrating how little has changed in Iraq over a century.

Even today, Bell’s legacy is still felt: This week, Mr. Abadi put forward Sharif Ali bin Hussein, a descendant of King Faisal, who was chosen by Ms. Bell in 1921 to rule Iraq, as foreign minister. But Mr. Hussein was rejected by lawmakers as an unfortunate reminder of Iraq’s failed monarchy.

Much of what troubles Iraq today is the legacy of Saddam Hussein’s brutality. Shiites and Kurds, oppressed under the dictator’s Sunni-dominated regime, have been unable to overcome their grievances. Sunni Arabs say their entire community has been unfairly marginalized for the crimes of Mr. Hussein.

“Iraq, it seems, has a long memory but is short on vision,” Kate Gilmore, a human rights official at the United Nations, said this week in unusually descriptive language after visiting Iraq. “It is like a vehicle traveling over rocky terrain, with a large rearview mirror but only a keyhole for a windscreen, despite a vicious contest for the wheel. The dominant narrative among many of Iraq’s leaders is of ‘my community’s grievance,’ failing to acknowledge the widespread nature of Iraqis’ suffering and failing to chart a course for an inclusive future.”

Mr. Maliki, in an interview this year with The New York Times, acknowledged that he had been unable, while in office, to overcome this history.

“The Kurds want compensation for the past,” said the former prime minister, who these days seems determined to undermine Mr. Abadi at every turn. “The Shia, too. Sunnis still fear from the majority, and fear being called in to account for what Saddam did.”

In addition to the squabbling among communities, divisions within the Shiite leadership, with Mr. Maliki and others pushing back against Mr. Abadi’s efforts at restructuring, are at the core of the current political crisis.

Mr. Maliki, whose grandfather participated in an armed uprising against the British in the 1920s, became one of Iraq’s three vice presidents after he lost the prime minister’s post in 2014. One of the first changes proposed by Mr. Abadi last summer, when he faced protests, was to eliminate the offices of vice president. But two of the occupants refused to leave, even though their salaries were cut off.

One of those was Mr. Maliki, who still occupies his palace and insists he is still a vice president of Iraq. “What Abadi did was illegal and unconstitutional,” he said.

Still, he said he had no ambition to return to office, even though many Iraqi officials and Western diplomats in Baghdad believe he has been scheming to do just that.

“I don’t miss it,” he said. “And I don’t want to return to it.”

Meanwhile, Hadi al-Ameri, another Shiite rival to Mr. Abadi, who runs a powerful militia that is supported by Iran, is seen by many as harboring ambitions to replace Mr. Abadi.

Even so, he said, “only if I were crazy would I accept” the job of prime minister.

“We don’t have democracy in Iraq,” he said. “Here, everyone wants to drive the car. The winner and the loser.”

He added, as a way of defending Mr. Abadi’s failures in uniting the Iraqi state, “even if a prophet came to rule Iraq, he wouldn’t be able to satisfy all sides.”


follow Tim Arango on Twitter @tarangoNYT.

Tim Arango reported from Baghdad and Istanbul and Falih Hassan and Omar al-Jawoshy contributed reporting from Baghdad
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/w...e-call-for-partitioning-the-country.html?_r=0

Middle East | Iraq Memo

With Iraq Mired in Turmoil, Some Call for Partitioning the Country

By TIM ARANGO
APRIL 28, 2016

With tens of thousands of protesters marching in the streets of Baghdad to demand changes in government, Iraq’s Shiite prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, appeared before Parliament this week hoping to speed the process by introducing a slate of new ministers. He was greeted by lawmakers who tossed water bottles at him, banged on tables and chanted for his ouster.

“This session is illegal!” one of them shouted.

Leaving his squabbling opponents behind, Mr. Abadi moved to another meeting room where supportive lawmakers declared a quorum and approved several new ministers — technocrats, not party apparatchiks — as a step to end sectarian politics and the corruption and patronage that support it.

But like so much else in the Iraqi government, the effort fell short, with only a handful of new ministers installed and several major ministries, including oil, foreign and finance, remaining in limbo. A new session of Parliament on Thursday was canceled.

Almost two years after the Islamic State swept through northern Iraq, forcing the Obama administration to re-engage in a conflict it had celebrated as complete, Iraq’s political system is barely functioning, as the chaotic scenes in Parliament this week demonstrated.

With the surprise visit to Baghdad on Thursday of Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., who as a senator famously called in a 2006 essay for the partition of Iraq in to Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish zones, it seems fair to ask a question that has bedeviled foreign powers for almost a century: Is Iraq ever going to have a functioning state at peace with itself?

“I generally believe it is ungovernable under the current construct,” said Ali Khedery, an American former official in Iraq who served as an aide to several ambassadors and generals.

Mr. Khedery said that a confederacy or a partition of Iraq mighty be the only remedy for the country’s troubles, one he called, “an imperfect solution for an imperfect world.”

Mr. Khedery is now a sharp critic of American policy in Iraq, saying it has consistently ignored the realities of the country’s underlying political problems. Iraq, he said, “is a violent, dysfunctional marriage, and we keep pouring American lives and dollars into it, hoping for a miracle. We should instead seek to broker an amicable separation or divorce that results in self-determination for Iraq’s fractious communities.”

Writing last year in Foreign Affairs, Mr. Khedery said Washington should “abandon its fixation with artificial borders” — a reference to the map of the Middle East drawn by the British and French after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I — and allow Iraq to break up.

With the Islamic State now in control of territory in Iraq and Syria, expanding into Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, and having carried out attacks in Paris and Brussels, it is perhaps easy to forget that the group rose in the first place as a consequence of the failure of politics in Iraq — in that case, the sectarian policies of Mr. Abdi’s predecessor as prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, a Shiite.

American officials have said that maintaining Iraq’s unity is still their policy, but United Nations officials in Baghdad have quietly begun studying how the international community might manage a breakup of the country.

The political problems of Iraq have been made worse with the collapse in the price of oil, the country’s lifeblood, the grinding war against the Islamic State and, more recently, fighting between Shiite militias and Kurds in the north that analysts worry could foreshadow a new, violent struggle in the country.

Iraq, it seems, is stuck in a cycle of history that endlessly repeats.

Almost 100 years ago, Gertrude Bell, the British official and spy who is credited with drawing the borders of modern Iraq after World War I, fretted about the project. In creating a new nation, she wrote, “we rushed in to this business with our usual disregard for a comprehensive political scheme.” A forthcoming documentary, “Letters From Baghdad,” explores the life and legacy of Ms. Bell, demonstrating how little has changed in Iraq over a century.

Even today, Bell’s legacy is still felt: This week, Mr. Abadi put forward Sharif Ali bin Hussein, a descendant of King Faisal, who was chosen by Ms. Bell in 1921 to rule Iraq, as foreign minister. But Mr. Hussein was rejected by lawmakers as an unfortunate reminder of Iraq’s failed monarchy.

Much of what troubles Iraq today is the legacy of Saddam Hussein’s brutality. Shiites and Kurds, oppressed under the dictator’s Sunni-dominated regime, have been unable to overcome their grievances. Sunni Arabs say their entire community has been unfairly marginalized for the crimes of Mr. Hussein.

“Iraq, it seems, has a long memory but is short on vision,” Kate Gilmore, a human rights official at the United Nations, said this week in unusually descriptive language after visiting Iraq. “It is like a vehicle traveling over rocky terrain, with a large rearview mirror but only a keyhole for a windscreen, despite a vicious contest for the wheel. The dominant narrative among many of Iraq’s leaders is of ‘my community’s grievance,’ failing to acknowledge the widespread nature of Iraqis’ suffering and failing to chart a course for an inclusive future.”

Mr. Maliki, in an interview this year with The New York Times, acknowledged that he had been unable, while in office, to overcome this history.

“The Kurds want compensation for the past,” said the former prime minister, who these days seems determined to undermine Mr. Abadi at every turn. “The Shia, too. Sunnis still fear from the majority, and fear being called in to account for what Saddam did.”

In addition to the squabbling among communities, divisions within the Shiite leadership, with Mr. Maliki and others pushing back against Mr. Abadi’s efforts at restructuring, are at the core of the current political crisis.

Mr. Maliki, whose grandfather participated in an armed uprising against the British in the 1920s, became one of Iraq’s three vice presidents after he lost the prime minister’s post in 2014. One of the first changes proposed by Mr. Abadi last summer, when he faced protests, was to eliminate the offices of vice president. But two of the occupants refused to leave, even though their salaries were cut off.

One of those was Mr. Maliki, who still occupies his palace and insists he is still a vice president of Iraq. “What Abadi did was illegal and unconstitutional,” he said.

Still, he said he had no ambition to return to office, even though many Iraqi officials and Western diplomats in Baghdad believe he has been scheming to do just that.

“I don’t miss it,” he said. “And I don’t want to return to it.”

Meanwhile, Hadi al-Ameri, another Shiite rival to Mr. Abadi, who runs a powerful militia that is supported by Iran, is seen by many as harboring ambitions to replace Mr. Abadi.

Even so, he said, “only if I were crazy would I accept” the job of prime minister.

“We don’t have democracy in Iraq,” he said. “Here, everyone wants to drive the car. The winner and the loser.”

He added, as a way of defending Mr. Abadi’s failures in uniting the Iraqi state, “even if a prophet came to rule Iraq, he wouldn’t be able to satisfy all sides.”


follow Tim Arango on Twitter @tarangoNYT.

Tim Arango reported from Baghdad and Istanbul and Falih Hassan and Omar al-Jawoshy contributed reporting from Baghdad

If the Kurds and Christians could have a safe haven, I'd be in favor of it... Shucks, it's all in God's Hands, anyway...

GBY&Y's, Housecarl... Thanks for all you do, Sir...

Maranatha

OA
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...ghting-threatens-the-war-against-isis-in-iraq

Coalition In-Fighting Threatens the War Against ISIS in Iraq

Recent skirmishes hint at a problem in the war-torn country that far exceeds the extremist threat.

By Paul D. Shinkman | Senior National Security Writer April 28, 2016, at 6:51 p.m.

It was just another skirmish in an historically violent part of Iraq that, aside from the few dozen fighters who died, would not normally raise concerns far beyond the township's borders.

But the recent confrontation in the northern Iraqi city of Tuz Khurmatu signals a significantly larger problem facing a central government in Baghdad already on shaky footing as it tries to hold together a political and military coalition it desperately needs to defeat the Islamic State group threat.

Hostilities broke out over the weekend between two groups considered critical components of the ground war. Troops from the predominantly Shiite Muslim militias – known as the popular mobilization units or PMUs – reportedly attacked the home of an officer with the Kurdish fighting force known as the peshmerga, according to media reports. The militiamen claimed they were retaliating against an unprovoked peshmerga attack.

Fighting escalated into Sunday as peshmerga troops launched mortars and Shiite militias lit two of the Kurdish unit's tanks on fire. Iraq's ambassador to the U.S. described the incidents as unfortunate and in an area "where longstanding fault lines exist."

An uneasy truce took hold Wednesday, but concern remains.

The rival forces provide the backbone to an Iraqi army that has proved less than capable in battle so far, and their continued clashes come on the eve of the U.S.-led coalition's biggest challenge to date: the liberation of the Iraqi city of Mosul. Dysfunction among this disparate collection of ground fighters could prove catastrophic to the fragile coalition Washington needs to beat back the extremists.

Both the peshmerga and the Shiite militias, known locally as Hashd al-Shaabi, believe the other is only contributing to the coalition to advance its own territorial gains and ensure a prominent place at the negotiating table once a victorious Iraq determines how to rebuild.

The sectarian tensions were one reason why Vice President Joe Biden made a surprise visit Thursday to Iraq, where he urged local leaders to find some resolution to ongoing political discord in Baghdad that has been further exacerbated by the low oil prices that are crippling the country's economy.

In remarks to staff at the U.S. Embassy, Biden, who has previously advocated for establishing within Iraq three autonomous regions along ethnic lines, lamented the conflict that exists within Iraq's modern borders where Americans now try to help broker peace.

"They're places where, because of history, we've drawn artificial lines, creating artificial states, made up of totally distinct ethnic, religious cultural groups and said, 'Have at it. Live together,'" he said.

As news of his visit broke, Defense Secretary Ash Carter was testifying before Congress, where he said the shared commitment that led to successfully eliminating the Islamic State group's direct threat against Baghdad has given way to political discord among increasingly ambitious national leaders.

"In some instances, ethno-sectarian competition has increased, creating an added burden and distraction for Prime Minister [Haider] Abadi's government before the task of defeating ISIL is complete," Carter said, using an alternative name for the Islamic State group.

Indeed, the ground forces the U.S. has helped organize to fend off the extremists has now reached some of the internal borders of Iraq's historic ethnic enclaves and is spurring fighting among these groups, like what continues to take place in Tuz Khurmatu. That town sits at the intersection of regions traditionally held by Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis as well as minority sects like Turkmen and has been a hot spot for tensions like those that erupted last weekend.

Powerful players throughout the country have used the fight to address what they see as broader fundamental concerns often aired on the national stage, where leaders accuse one another of deceitful motives, sometimes at the behest of international backers like Turkey or Iran.

"They want to take over the land," a senior Iraqi official who works closely with the Shiite militias says about the Kurdish forces. "They don't care about helping the PMU the way they're supposed to. … They act to show the world they can flex their muscle and get people out of there."

"The bottom line is this," he says. "The Kurds have their own agenda, and historically speaking, we as the government of Iraq know for sure – know for a fact – that a lot of the food supplies and weapons [to the Islamic State group] come through Kirkuk and Irbil. Everybody knows this, but people don't talk about it."

The Kurdish government has responded to the violence by calling for peace and negotiations, but underlies all statements with the condition that the peshmerga remain a principal force for security in the region.

"The events of recent days in the town of Tuzkhormato are a source of concern for us. It's very unfortunate that a number of peshmerga and civilians have been martyred and wounded," Kurdistan Region President Masoud Barzani said in a statement on Tuesday. "I call on the Kurdistan Region officials and peshmerga commanders to engage with those leaders of Popular Mobilization Units who are against this sedition … to restore peace and communal harmony in the area."

He added, "The peshmerga forces must defend the people of the area and prevent any aggression on the people of Tuzkhormatu."

In a statement to U.S. News, the Kurdistan Regional Government's office in D.C. said a new agreement would turn security of the city over to local police and security forces. The KRG, however, would continue to provide security to the population of that and any other town under Kurdish control "as long as they are needed," the statement said.

The representative office declined to comment on allegations the Kurdish moves in Tuz Khurmatu were designed as a land grab ahead of ultimately trying to secede from Iraq, as some officials in Baghdad continue to claim.

But the skirmish in Tuz Khurmatu heightens a more general fear about the ground forces the U.S. has mashed together as the only way to defeat the Islamic State group: The Iraqi army is too inexperienced and disorganized to take on the task themselves; the peshmerga is reluctant to operate far outside of its own territory or for anything beyond the defense of its fellow Kurds; and the PMUs – to which the central government has recruited Sunni Muslims, but remains overwhelmingly Shiite – seek to ensure that the country's Shiite majority remains in power and holds sway over a contiguous Iraq, including lucrative oil fields like those in Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk.

Both of these irregular forces are considered essential to supporting the regular Iraqi army as it – at least nominally – leads the ground war against the Islamic State group. In practice, however, they are beholden to regional leaders.

These concerns date back to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, even before.

"The widespread fear was some flashpoint along the border would lead to fighting. A fair fraction [of U.S. troops] deployed there to discourage that," says Stephen Biddle, a former senior adviser to Iraq War generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus who now serves as a senior fellow for defense policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. "So it's not surprising at all that there could be violence between Shiite and Kurds in that part of the country."

Others say the situation in Tuz Khurmatu is more insecure than most.

"This is a very divided, violent, uncontrolled urban environment, even by Iraqi standards," says Michael Knights with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. This level of violence combined with the mixing bowl of various ethnicities provides an opportunity for the leaders of these sects to project their own agendas that is too tempting to resist, he says, even if they have no control over events.

"What this all adds up to is there are local actors, very muscular local actors, who are doing things national-level politicians could not turn on or off, regardless of if they want to," Knights says. "This is a bottom-up driven crisis. It's local mafiosi fighting with each other, and they just happen to have extensions up through national political party politicians."

The fighting in Tuz Khurmatu may not necessarily portend what will happen elsewhere in the coming months. Mosul, for example, is a mostly Sunni Muslim city, so the predominantly Shiite militias have said they will prohibit themselves from entering as so-called liberators, likely to avoid being slaughtered themselves.

It does, however, represent the kind of post-conflict jockeying that national politicians already have their eyes on. Shiite militia leaders, for example, and their Iranian backers have indicated they would have to play some role in liberating Mosul if the peshmerga is also involved.

Kurdistan's Barzani, too, has indicated he wants to carve a permanent role for Turkey in negotiations to ensure that any Sunni Muslim leadership in Mosul after its liberation would be pro-Ankara.

That is, of course, assuming an ultimate victory in Mosul.

Video - France to send weapons to Kurds in Iraq
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.military.com/daily-news/...troops-in-iraq-conduct-combat-operations.html

Dunford Acknowledges US Troops in Iraq Conduct Combat Operations

Apr 28, 2016 | by Hope Hodge Seck
55 comments

While the White House maintains that U.S. troops supporting the fight against Islamic State militants are not in a combat role, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff acknowledged Thursday that troops are fighting and dying in combat operations in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East.

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter about the status of operations against the Islamic State in Iraq and Afghanistan, or ISIS, also known as ISIL, Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford answered a line of questions from Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan about the March 19 death of Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Louis Cardin due to indirect fire at a small outpost in northern Iraq.

"Was he killed in combat?" Sullivan, a Marine reserve officer, asked.

"He was killed in combat, Senator," Dunford responded.

Army Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler, who was killed by ISIS fire on Oct. 22 in Kirkuk province, Iraq, also died in combat, Dunford said.

"When our [Joint Special Operations Command] troops conduct [counter-terrorism] missions in that part of the world, are they conducting combat operations?" Sullivan pressed.

Dunford agreed they were, and also assented that Air Force A-10s and F-16s dropping bombs on Iraq and Syria were also engaged in combat operations.

Why then, Sullivan asked, did the White House refuse to acknowledge that troops were in combat?

"Why does the administration go through these crazy somersaults that the entire country knows is not correct to say our troops are not in combat when they're in combat? The chairman of the Joint Chiefs just stated that pretty much everybody in the Middle East is in combat. So why does the president not level with the American people, why does the White House spokesman continually say they're not in combat," Sullivan said.

"I also think it diminishes the sacrifice of the American troops and their families," he added. "We know they're in combat; why can't we level with the American people and say they're in combat?"

In a Tuesday briefing, White House spokesman Josh Earnest reiterated the administration's stance on the topic.

"[U.S. troops are] not in a combat role, but they are in a role that puts them in harm's way," he said. "They are armed for combat. They are armed to defend themselves if necessary. But the role that they have is to offer advice and assistance to forces on the ground fighting ISIL in their own country."

Carter agreed with Dunford that the fallen troops had been killed in combat, but said the language of the White House was intended to emphasize the role of Iraqi forces out front.

The role of the troops deployed in support of counter-ISIL operations was "not to try to substitute for local forces … but to try to get them powerful enough that they can expel ISIL with our support," Carter said. "And when we provide that support, we put people in harm's way, we ask them to conduct combat actions."

Sullivan asked that Carter and Dunford pass his request for clearer acknowledgment of American troops in combat to the White House.

"[There are] 250 new Special Forces troops going to the Middle East but they're not in combat roles. Well, that's not actually true," he said. "I think that leveling with this committee, leveling with the American people is very useful."

Last weekend, Dunford paid a quiet visit to Fire Base Bell, where Cardin was killed, to award four Purple Heart medals to Marines wounded in the same attack.

"I just talked to them about what they were doing, what their mission was, and frankly just thanked them," Dunford said, according to a Defense Department news report.

-- Hope Hodge Seck can be reached at hope.seck@monster.com. Follow her on Twitter at@HopeSeck.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
US System In Iraq Collapsing: Protesters Storm Parliament, State of Emergency Declared
Started by Possible Impactý, Today 08:10 AM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...-Storm-Parliament-State-of-Emergency-Declared

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.ktvq.com/story/31855134/protesters-target-iraqs-parliament-following-clerics-call

35 minutes ago

Protesters target Iraq's parliament following cleric's call

By Mohammed Tawfeeq, Alanne Orjoux and Jomana Karadsheh CNN

(CNN) -- The situation was tense in Baghdad by nightfall after hundreds, if not thousands, of protesters angry at government inaction stormed the city's green zone and parliament building -- the first time that fortified zone housing government buildings and the U.S. Embassy has been penetrated since 2003.

The protests Saturday were sparked by a fiery speech from Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who was speaking from the city of Najaf, about 100 miles south of the Iraqi capital. He's been railing against the Iraqi government for months now, warning that his supporters would enter the green zone if the Iraqi government didn't take steps to deal with the economic crisis the country is facing, as well as eradicate corruption and make reforms.

Images broadcast on state-run news channel Al-Iraqiya showed protesters carrying Iraqi flags walking freely in the green zone and gathering in the halls and meeting rooms in parliament.


The green zone was delineated shortly after U.S. troops invaded Iraq in 2003, forcing out then-President Saddam Hussein and overtaking Baghdad. The zone was strongly secured while U.S. troops were in charge of Iraq's security, and while the occasional mortar or grenade was lobbed into it and a handful of suicide attackers slipped inside, no large-scale protests have managed to get through.

But now, many Iraqi security forces and Shiite militias have been diverted to fight the terror group ISIS elsewhere in the country, and the security situation in the capital may not be as strong.

Saad Maan, the spokesman for Baghdad's Operations Command, told Al-Iraqiya earlier Saturday Iraqi security forces are present in the green zone and are in full control of the situation.

Some lawmakers beaten

No large-scale violence has been reported in the protests, although Hoshiar Abdullah, a Kurdish member of parliament, told Kurdish television network Rudaw that the deputy speaker of parliament and five other Kurdish lawmakers were trapped inside the parliament building and had been attacked by protesters who also smashed their cars.

Shiite lawmaker Ammar Taama -- also the head of the Shiite Fadhila faction in parliament -- was reportedly beaten by some protesters, possibly a target due to his past comments criticizing Sadr.

A statement on the website of Iraqi President Fuad Masum called on protesters to remain calm, "abide by the law, not to attack any lawmaker, government employees, public or private properties and to evacuate the building."

It also urged "the cabinet, lawmakers, and head of the political blocs to implement the desired ministerial amendment, execute the political and administrative reforms, and fight corruption. We believe that burying partisan and factional quota system is a task that can no longer be postponed."

According to Iraq's Defense Ministry, Defense Minister Khalid al-Obeidi has contacted military commanders in all sectors, urging them to be cautious and vigilant and not allow terrorist elements to exploit the situation.

Security had already been heightened in Baghdad due to a planned Shiite pilgrimage to Kadumiya Monday and Tuesday.

Rumors flew that some politicians were trying to flee the protests, but an official at the Baghdad airport told Al-Iraqiya no Iraqi officials were at the airport trying to leave the country.

And the U.S. Embassy tweeted that reports that officials from the Iraqi government or another party are in the American Embassy are not true.


The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) issued a statement saying it was "gravely concerned" by the protests and "the storming of the Council of Representatives premises by demonstrators after they entered the International Zone.

"The Mission condemns the use of violence, including against elected officials, and urges calm, restraint and respect for Iraq's constitutional institutions at this crucial juncture. UNAMI calls on the Government, all political leaders and civil society to work together to immediately restore security and engage in dialogue that will ensure the implementation of the reforms necessary to draw Iraq out of its political, economic and security crisis," the statement said, adding that the group continues to operation from its headquarters in the green zone and "is in constant contact with parties to facilitate a solution that meets the demands of the people for reform."

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is working to bridge sectarian divides, but his government has been plagued in recent months by protests and opposition from predecessor Nuri al-Maliki, as well as Sadr.

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden made a brief, unannounced visit to Baghdad Thursday for meetings with political leaders to encourage Iraqi national unity and steps to take to help Iraq's economic woes.

"The more the political system in Baghdad is consumed with everybody keeping their job, or figuring out how to rearrange the government, the more difficult it is for everybody to be on the same page as it relates to the next step in the counter-ISIL campaign," said one senior administration official traveling with Biden. "The bigger danger you have to hedge against is that."


A deadly bombing east of Baghdad

Earlier Saturday, at least 24 people were killed and as many as 38 wounded when a car bomb exploded at a busy livestock market in Nahrawan, east of Baghdad, police said.


ISIS claimed responsibility for the bomb through its media group, Amaq Agency.

The Amaq Agency said "around 100" people had been either killed or injured in the blast. The bomb targeted Shiites, the agency said. ISIS is a Sunni group.

Sectarian violence has been rife in the country since the U.S, invasion in 2003, that toppled Saddam from power, and it has pitted Sunnis and Shias against each another, with the Kurds gaining a measure of autonomy in the north of the country.


CNN's Merieme Arif, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Hamdi Alkhshali contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/29/iraq-isis-sunni-shiite-kurds-fight-mosul/

Who Will Rule Mosul?

The operation to recapture the Iraqi city from the Islamic State has turned into a high-stakes political contest for power. And the shooting hasn’t even started.

By Dan De Luce, Henry Johnson
April 29, 2016
Dan.DeLuce@dandeluce

The battle to liberate Mosul from the Islamic State has begun. But so far all the fighting is taking place in the political arena, with Iraq’s rival ethnic and religious factions mired in a power struggle over how to recapture the country’s second-largest city.

Virtually every major armed group in Iraq and their foreign patrons, including local Sunni Arabs backed by Turkey, Shiite militias supported by Iran, and American-equipped Kurdish forces are jockeying for a piece of the action.

The contest over who marches into Mosul will shape who controls the city once — or if — Islamic State militants are forced out. But despite a campaign more than a year in the making, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has yet to forge a coherent political plan that can bridge the divide between the rival groups, all but certainly pushing back a military operation yet again, U.S. officials and experts said.

Obama administration officials are closely watching the political intrigue over Sunni-majority Mosul, which borders the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq’s north and is only a few hours’ drive from the Iranian border. U.S. officials are wary of any scenario that skews the balance too far in favor of any one group — particularly proxies answering to Iran or Kurdish forces intent on carving out more territory.

“Who takes Mosul matters a lot,” said a senior administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Shiite militias with links to Iran (known as Popular Mobilization Forces), Kurdish Peshmerga troops, Sunni tribal leaders, and Iraqi Army commanders “have a different vision for how we get there,” the official told Foreign Policy. “If there’s too much PMF or Peshmerga elements, we’re going to have a problem.”

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden paid a visit to Iraq this week, his first since 2011, and high on the agenda in his talks in Baghdad on Thursday and Erbil on Friday was an appeal to political leaders to arrive at a consensus on how to retake Mosul.

The Islamic State seized Mosul in June 2014, shocking Obama administration officials who had turned their focus elsewhere after U.S. troops left Iraq in December 2011 after more than eight years of war and the deaths of nearly 4,500 American forces. The ongoing power struggle over who will rule the sprawling, dusty city shares some similarities with a dispute that plagued an offensive to take back Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit, in central Iraq, in March 2015. In that case, American military commanders initially refused to carry out bombing raids against Islamic State militants in Tikrit until Iranian-linked Shiite militias pulled back and allowed the Iraqi government army to take the lead.

U.S. officials said they are prepared to stand down on lending artillery fire and air power once again if plans for Mosul failed to give Baghdad’s army a central role.

Despite misgivings from Iraqi Army commanders and U.S. military advisors, the leader of one of the most powerful Shiite militias, Hadi Amiri, has insisted that his forces will be a part of any fight for Mosul. He leads a political organization once known as the Badr Brigades, which for years targeted U.S. troops in Iraq with so-called EFP bombs from Iran.

“In the battle for Mosul, we will be playing the essential role,” Amiri told the Financial Times in March.

But he said his militia would not enter the city and instead would “isolate and surround” the area, allowing local fighters and security forces to move into Mosul.

Iraqi leaders on March 24 declared they had launched an assault on Mosul. But more than a month later, apart from some fighting in rural areas southeast of the city, near Makhmour, a major operation to push the Islamic State from Mosul has yet to get underway and there is no sign of imminent military action.

The U.S. military has also jumped the gun on the timing of a Mosul offensive. Last year, a senior officer predicted an operation would be underway by the spring of 2015, in remarks that reflected the Pentagon’s bid to push Iraqi leaders to respond faster to the Islamic State. Baghdad bristled at the perception that Washington was directing the fight, and senior U.S. officers backed down. Since then, the Pentagon has resisted rushing Baghdad into an offensive until Iraqi forces are ready.

Sectarian feuding over which forces will lead the military offensive is not the only factor complicating a Mosul offensive. For the past two months, Abadi has been preoccupied with his own political survival, as he struggles to defuse a challenge to his authority in Baghdad from a fellow Shiite, firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Exploiting popular anger over corruption and unemployment among impoverished Shiites, Sadr has orchestrated massive protests across Baghdad and outside the Green Zone, where government offices and diplomatic posts are located behind an array of concrete blast walls.

Abadi, attempting to get ahead of Sadr’s demands but hampered by a weak political hand, proposed a new cabinet of technocrats. But the prime minister has failed to win parliamentary backing for the move, partly because fellow Shiite politicians are reluctant to give up their privileges.

“He’s consumed by this,” said Ben Connable, a retired U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer and now senior analyst at the RAND Corp., who recently returned from a visit to Baghdad. “He’s distracted. And it’s harder to fight a war when you are distracted by near-term security and political threats right outside your front gate.”

Both the United States and Iran are supporting Abadi and his Shiite-led government, as neither country wants to see the Iraqi government fall when the campaign against the Islamic State has gained some momentum. U.S. officials expect Abadi will survive the political turmoil but analysts warn he may emerge scarred and weakened, possibly leaving him more vulnerable to pressures from harder-line Shiite militias.

“Abadi will feel tremendous pressure from Iran” to give the PMF an important role in the operation to recapture Mosul, the senior administration official said.

While political conflict threatens to delay the Mosul operation indefinitely, mounting sectarian and ethnic tensions are coming to a head on the ground, threatening the fragile coalition fighting the Islamic State.

Even as the extremists have been forced to retreat, Kurdish troops and Shiite militia have clashed in contested areas. Last weekend, the two sides battled in Tuz Khormato, a small city with mixed ethnicity in northeast Iraq, in a firefight over two days that left at least 27 soldiers dead.

In the meantime, increasing numbers of Sunni Arabs are fleeing Mosul and its environs, walking through a dangerous no man’s land between front lines to reach Kurdish-controlled territory.

This past Tuesday, 25 families crossed the Tigris River overnight and arrived at dawn in Makhmour, according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. After security checks, the families were directed to a nearby camp for displaced persons that is already home to more than 6,400 civilians, well past its maximum capacity.

Aid workers and experts say most of the people fleeing from Mosul in recent weeks appear to be motivated by fears for their safety, given the Iraqi government’s public statements about an upcoming offensive.

They have good reason to fear the war coming to Mosul — and not only because of the explosions and gunfire that will envelop the city once the fighting starts in earnest.

Mosul is the capital of Nineveh province, which borders Syria and Iraqi Kurdistan, and is the largest community in the ethnically mixed region. Sunni Arabs there are wary of how they will be treated once Islamic State extremists are kicked out, particularly given concerns of harassment and abuse by some Kurdish Peshmerga units and Shiite militia.

Human rights groups have documented abuses against Sunnis carried out by Kurdish troops and Shiite militia units in areas where Islamic State militants have been rolled back, including in Nineveh province. Amnesty International said in January that Peshmerga forces bulldozed and burned the homes of Sunnis in northern Iraq, purportedly in retaliation for their alleged support of the extremists.

In a report last year, Human Rights Watch found that Kurds had barred Arabs from returning to their villages in Nineveh province for months at a time, allowing Kurdish civilians to seize the land. The Peshmerga stopped the Arabs from returning to their homes by holding them in “security zones,” allegedly denying them basic services and preventing them from checking on their property.

Bruno Geddo, the UNHCR’s representative in Iraq, said the refugee agency will be present on the front lines during a future Mosul offensive to ensure displaced Arabs are not mistreated on the pretext of security concerns.

“We will monitor the conditions of treatment so that there’s food, water, and shelter at the screening center and no arbitrary detentions,” Geddo told FP by phone from Erbil.

Given Mosul’s sectarian and ethnic sensitivities, U.S., Arab, and Western governments would prefer to see a Sunni militia leading the charge into the city. But despite an 18-month concerted effort by Washington and its allies to arm and train Sunni Arab units, there are limited numbers of capable Sunni fighters. As a result, the Iraqi government army, which is mostly made up of Shiite soldiers and commanders, will have to bear the brunt of the offensive, with its elite counterterrorism force spearheading the operation, U.S. officials and experts said.

But the Iraqi Army remains a fragile institution, and does not enjoy the trust or loyalty of many Iraqi Sunnis who remain alienated from the Shiite-led government in Baghdad. Experts and former U.S. military officers said the Iraqi Army will face a daunting challenge to assert its authority in Mosul if rival factions refuse to disarm and agree on a power-sharing deal that has proved elusive for years.

During last year’s military operation in Tikrit, U.S. officials worried about the behavior of Shiite militias toward Sunni residents of the city. Those concerns were realized when the militias torched and looted homes in Tikrit’s southern and eastern suburbs. But in Mosul, the historical rivalries between Kurdish forces and Sunni Arabs could present the biggest problem. Kurds claim much of the territory east of the city, where they were forcibly removed by Saddam during his “Arabization” policies in the 1970s and ’80s.

“The Kurds are quite open about how anything they take becomes part of Kurdistan forever, which obviously has residents of Mosul slightly concerned, not to mention Baghdad,” said Douglas Ollivant, a former U.S. Army officer who served in Iraq and later in the White House during the Bush administration and early years of Obama’s first term. “What’s really going on here is much more political than military.”

During constitutional debates after the fall of Saddam in 2003, Kurdish leaders argued for including parts of Mosul and surrounding areas within the Kurdistan Regional Government that is seated in Erbil and extends through Iraq’s three northernmost provinces. They lost that argument but never abandoned it, and the looming battle for Mosul has breathed new life into the idea among political leaders in Kurdistan, said Osama Gharizi, a fellow with the U.S. Institute for Peace based in Erbil.

Kurdish and Iraqi government leaders, however, cannot even agree on an estimate of the ethnic composition of Mosul before the Islamic State took over the city in 2014, Gharizi told FP. That’s because Iraq has for decades avoided conducting a nationwide census that would ultimately settle territorial claims in bitterly divided Arab, Kurd, and Turkomen communities. And Baghdad has yet to embark on a genuine political dialogue to try to work out what Mosul should look like if the Islamic State is defeated.

“There’s no serious discussion on what the day after should look like,” Gharizi said.

Neighboring Turkey is also keenly interested in “the day after” in Mosul, a city that was ruled by the Ottoman Empire for nearly 400 years.

Last December, without asking Baghdad for permission, Turkey deployed several hundred troops and an armored battalion of some 20 tanks to a military base in Mount Bashiqa, 10 miles northeast of Mosul. The troops are still there, despite the Iraqi government’s repeated demands to leave.

Before Turkey sent in troops, a small number of Turkish military advisers stationed at the base trained a 6,500-strong militia organized and equipped by Atheel al-Nujaifi, the scion of a powerful landowning family from Mosul. Analysts say Nujaifi, who governed Nineveh province until Iraqi members of parliament sacked him last year for corruption and alleged complicity with the Islamic State, has designs to return as the provincial governor, or possibly to become mayor of Mosul. His brother, Osama al-Nujaifi, also formerly served as speaker of Iraq’s parliament and vice president as one of the highest-elected Sunnis in the country.

Ostensibly, the Turkish troops are protecting the base at Mount Bashiqa from Islamic State mortar attacks as advisers train the mostly Sunni militiamen in month-long courses in basic combat and marksmanship. But analysts say that Turkey’s actual motive in sending reinforcements is to better secure its interests during the political free-for-all that will follow Mosul’s liberation. Given how much Baghdad resents Ankara’s unilateral training camp, it’s unlikely Turkey would participate directly in a Mosul offensive.

The Nujaifi family and its Turkish-backed private army are “part and parcel to Turkey’s plans for post-conflict Mosul,” said Aaron Stein, a senior fellow and Turkey expert at the Atlantic Council.

“The Nujaifi brothers are close Turkish allies. … They argue the tribal forces that Turkey is training should be the holding force in a post-conflict Mosul. That’s why Turkey’s tanks are deployed across the front line,” he said.

Ankara is also playing the president of Iraqi Kurdistan off his rivals, and Turkey’s sworn enemies, in the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which has made sweeping gains in Syria and established a foothold in Iraq’s northwestern Sinjar area. Erbil reportedly leased Ankara the rights to the Bashiqa military camp, and participated in a joint operation with Turkish troops and their Arab allies to free two villages north of Mosul. It’s a delicate strategy of exploiting intra-Kurdish rivalries while papering over other Kurdish-Arab grievances.

During the 2003-2011 U.S. occupation, Mosul was one of the last major strongholds for al Qaeda in Iraq, the terror group that eventually morphed into what is now the Islamic State. The Sunni extremist group regained strength after American troops left Iraq and was further fueled by the Shiite-dominated central government’s sidelining of Iraqi Sunnis from power. Analysts in and outside of Iraq have warned that as long as Sunnis feel disenfranchised, violent extremism will be impossible to stamp out in Mosul and elsewhere in Iraq.

Not only do Iraqi authorities lack a coherent political plan to restore security and some semblance of government in Mosul, neither Baghdad nor the international community appears prepared to confront the vast humanitarian and reconstruction task once the Islamic State is forced out. Moreover, plunging oil prices have created a fiscal crisis for Iraq’s government, prompting urgent appeals for donor aid.

In a depressing turn of events for the thousands of Iraqis still living under the Islamic State’s brutal rule in Mosul, the country’s political leaders and rival militias have little incentive to move quickly against the extremists in the city, some experts said.

Delaying the liberation of Mosul — possibly until this fall or even the spring of 2017 — has its advantages for the Iraqi government and every other player in the country, said Robert Blecher, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the International Crisis Group.

“One of the most important things delaying the campaign is that leaving the city under Islamic State control is, for the time being, the least bad option for everyone, certainly less costly than the city falling into the orbit of a regional competitor,” he said.

“For just about everyone other than the U.S., the Islamic State is a secondary concern. Better Islamic State than someone else in Mosul.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...4efa856caf2a_story.html?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_draw

Protests in Baghdad throw administration’s Iraq plan into doubt

By Greg Jaffe
April 30 at 9:40 PM
Comments 1.2K 

President Obama’s plan for fighting the Islamic State is predicated on having a credible and effective Iraqi ally on the ground in Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

And in recent days, the administration had been optimistic, despite the growing political unrest in Baghdad, about that critical partnership.

But that optimism — along with the administration’s strategy for battling the Islamic State in Iraq — was thrown into severe doubt after protesters stormed Iraq’s parliament on Saturday and a state of emergency was declared in Baghdad. The big question for White House officials is what happens if Abadi — a critical linchpin in the fight against the Islamic State — does not survive the turmoil that has swept over the Iraqi capital.

The chaos in Baghdad comes just after a visit by Vice President Biden that was intended to help calm the political unrest and keep the battle against the Islamic State on track.

As Biden’s plane was approaching Baghdad on Thursday, a senior administration official described the vice president’s visit — which was shrouded in secrecy prior to his arrival — as a “symbol of how much faith we have in Prime Minister Abadi.”

After 10 hours on the ground in Baghdad and Irbil, Biden was hurtling toward his next stop in Rome. The feeling among the vice president and his advisers was that Iraqi politics were on a trajectory to greater calm and that the battle against the Islamic State would continue to accelerate. Some hopeful advisers on Biden’s plane even suggested that Abadi might emerge from the political crisis stronger for having survived it.

No one is talking that way now. “There’s a realization that the government, as it’s currently structured, can’t hold,” said Doug Ollivant, a former military planner in Baghdad and senior fellow at the New America Foundation. “It’s just not clear how the Iraqis get out of this. I just don’t see how they will.”

It is equally unclear how the administration will move forward if Abadi is unable to consolidate his tenuous grip on power. For much of the past year, the Iraqi prime minister’s survival was taken as a given by senior White House officials who were far more focused on the military fight against the Islamic State.

The president and his top aides have pointed to battlefield gains against the group in Iraq as proof that the administration’s much-criticized strategy was working. In the past 18 months, the Islamic State has lost more than 40 percent of its territory in Iraq, according to U.S. officials.

Attacks on the group’s banks in Mosul have blown up cash totaling from $300 million to
$800 million, according to Pentagon estimates.

“Militarily, the momentum is clearly in the coalition’s favor against [the Islamic State],” said a senior administration official traveling with Biden to Baghdad who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the White House’s strategy. “Every objective fact speaks to the fact that [the Islamic State] is losing.”

Obama has sought to accelerate the military campaign by sending more than 200 U.S. military advisers to Iraq and giving commanders authority to use lethal Apache attack helicopters in support of Iraqi forces. In a recent interview, the president said that by the end of the year he expected that the United States and its Iraqi partners will have “created the conditions whereby Mosul will eventually fall.”

Another senior administration official said that U.S. counterterrorism efforts “always benefit from a stable partner on the ground” and that the Abadi government continues to have the administration’s full support. Even with the current instability in Baghdad, the campaign against the Islamic State will continue, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive counterterrorism operations.

The political crisis in Baghdad began when Abadi made a bold push to replace politically connected members of his cabinet with technocrats and reformers. The prime minister said that his moves were intended to stamp out corruption.

But the proposals alienated powerful blocs and provoked raucous debates within the Iraqi parliament. Thousands of protesters threatened to storm the heavily fortified Green Zone, which is the seat of Iraqi power, but then seemed to back off in the days before Biden’s arrival.

Biden’s meetings Thursday with Abadi and other senior Iraqi officials focused primarily on making sure that the political strife in Baghdad was not interfering with military preparations to retake Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, from the Islamic State.

“We talked about the plans that are in store for Mosul and the coordination that’s going on with all of our friends here,” Biden told reporters after his meeting with the Iraqi prime minister. “And so, I’m very optimistic.”

As he spoke, the vice president was standing next to Salim al-
Jubouri, the Iraqi parliament speaker. He pointed to Jubouri and noted that they last talked in Biden’s office in Washington. “This is an old friend,” Biden said.

Less than 36 hours later, the protesters were dancing and stomping on Jubouri’s desk in front of the parliament chamber. Jubouri had fled the building.

The dramatic turn of events, some analysts said, points to the critical flaw in the Obama administration’s approach to the battle against the Islamic State, which has prioritized defeating the militant group over the much tougher task of helping Abadi repair Iraq’s corrupt and largely ineffective government.

“The message to the Iraqis has been to focus on the short-term problem that this president would like solved by January,” Ollivant said. “The focus is on the symptom and not the root cause of the problem.”

Other analysts said that the Obama administration’s campaign against the Islamic State was, from the outset, too dependent on Abadi, a weak prime minister who is trying to survive in a political system overrun by cronyism and competing sects.

“We get seized with individual personalities,” said Ali Khedery, who served as special assistant to five U.S. ambassadors in Baghdad from 2003 to 2009. “We fall in love with them. I agree that Abadi is generally speaking a good ally of the United States, but there isn’t much under his control.”

Because Iraqi society is so fractured along ethnic and sectarian lines, Khedery said the U.S. administration should adopt a more decentralized approach, working directly with individual Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish leaders. “What you have is a society that is deeply polarized between communities and even polarized within those communities,” Khedery said. “We need a radical new formula.”

There is no indication at the moment that the White House is considering such a radical change in approach. For now, the hope is that the current unrest in Baghdad is just a blip. The protests were sparked by Shiite cleric *Moqtada al-Sadr, who is now under pressure from Iran and his fellow Shiites to rein in the demonstrations, said a senior U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal Iraqi politics.

“Maybe [Sadr] will realize he took a step too far and will dial it back,” the official said. “That could give Abadi more space.”

It is also possible that the protests, spurred by the Iraqi government’s failure to provide basic services such as clean water and electricity, could grow worse. This time, demonstrators broke chairs and smashed windows in the parliament building. They berated lawmakers and chanted slogans for TV cameras.

“Iraq is becoming increasingly ungovernable,” said Emma Sky, who served as a senior political adviser to the U.S. military prior to the withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011. “Non-state actors are stronger than the state. The government is paralyzed and corrupt.”

Greg Jaffe covers the White House for The Washington Post, where he has been since March 2009.  Follow @GregJaffe
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/exclusive-the-front-lines-facing-isis-15995

The Skeptics

Exclusive: On the Front Lines Facing ISIS

Daniel L. Davis
May 1, 2016

I have written many times in this space on the evolving situation in Iraq regarding the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS). In large part my analysis pieces have been based on the experience gained through my two-plus decades of military service, including four combat deployments (two of which were in Iraq). But for this contemporary situation I have been reliant on reports by journalists on the ground. In the early March, I traveled to Iraq to find out first-hand what the conditions were like in and around the site of the next big fight: the battle for Mosul.

While there I visited four refugee camps, interviewed considerable numbers of displaced persons, met with the commanding general of the Peshmerga in command of troops opposite Mosul, talked with some of his troops, and met with aid workers and journalists from the region. It was an eye-opening visit to say the least.

In some ways I discovered the situation was worse than I’d imagined, the looming fight more complex and multi-layered than I’d imagined, and the brutality of ISIS was even more cruel than i’d heard. But I also discovered pockets of hope and reason for at least some optimism.

In the refugee camps I met with Yazidis, Muslims, and Christians; men, women, teenagers and young children. Two main things stood out during these interviews. First was that even some devout Sunni Muslims I met were angry at ISIS and were adamant in saying the radicals were not genuine followers of Islam but had perverted it for their own ideological agenda; two Sunni Muslims I visited had renounced their faith.

The second thing that stood out from my conversations with displaced persons is that especially among the Christians that had been driven out of Mosul and its environs, there was no hatred or a desire for revenge. “That’s not what our faith teaches,” one man told me. “We must pray for them. Jesus forgave even those people who killed him on the cross.” When I asked him why he wasn’t angry at ISIS, he quickly corrected me. “They should be held accountable for their actions—they drove us from our homes—and we want to get our lives back.” But he said it was up to God, not them, to seek revenge. I have nothing but the highest regard for their strength of character.

There was one other reason for optimism I observed. As is well known, the Iraqi Army dissolved before ISIS in the summer of 2014 and their ability to defeat the Islamic radicals and retake lost territory—especially Mosul—is uncertain. The Peshmerga, however, appear to be cut from a different cloth. I met with the commanding general of the Peshmerga forces opposite Mosul, General Bahram Yassin. I came away very impressed with his understanding of the military, political, and cultural issues complicating the fight against ISIS, as well as his grasp of the tactical tasks necessary to defeat ISIS in Mosul.

Video

I was pleasantly surprised at the general’s willingness to discuss—frankly and on the record—the difficulties and challenges facing his mission (I will write more on this conversation in the coming days). After our interview, he took me to meet some of his troops manning the forward fighting positions opposite the ISIS forward defensive positions. There I met a Kurdish fighting man who was adamant in his contention that ISIS fighters were not as fearsome as the media makes them out to be—and how eager he was to fight them. I even met an American volunteer from Idaho at that forward position. He was a former US Army soldier and had traveled at his own expense to provide his services as a combat medic.

Video

How this battle and war plays out is far from certain at this point. But one thing was deeply engrained on me during this visit. The human cost of this war has already been profound, the destruction breathtaking, and the scale of psychological and emotional wounds suffered by the survivors difficult to imagine. Perhaps it wasn’t surprising that virtually everyone I spoke with—man, woman, child, Christian, Muslim, Yazidi—all wanted the same thing: a chance to live without the threat of death hanging over their heads every day. 23-year-old Alen al-Kasmousce, a Christian living in a refugee camp in Erbil, summed it up best.

I asked him what he hoped to accomplish in his future. Get a master’s degree? Become an engineer or businessman? Have a family? He calmly responded, “No, my generation doesn’t even think about those things. What we all dream about is just living life without war.” Once the conflict was over, Alen continued, he could consider a family and career. Without peace, however, he dares not dream and deals with surviving one day to another.

Description of photos:

1. What the locals in Erbil called a “vertical village” refugee camp. Because the regional economy tanked in 2014 owing to the twin maladies of the ISIS attack and the collapsing of the global oil market, the city of Erbil is littered with high-rise buildings frozen in various degrees of completion, mere shells. Refugees have been given permission in some of them, like the one pictured here, to build make-shift rooms on several of the unfinished floors in which to live. Whole families live in each of these single rooms.

2. The laundry area in the “vertical village.”

3. A luxury: a functioning, rapidly built community toilet. There are no private facilities of any sort. No kitchen, restroom, showers, or laundry.

4. Rows of pre-fab buildings and tents comprising a primarily Yazidi camp erected in the countryside not far from Mosul.

5. An elderly Yazidi man.

6. A young Yazidi father wonders what the future will hold for his son.

7. A Yazidi woman and her baby. One of the women I met at this camp was still grieving because three of her daughters—ages 10, 11 and 13—were taken from her home by ISIS to serve as sex slaves. She has not heard from them since she escaped in 2014.

8. This elderly Yazidi seemed traumatized when I met him.

9. ISIS is brutal to everyone. Even these Muslim women were driven from their homes by the Islamic radicals.

10-13. The children at every camp I visited seemed to fall into two categories. Some were deeply suspicious of any stranger and seemed afraid of me. But most were oblivious to the war and their lives as displaced persons. They were like kids everywhere: wanted to play, be silly, and enjoy life. Even in these camps many succeeded. Regrettably, their parents and those old enough to understand were not so lucky.

14. I accompanied Ali Javanmardi and his television crew from the Voice of America to the ISIS front lines opposite Mosul, escorted by a Peshmerga truck with a machinegun mounted in the bed.

15. Peering over the sandbags of the Peshmerga front lines at the ISIS line.

16. Looking through a gun port in a sandbag wall at the literal front line of ISIS. On the top of this hill stands the black flag of the Islamic State, marking their forward-most position.

17. A Peshmerga fighter: “We are not afraid of Da’esh (ISIS). They should be afraid of us!”

Video

18. American Ryan O’Leary from Iowa, volunteering as a fighter and medic for the Peshmerga. “I want to help liberate Mosul from ISIS and make sure it doesn’t spread,” he said.

19. The children (and even some of the men) of the Yazidi camp loved to have their photo taken.

20. Taking photos of Peshmerga fighters on front line.

21. General Yassin gave me a tour of the forward position overlooking the ISIS line.

Daniel L. Davis is a widely published analyst on national security and foreign policy. He retired as a Lt. Col. after twenty-one years in the U.S. Army, including four combat deployments, and is a member of the Center for Defense Information's Military Advisory Board. The views in these articles are those of the author alone and do not reflect the position of the U.S. Government. Follow him on Twitter @DanielLDavis1 [5].


Tags
iraq [6]Kurdistan [7]ISIS [8]war [9]Mosul [10]Islamic State [11]ISIL [12]Peshmerga [13]Yazidis [14]Refugees [15]
Topics
Security [16]
Regions
Iraq [17]Kurdistan [18]

Links:
[1] http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/exclusive-the-front-lines-facing-isis-15995
[2] http://nationalinterest.org/profile/daniel-l-davis
[3] http://twitter.com/share
[4] https://www.flickr.com/photos/141804459@N03/albums/72157667258343201
[5] https://twitter.com/danielldavis1
[6] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/iraq
[7] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/kurdistan
[8] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/isis
[9] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/war
[10] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/mosul
[11] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/islamic-state
[12] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/isil
[13] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/peshmerga
[14] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/yazidis
[15] http://nationalinterest.org/tag/refugees
[16] http://nationalinterest.org/topic/security
[17] http://nationalinterest.org/region/middle-east/persian-gulf/iraq
[18] http://nationalinterest.org/region/kurdistan
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/03/u-s-soldier-killed-by-isis-while-advising-kurdish-troops/

U.S. Soldier Killed by ISIS While Advising Kurdish Troops

By J. Dana Stuster
May 3, 2016

A U.S. soldier was killed near Irbil, Iraq, when Islamic State forces broke through a line held by Kurdish peshmerga and advanced “two to three miles” to where U.S. forces were advising Kurdish troops. This is the third U.S. combat death fighting the Islamic State in Iraq. Few details have been released so far.

Despite protests in Baghdad, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is “in a very strong position,” U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told reporters yesterday while en route to Germany for a meeting with other leaders of the military coalition to defeat the Islamic State. “Prime Minister Abadi stands for and has been a partner in all of the things that are important to Iraq’s future, namely a country that holds together and doesn’t just spiral off into sectarianism,” he said. Gen. Joseph Dunford, who is also traveling to Germany for the meeting, told Foreign Policy that the United States is “concerned” about the political deadlock and its potential implications.

U.N. Envoy in Moscow in Effort to Restore Ceasefire to Aleppo

U.N. Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura is in Moscow today meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to try to make progress toward restoring a ceasefire in Aleppo. De Mistura’s meeting with Lavrov comes a day after a series of meetings held by Secretary of State John Kerry that he said have come close to reinstating the ceasefire but require more support. Violence in Aleppo is continuing today and reports have noted several deaths in government-held neighborhoods from rebel shelling and rocket attacks, including three women who were killed in an attack on a hospital. More than 250 people have been killed in Aleppo in the past two weeks since the collapse of the ceasefire, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Headlines
•A proposed amendment to the Turkish constitution that would strip parliamentarians of immunity, clearing the way for prosecutions of sitting pro-Kurdish opposition politicians, was passed out of committee after a debate on the measure turned to a brawl and pro-Kurdish parliamentarians walked out of the proceedings.


•A British foreign fighter with the Islamic State, Raphael Hostey, who was responsible for much of the organization’s English-language propaganda and British recruitment was killed in Syria, probably in an airstrike.


•The Israeli military will hold Palestinian journalist Omar Nazzal in “administrative detention” for four months without charge or trial on suspicion of “unlawful activity” with a terrorist group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.


•The Saudi Ministry of the Interior killed two men in a gunfight and arrested a third in a counterterrorism operation in Bisha province over the weekend; the operation was reportedly in response to an imminent threat and the men were suspected of involvement in Islamic State attacks in Saudi Arabia.


•Egyptian journalists have called for protests at the Journalists’ Syndicate building in Cairo today in observance of World Press Freedom Day and in response to a police raid on the building on Sunday in which two journalists were arrested.

Arguments and Analysis

“Is Muqtada al-Sadr Good for Iraq?” (Renad Mansour and Michael David Clark, War on the Rocks)

“Sadr has since undergone a rebranding process. He disbanded the notorious Mehdi Army and later established Saraya al-Salam (the Peace Brigades), which semantically has a less aggressive and non-sectarian tone. Last year, in a battle against the Islamic State, Sadr withdrew his paramilitary fighters as soon as allegations emerged of crimes committed by his men. Moving away from strictly a sectarian militia, his fighters are also fighting alongside Sunni tribes, such as the Albu Nimr in Anbar, against the Islamic State. Moreover, members of his paramilitary have welcomed the idea of integration into the Iraqi state, but only when the government’s security apparatus is perceived as effective and legitimate. Many analysts criticize Sadr for hypocrisy, claiming to fight corruption while sending individuals from his own ranks to become government officials. His officials have been part of the very problem of corruption that Sadr claims to oppose. However, Sadr is increasingly cautious about who he sends to represent his voice in government. Under accusations of corruption, he has on occasion removed the bad apples and blessed the courts’ legal proceedings. For instance, when Abadi issued legal proceedings against Sadrist Deputy Prime Minister Baha Araji, Sadr issued a statement ordering Araji to resign and forbade him from leaving the country prior to completion of the judicial procedures.”



“The Time Has Come for a ‘Sexual Spring’ in the Arab World” (Kacem El Ghazzali, Huffington Post)

“When we say that nowadays to call for sexual freedom in Arab and Muslim societies is more dangerous than the demand to topple monarchies or dictatorial regimes, we are not playing with metaphor or attempting to gain sympathy. We are stating a bitter and painful fact of the reality in which we are living. In Arab and Muslim milieus, sex is considered a means and not an end, hedged by many prickly restrictions that make it an objectionable matter and synonymous with sin. Its function within marriage is confined to procreation and nothing else, and all sexual activity outside the institution of marriage is banned legally and rejected socially. Innocent children born out of wedlock are socially rejected and considered foundlings. This situation cannot be said to be characteristic of Arab societies only, but we experience these miseries in far darker and more intense ways than in other countries.”

-J. Dana Stuster
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/05/03/q-and-a-when-is-boot-ground-not-boot-ground.html

Q&A: When Is a Boot on the Ground Not a Boot on the Ground?

Associated Press | May 03, 2016 | by Lolita C. Baldor


WASHINGTON — No one disputes that U.S. military forces are fighting in combat in Iraq and Syria -- except maybe President Barack Obama and some members of his administration.

The semantic arguments over whether there are American "boots on the ground" muddy the view of a situation in which several thousand armed U.S. military personnel are in Iraq and Syria. Obama has said more than a dozen times that there would be no combat troops in Iraq and Syria as the number of service members in those countries grows; last week, Defense Secretary Ash Carter acknowledged the military personnel there were in combat and "we should say that clearly."

So, when is a military boot on the ground? And what does it all mean?

Are U.S. military troops in Iraq?

Yes. More than 5,500 U.S. service members. The Pentagon, however, counts them in different ways. Obama recently authorized an increase in the number of troops that can deploy to Iraq to advise and assist Iraqi forces in fighting the Islamic State. The cap was increased last week from 3,870 to 4,087.

But a number of troops aren't counted against the cap because of the military's personnel accounting system. For example, troops assigned to the U.S. Embassy for security or those sent to Iraq for temporary, short-term assignments are there in addition to the 4,087.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter, in Stuttgart, Germany for a change-of-command ceremony Tuesday, revealed that a serviceman had been killed in combat near Irbil in Iraq. A U.S. military official, speaking on grounds of anonymity, said the American was killed while performing his duty as an adviser to Kurdish Peshmerga troops. He was killed by "direct fire" after Islamic State forces penetrated the Peshmerga's forward line. The official said the American was three to two to three miles behind the front line.

Are U.S. military troops in Syria?


Yes. Last week the Pentagon announced an increase in the number of U.S. forces working in Syria from 50 to 300. Those troops are working with local Syrian forces and are mainly Army special forces, but the latest increase will also include medical and logistics units.

So, that would mean there are U.S. "boots on the ground" in Iraq and Syria, wouldn't it?


Yes it would. In Iraq there are advisers, trainers, special operations forces and others stationed at Iraqi bases, working with the Iraqi forces. Last week, Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that some advisers would begin working with Iraqis at the brigade and battalion level. They had been working with Iraqis at the division headquarters level. The change would embed those teams of advisers with smaller units, who would likely be closer to the fight.

In Syria, the U.S. has about 50 special operations forces going into Syria from a base in a neighboring country to meet with local Syrian opposition forces. They aren't based in Syria, so they travel in and out, sometimes staying in the country for several days at a time. According to officials, the additional 250 forces will do the same thing. They will not be based in Syria, but will instead work out of neighboring countries, such as Iraq or Turkey. And they are not there to fight alongside the Syrians, they are there to provide advice and other assistance.

What about air strikes? Aren't pilots flying combat missions?


Yes they are. Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made it clear during a Senate hearing last week that U.S. fighter jets conducting airstrikes in Iraq and Syria are conducting combat missions.

Why does the administration say there are no U.S. boots on the ground?


Obama administration officials have consistently told the American public since 2013 that there will be no combat "boots on the ground" in Iraq and Syria. Their argument is based on the idea that there are no conventional U.S. ground forces in large units fighting the Islamic State militants in direct combat. Saying there are "no U.S. boots on the ground" — while inaccurate — is meant to convey the administration's view that U.S. troops are not on the front lines waging the war. Instead, U.S. troops are advising and assisting the Iraqi and Syrian forces, providing training, intelligence, and logistical support from behind the battlefront.

The parsing of words is meant to differentiate the latest Islamic State conflicts from earlier wars in Iraq and Afghanistan when thousands of U.S. troops were battling the enemy in small units and in close combat.

Carter told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week that U.S. troops are not going to war to substitute for the local forces, but are trying "to get them powerful enough that they can expel ISIL with our support. And when we provide that support, we put people in harm's way. We ask them to conduct combat actions."

Aren't special operations forces in direct combat in Iraq or Syria?


A: Probably. But the Pentagon doesn't talk about the often highly classified operations that U.S. commandos -- including Army Delta Force or Navy SEALs -- are doing no matter where they are. And Army special forces — or Green Berets — are in many war-torn countries providing training and assistance, because that's one of their key jobs.

In some cases, U.S. officials have acknowledged special operations missions to capture or kill high-value targets or to try and rescue hostages.

But those are not considered "boots on the ground" because they often move in and out quickly, and stay for short periods of time.


Related Topics
Headlines, Global Hot Spots, Iraq, Syria, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-member-killed-iraq-u-defense-chief-101708858.html

Islamic State kills U.S. serviceman in northern Iraq

By Phil Stewart and Andrea Shalal
Reuters
May 3, 2016

STUTTGART, Germany (Reuters) - Islamic State militants killed a U.S. serviceman in northern Iraq on Tuesday after blasting through Kurdish defences and overrunning a town in the biggest offensive in the area for months, officials said.

The dead man was the third American to be killed in direct combat since a U.S.-led coalition launched a campaign in 2014 to "degrade and destroy" the jihadist group, and is a measure of its deepening involvement in the conflict.

"It is a combat death, of course, and a very sad loss," U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters during a trip to Germany.

A U.S. defense official said the dead man was a Navy SEAL. The SEALs are considered to be among the most able U.S. special operations forces and capable of taking on dangerous missions.

A senior official within the Kurdish peshmerga forces facing Islamic State in northern Iraq said the man had been killed near the town of Tel Asqof, around 28 kilometers (17 miles) from the militant stronghold of Mosul.

The Islamic State insurgents occupied the town at dawn on Tuesday but were driven out later in the day by the peshmerga. A U.S. military official said the coalition had helped the peshmerga with air support from F-15 jets and drones.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the man was killed "by direct fire" from Islamic State.

Carter's spokesman, Peter Cook, said the incident took place during an Islamic State attack on a peshmerga position some 3-5 km behind the forward line.

SNIPERS AND SUICIDE BOMBERS

Such Islamic State incursions are rare in northern Iraq, where the Kurdish peshmerga have pushed the militants back with the help of coalition air strikes and set up defensive lines that the militants are rarely able to breach.

The leader of a Christian militia deployed alongside peshmerga in Tel Asqof said the insurgents had used multiple suicide bombers, some driving vehicles laden with explosives, to penetrate peshmerga lines.

The Kurdistan Region Security Council said at least 25 Islamic State vehicles had been destroyed on Tuesday and more than 80 militants killed. At least 10 peshmerga also died in the fighting, according to a Kurdish official who posted pictures of the victims on Twitter.

The peshmerga also deflected Islamic State attacks on the Bashiqa front and in the Khazer area, about 40 km west of the Kurdish regional capital Erbil, Kurdish military sources said.

In mid-April the United States announced plans to send an additional 200 troops to Iraq, and put them closer to the front lines of battle to advise Iraqi forces in the war against Islamic State.

Last month, an Islamic State attack on a U.S. base killed Marine Staff Sergeant Louis Cardin and wounded eight other Americans providing force protection fire to Iraqi army troops.

The Islamist militants have been broadly retreating since December, when the Iraqi army recaptured Ramadi, the largest city in the western region. Last month, the Iraqi army retook the nearby region of Hit, pushing the militants further north along the Euphrates valley.

But U.S. officials acknowledge that the military gains against Islamic State are not enough.

Iraq is beset by political infighting, corruption, a growing fiscal crisis and the Shi'ite Muslim-led government's fitful efforts to seek reconciliation with aggrieved minority Sunnis, the bedrock of Islamic State support.

(Additional reporting by Isabel Coles in Erbil; Editing by Gareth Jones)

View Comments (136)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-gathers-allies-next-steps-islamic-state-fight-091349001.html?nhp=1

U.S., allies agree to do more to combat Islamic State

By Phil Stewart
May 4, 2016

STUTTGART, Germany (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said on Wednesday that Washington and its allies had agreed to do more in their campaign to defeat Islamic State but that more risks lay ahead.

Carter made the comment following talks in Germany with defense ministers and representatives from 11 other nations participating in the alliance.

He said the United States greatly regretted the death of a Navy SEAL in an attack by the jihadist group in northern Iraq on Tuesday. He named the man as Petty Officer First Class Charles Keating.

"These risks will continue ... but allowing ISIL safe haven would carry greater risk for us all," he added, using an acronym for Islamic State.

"We also agreed that all of our friends and allies across the counter-ISIL coalition can and must do more as well, both to confront ISIL in Iraq and Syria and its metastases elsewhere."

The talks included ministers from France, Britain and Germany and were planned well in advance of Tuesday's attack, in which Islamic State fighters blasted through Kurdish defenses and overran a town.

The elite serviceman was the third American to be killed in direct combat since the U.S.-led coalition launched a campaign in 2014 to "degrade and destroy" Islamic State, and is a measure of its deepening involvement in the conflict.

Offering new details about Keating's mission, Carter said the SEAL's job was to operate with Iraqi Kurdish peshmerga forces to train and assist them north of the city of Mosul.

"That part of the peshmerga front came under attack ... and they found themselves in a firefight," Carter said.

In mid-April, the United States announced plans to send an additional 200 troops to Iraq and put them closer to the front lines of battle to advise Iraqi forces.

In late April, President Barack Obama announced he would send an additional 250 special operations forces to Syria, greatly expanding the U.S. presence on the ground there to help draw in more Syrian fighters to combat Islamic State.

'GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME'

Norwegian Defence Minister Ine Eriksen Soereide told Reuters that the ministers discussed ways to escalate the military fight against Islamic State and deal with concurrent humanitarian crises but that it was clear more hard work remained.

"There is no doubt Islamic State is under pressure ... but one has to be realistic," she said in a telephone interview. "This is difficult, this is complex. It's going to take a long time."

Soereide said Norway's decision this week to send 60 troops, including special forces soldiers, to support Syrian fighters, was made possible partly by the more structured plan for coordinating the fight against Islamic State that had emerged in recent months.

The Islamist militants have been broadly retreating since December, when the Iraqi army recaptured Ramadi, the largest city in the western region. Last month, the Iraqi army retook the nearby region of Hit, pushing the militants farther north along the Euphrates valley.

But U.S. officials acknowledge the military gains are not enough.

Iraq is beset by political infighting, corruption, a growing fiscal crisis and the Shi'ite Muslim-led government's fitful efforts to seek reconciliation with aggrieved minority Sunnis, the bedrock of Islamic State support.

(Reporting by Phil Stewart; Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by John Stonestreet and Peter Cooney)

View Comments (113)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/sto...us-embassy-baghdad-amid-unrest-iraq/84026120/

Marines sent to protect U.S. embassy in Baghdad amid unrest in Iraq

Jeff Schogol, Marine Corps Times 3:05 p.m. EDT May 6, 2016

The U.S. has sent additional Marines to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad in Iraq following last week’s breech of the Green Zone in the country's capital.

About 25 additional Marines have arrived at the embassy amid security concerns after Shiite protesters broke through the Green Zone on April 30 and stormed the Iraqi parliament. The news was first reported by CNN on Friday.

Officials in Washington declined to discuss which units to which the extra Marines are assigned or what their mission is at the embassy.

“We routinely re-balance our security and diplomatic personnel at all of our missions worldwide,” said a U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.“We do not discuss internal security procedures at embassies. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad continues to operate normally.”


MARINE CORPS TIMES
Here's where the Marines have stood up new embassy guard posts after Benghazi


The Marine Corps has a host of tools it can use to assist with embassy security in the face of a crisis.

Marine security guards are assigned to about 175 diplomatic facilities in close to 150 countries. Those Marines guard embassies' access points known as Post One and safeguard classified material. They are also equipped with weapons and nonlethal tools to deal with emergencies or security breaches at embassies.

If an ambassador, chief of mission or regional security officer at an embassy fears their post is in trouble, they can call on the Marine Security Augmentation Unit to respond. That unit dispatches additional embassy guards who can assist the existing MSG detachment at the facility.

Fleet Anti-Terrorism Security Teams can send platoons of Marines to guard an embassy under threat of an attack. The service also has land- and sea-based units in the region that can send teams of infantrymen to shore up security at diplomatic posts.


MARINE CORPS TIMES
The Marines' new Iraq mission


Marines with the service's land-based crisis response units, for example, are staged in different parts of the world to respond to emergencies or threats at embassies or consulates. Marine infantrymen from those units in the Middle East and Africa have been dispatched to U.S. embassies in hot spots like Iraq, Yemen and Libya in the past.

The deployment of more Marines to the embassy in Baghdad comes as the Iraqi government is at risk of coming apart. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s attempt to reform the government has run into a brick wall in parliament where on April 26, lawmakers threw water bottles at each other when an expected vote on Abadi’s proposed new cabinet melted down into a brawl.

The crisis has presented an opportunity for anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose forces U.S. troops have fought in the past. Al-Sadr has staged massive anti-government rallies in Baghdad and it was his followers who stormed the Green Zone last week.

If the Iraqi government falls, al-Sadr could become the country’s new leader.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...nce_iraqis_it_doesnt_support_isis_109343.html

May 8, 2016

U.S. Struggles to Convince Iraqis it Doesn't Support ISIS

By Sinan Salaheddin & Susannah George

BAGHDAD (AP) — For nearly two years, U.S. airstrikes, military advisers and weapons shipments have helped Iraqi forces roll back the Islamic State group. The U.S.-led coalition has carried out more than 5,000 airstrikes against IS targets in Iraq at a total cost of $7 billion since August 2014, including operations in Syria. On Tuesday a U.S. Navy SEAL was the third serviceman to die fighting IS in Iraq.

But many Iraqis still aren't convinced the Americans are on their side.

Government-allied Shiite militiamen on the front-lines post videos of U.S. supplies purportedly seized from IS militants or found in areas liberated from the extremist group. Newspapers and TV networks repeat conspiracy theories that the U.S. created the jihadi group to sow chaos in the region in order to seize its oil.

Despite spending more than $10 million on public outreach in Iraq last year, the U.S. government appears to have made little headway in dispelling such rumors. An unscientific survey by the State Department of Iraqi residents last year found that 40 percent believe that U.S. policy is working to "destabilize Iraq and control its natural resources," and a third believe America "supports terrorism in general and (IS) specifically."

Skepticism about U.S. motives is deeply rooted in Iraq, where many still blame the chaos after the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein on American malice rather than incompetence. The conspiracy theories are also stoked by neighboring Iran, which backs powerful militias and political parties with active media operations.

Among the most vocal critics is al-Ahad TV — a 24-hour satellite channel funded by Asaib Ahl al-Haq, an Iranian-backed militia allied with the Iraqi government. The channel airs front-line reports and political talk shows where the allegedly harmful role of the U.S. government frequently comes up.

The U.S. "aims at weakening Iraq and the Arab world as well as the Shiites," al-Ahad's spokesman Atheer al-Tariq said. "They spare no efforts to destabilize Iraq and neighboring countries in order to continue selling weapons and strengthening their presence in the region through establishing more military bases," he added.

While supervising the channel's war reporting last year, he claimed to have witnessed incidents when U.S. forces helped IS. As Iraqi security forces prepared to enter the city of Tikrit in April, he said two U.S. helicopters evacuated senior militants. A few months later, during an operation to retake the Beiji oil refinery, crates of weapons, ammunition and food were dropped over militant-held territory, he said.

"Is it logical to believe that America, the source of technology and science, could fire a rocket or drop aid materials in a mistaken way?" he asked.

Videos uploaded to social media by front-line militiamen purport to tell a similar story. One shows U.S. military MREs, "meals, ready-to-eat," as well as uniforms and weapons said to have been found in an area held by IS. Another shows the interrogation of a captured IS militant. "Check out his boots, they are from the U.S. army," a fighter says. Another fighter points to a pile of rocket-propelled grenades he says were made in the U.S. and shipped to IS.

There are more plausible explanations for U.S. supplies being found in the hands of the extremists.

When IS swept across northern and western Iraq in the summer of 2014 it captured armored vehicles, heavy weapons and other U.S. equipment that had been provided to Iraqi security forces at a cost of billions of dollars. And despite the U.S. military's technical sophistication, it's not unheard of for airdrops or strikes to miss their mark in the heat of battle.

The U.S. Embassy and the U.S.-led coalition have invested considerable time and resources in refuting the allegations.

Both run Twitter feeds, Facebook pages and hold regular press conferences, and U.S. officials frequently appear as guests on Iraqi TV networks. With a budget of $10.67 million for the 2015 fiscal year, the public diplomacy section for Iraq is the third largest in the world, according to a 2015 report by the State Department's Special Inspector General.

"There are a lot of players out here on this information and media battle space," said U.S. Army Col. Steve Warren, the spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition.

"The Iranians have something to say every day, the Russian have something to say every day, ISIL has something to say every single day, so we need to make sure that this coalition and this Iraqi government is also saying something every day," he said, using an alternative acronym for IS.

"This coalition is here to fight ISIL," he said, "not provide them MREs."

But if there is a media war underway, the U.S. appears to be losing it. In December 2014, 38 percent of Iraqis had a favorable view of the U.S., but by August 2015 that had dropped to just 18 percent, according to the State Department's unscientific survey.

A group of Iraqi men smoking cigarettes and sipping tea outside a Baghdad shop selling books and newspapers said their skepticism extends beyond U.S. officials. They say Iraqis are well aware that most media outlets are run by political parties furthering their own agendas.

"Iraqi media isn't professional, it's all just ideology," Abu Muhammed said, asking that his full name not be used for fear of reprisals.

But he said the accusations of U.S. support for IS are hard to ignore because of America's confusing tangle of regional alliances. "The U.S. is always fighting groups on one side that they also support on the other side," he said. He pointed to Syria, where the U.S. supports Syrian Kurdish fighters who are considered terrorists by NATO ally Turkey.

Others simply can't understand how the world's most powerful military hasn't been able to defeat the extremists.

"They took out Saddam in two weeks, but they can't finish IS in two years?" asked Falih, another Iraqi who asked that his last name not be used out of security concerns. "It just doesn't make sense."

___


Associated Press writer Ali Hameed contributed to this report.
 

tiger13

Veteran Member
The Iraqi's are not stupid either. They can see the treachery that is being committed in their own country also, by this government that "says it supports them, yet also gives aid and comfort to their enemy isis. The whole world sees it except for the supporters of this administration and the media in this country.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/car-bomb-baghdads-sadr-city-kills-16-sources-074656209.html

Car bomb in Baghdad's Sadr City kills 52: police, medics

May 11, 2016
By Kareem Raheem

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A car bomb claimed by Islamic State in a Shi'ite Muslim district of Baghdad killed at least 52 people and wounded more than 78 others on Wednesday, Iraqi police and hospital sources said, the largest attack inside the city for months.

Security has gradually improved in the Iraqi capital, which was the target of daily bombings a decade ago, but violence directed against the security forces and Shi'ite civilians is still frequent. Large blasts sometimes set off reprisal attacks against the minority Sunni community.

The fight against Islamic State, which seized about a third of Iraq's territory in 2014, has exacerbated a long-running sectarian conflict in Iraq mostly between Sunnis and the Shi'ite majority that emerged after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Such violence threatens to undermine U.S.-backed efforts to dislodge the militant group

Wednesday's attack in Sadr City could also intensify pressure on Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to resolve a political crisis that has crippled the government for more than a month.

A pickup truck packed with explosives went off at rush hour near a beauty salon in a bustling market. Many of the victims were women including several brides who appeared to be getting ready for their weddings, the sources said.

The bodies of two men said to be grooms were found in an adjacent barber shop. Wigs, shoes and children's toys were scattered on the ground outside. At least two cars were destroyed in the explosion, their parts scattered far from the blast site.

Rescue workers stepped through puddles of blood to put out fires and remove victims. Smoke was still rising from several shops hours after the explosion as a bulldozer cleared the burnt-out chassis of the vehicle used in the blast.

Islamic State said in a statement circulated online by supporters that it had targeted Shi'ite militia fighters gathered in the area.

Iraqi forces backed by airstrikes from a nearly two-year-old U.S.-led campaign have driven the group back in the western province of Anbar and are preparing for an offensive to retake the northern city of Mosul. But the militants are still able to strike outside territory they control.

The ultra-hardline Sunni jihadist group, which considers Shi'ites apostates, has claimed recent attacks across the country as well as a twin suicide bombing in Sadr City in February that killed 70 people.

(Additional reporting by Saif Hameed and Ali Abdelaty in CAIRO; Writing by Stephen Kalin; Editing by Ralph Boulton)

ETA: Fox News is reporting that the death toll is now up to 150.
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...will-define-not-just-iraqs-war-but-its-future

Mosul: suspicion and hostility cloud fight to recapture Iraqi city from Isis

The stakes are high, but a power struggle between the Iraqi army and the Kurdish Peshmerga is hampering the battle against Islamic State

Martin Chulov in Makhmour, Iraq
Wednesday 11 May 2016 00.55 EDT
Comments 227

At the bottom of a hill near the frontline with Islamic State fighters, the Iraqi army had been digging in. Their white tents stood near the brown earth gouged by the armoured trucks that had carried them there – the closest point to Mosul they had reached before an assault on Iraq’s second largest city.

For a few days early last month, the offensive looked like it already might be under way. But that soon changed when the Iraqis, trained by US forces, were quickly ousted from al-Nasr, the first town they had seized. There were about 25 more small towns and villages, all occupied by Isis, between them and Mosul. And 60 miles to go.

Behind the Iraqis, the Kurdish peshmerga remained dug into positions near the city of Makhmour that had marked the frontline since not long after Mosul was seized in June 2014. The war had been theirs until the national army arrived. The new partnership is not going well.

On both sides, there is a belief that what happens on the road to Mosul will not only define the course of the war but also shape the future of Iraq. And, despite the high stakes, planning for how to take things from here is increasingly clouded by suspicion and enmity.

Two years after the Isis onslaught, the country remains crippled by ethnic and sectarian strife and political torpor, which have withered state control and pitched the Iraqi army in a power struggle with militias and the Kurds before it even faces off with Isis. The result has been a stalemate in the battle that matters most, with Iraq deeply wary that the largely autonomous Kurdish north will use its involvement to formalise a divorce from Baghdad – and the Kurds just as sceptical that Iraq’s military is up for the fight.

“There is no such thing as Iraq any more,” said Capt Shawqat of the Kurdish peshmerga, behind sandbags about a mile away from the Iraqi lines. “There never was, but now it is clear to everyone. Even to the Americans up in the hills.”

[IMGhttps://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2016/05/areas_of_control_iraq-zip/giv-125156oxHPJ2mLtgg/[/IMG]
https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uplo...as_of_control_iraq-zip/giv-125156oxHPJ2mLtgg/

Next to him, another Kurdish officer, Lt Col Srud Barzinji, looked through his binoculars at the Iraqi troops. “Look at them,” he said. “Every military training course tells us that you must have at least 500 metres of open land between yourself and your enemy. They are at the bottom of a hill, just below them. They have no element of surprise.”

Until mid-March Iraqi forces had stayed away, their most loyal units retrained by the US in Anbar province before being sent back to Makhmour. “When they attacked al-Nasr, the Americans were firing artillery from the mountain [about 30 miles behind],” said Barzinji. “They were very precise shells, guided in by cameras, and they still couldn’t take it. They fled after a few hours.”

The Makhmour frontline stretches over 75 miles to the south-east of Mosul, and is seen by military leaders on all sides as the best way to reach Iraq’s second largest city, which is still thought to be home to up to 600,000 people. The towns and villages in between have all been seized by Isis – a mixture of homegrown militants and fighters from abroad. Isis banners fly from phone towers or other high points in each village, and the jihadis are proving hard to oust.

Many captured Isis members had been carrying weapons they had seized from the Iraqi military when 80,000 to 100,000 of its soldiers and officers fled two years ago, surrendering the area to the terror group.

“We don’t see them during the day,” said another Peshmerga soldier, of the Isis members confronting both sides. “Even when they mortar us, it is hard to know where they come from. They move around at night: they have dug tunnels, and they have laid bombs. All around us were bombs when we came into this village. It will be like this all the way to Mosul. Our friends can’t do this by themselves, and they know that,” he said, referring to the Iraqi army.

“The difference is, we believe in what we are fighting for. We believe in this cause. We have principles and we have values. We will not stop until we get this done.”

Iraqi forces did advance on Monday, retaking the village of Kabarouk in the Makhmour area, the first success since being pushed back from al-Nasr. Up to 300 villagers walked out of the village towards Kurdish forces where they were sent to a holding centre.

“The ones we think are Isis, we will send straight to Irbil,” said Barzinji, as he stood surrounded by refugees from elsewhere in Iraq last week. “Most of them, like these people, were caught up in it. But we need to check them out.”

Out of the crowd emerged two young men in their early 20s. “I’ll tell you what it is like in there,” said one 22-year old-who had walked to Makhmour from near Mosul. “It is so confused. My father is in Isis. He joined them because he has three wives and he could not afford to pay for them all,” the man said, adding that his father had joined the terror group to benefit from the stipend it pays its members. “It was financial for him, but it made our life hell.”

A second man, Issam, 22, said his brother had joined the terror group and had tried to recruit him. “I said no and he did not force me, but he became ideological. Communities are very tired. They are ruthless. If they catch you smoking once, they will warn you,” he said inhaling a cigarette. “If they catch you a second time, you get the leather,” he added, lifting his shirt to show faint scars.

Further along the frontline were villages that had been seized from Isis and were now being used as staging areas by Iraqi forces. Barzinji predicted the push for Mosul would not happen this year. “We are military officers and we don’t speak poorly of our colleagues. But look at what’s been achieved. And look at the job ahead.”

Additional reporting by Salem Rezk
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-violence-idUSKCN0Y40FM

World | Fri May 13, 2016 4:37pm EDT
Related: World

Islamic State attacks north of Baghdad kill 16, sources say

TIKRIT, Iraq | By Ghazwan Hassan

Shooting and bomb attacks claimed by Islamic State killed at least 16 people north of Baghdad on Friday, days after Islamic State's deadliest blasts so far this year in the capital stirred public criticism of government security measures.

Three gunmen opened fire with machine guns around midnight at a cafe in the predominately Shi'ite Muslim town of Balad where young men, including fans of Spain's Real Madrid soccer club, had gathered to start the weekend, police and hospital sources. At least 12 were killed and 25 wounded.

The assailants fled and hours later one of them set off his explosive vest at a nearby vegetable market after police and Shi'ite militia members cornered him in a disused building and exchanged gunfire, security sources said. Four were killed and two critically wounded, medical sources added.

Islamic State said in a statement distributed online by supporters that three suicide attackers targeting Shi'ite militiamen had detonated their explosives, though security sources said they had only identified one bomber.

A Reuters witness saw the scorched body of a suspected assailant hanging upside down from a post outside the cafe on Friday morning.

Residents said they had seized the man from a nearby house where he had fled following the attack. They said they had burned him alive after he confessed. An intelligence official confirmed this account.

Islamic State nearly overran Balad, 80 km (50 miles) north of Baghdad, in 2014 and maintains a frontline around 40 km away.

Friday's attackers had passed three police checkpoints before reaching their target, said police sources. Security forces deployed throughout the town, fearing more attacks.


SOCCER FANS

The intelligence official said fighters from the powerful Iranian-backed Badr Organisation raided a nearby house and detained 13 members of a Sunni family. There were reports of gunfire in an adjacent orchard.

Iraqi authorities are facing scrutiny over security breaches that allowed suicide attackers to set off three bombs on Wednesday in Baghdad, killing at least 80 people.

The country is also struggling through a political crisis over a cabinet overhaul that has crippled government for weeks and threatens to undermine the U.S.-backed war against Islamic State, which still controls swathes of territory in the north and west it seized in 2014.

The fight against the ultra-hardline Sunni militants has exacerbated Iraq's sectarian conflict, mostly between the Sunni minority and the Shi'ite majority, that emerged after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

A 22-year-old victim named Tahseen told a doctor he had been smoking a water pipe when a man wearing civilian clothes and a bandolier filled with ammunition crossed the street toward al-Furat Cafe. He recounted hearing several blasts, likely from stun bombs, amid gunfire that lasted about ten minutes.

Inside the cafe hung pictures of famous footballers and a sign for a local group of Real Madrid fans. Witnesses said there was no match on Thursday night but spectators often congregated there.

Real Madrid said its players would wear black arm bands on Saturday to honor the victims.

"Football and sport shall always be spaces in which to come together and in which harmony and peace reign and with which no form of barbaric terrorism will be able to compete," it said in an online statement.

A suicide bombing in March at a youth soccer match south of Baghdad killed 26 people and wounded 71 others.



(Additional reporting by Omar Fahmy in Cairo; Writing by Stephen Kalin and Saif Hameed; Editing by Ralph Boulton and Richard Balmforth)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/snipers-...ing-fallujah-us-official-195351320.html?nhp=1

IS snipers prevent civilians leaving Fallujah: US official

May 13, 2016

Washington (AFP) - Islamic State snipers are targeting humanitarian corridors established by Iraqi security forces to relieve suffering in the IS-held city of Fallujah, a Pentagon official said Friday.

Baghdad-based military spokesman Colonel Steve Warren said the shooters were preventing residents from escaping Fallujah, which is only about 30 miles (50 kilometers) west of Baghdad and is facing major shortages of basic supplies including medicine.

"We know that the Iraqis have attempted on several occasions to open up humanitarian corridors to allow some of those civilians to come out," Warren told Pentagon reporters in a video call.

"Those have met with generally not much success. ISIL has done things like set up snipers to cover down on those corridors, to kill people as they're trying to get out. So that has really discouraged their use," he added, using an acronym for the IS group.

Warren later said Iraqi forces had tried to set up three corridors, but these have been all but abandoned because of the snipers.

"Word must have spread because no civilians have tried to use the corridors in the last few weeks," he said.

Anti-government fighters took control of Fallujah in early 2014 during unrest that broke out after security forces demolished a protest camp farther west, and it later became an IS stronghold.

Warren said Iraqi security forces now "generally" surround Fallujah and have begun to slowly "chip away" at it.

"This is the very first city that ISIL gained control of," he said.

"ISIL's been there for more than two years, so they are dug in and dug in deep. This is a tough nut for us to crack here. This is a tough nut for the Iraqis to crack."

US forces are training and advising Iraqi partners as they try to repel IS jihadists from the country.

The Pentagon says the IS group is losing ground, and the jihadists have suffered major defeats in Iraq, including the loss of the cities of Heet and Ramadi.

But they remain in control of Iraq's second-largest city Mosul and it is not clear when Iraqi troops will mount an assault to retake it.

Warren said there was no "no military reason" for Iraqi forces to liberate Fallujah before they could tackle Mosul.

About half of Iraq's security forces are focused on protecting Baghdad, where IS fighters claimed responsibility for a string of suicide attacks this week.

At least 94 people were killed in three blasts in Baghdad on Wednesday, the deadliest day in the Iraqi capital this year.

View Comments (23)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/647c...-militant-attack-north-baghdad-kills-least-11

Iraq: Militant attack north of Baghdad kills at least 14

By SINAN SALAHEDDIN
May. 15, 2016 8:18 AM EDT

BAGHDAD (AP) — The Islamic State group launched a coordinated assault Sunday on a natural gas plant north of Baghdad that killed at least 14 people, according to Iraqi officials.

The attack started at dawn with a suicide car bomber hitting the main gate of the plant in the town of Taji, about 20 kilometers (12 miles) north of Baghdad. Then several suicide bombers and militants broke into the plant and clashed with the security forces, an official said, adding that 27 troops were wounded.

The IS-affiliated Aamaq news agency credited a group of "Caliphate soldiers" for the attack.

In a statement, Deputy Oil Minister Hamid Younis said firefighters managed to control and extinguish a fire caused by the explosions. Younis said technicians were examining the damage.

Elsewhere in Baghdad, three separate bomb attacks targeted commercial areasm killing at least eight civilians and wounding 28 others, police added.

Medical officials confirmed the casualty figures. All officials spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to release information.

IS extremists still control significant areas in northern and western Iraq, including the second-largest city of Mosul. It has declared an Islamic caliphate on the territory it holds in Iraq and Syria.

The group has recently increased its attacks far from the front lines in a campaign that Iraqi officials say is an attempt to distract from their recent battlefield losses.

Since Wednesday, more than 100 people have been killed in a string of bombings in Baghdad and elsewhere.

___

Associated Press writers Murtada Faraj in Baghdad and Maamoun Youssef in Cairo contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://nypost.com/2016/05/15/the-next-us-victory-in-iraq-may-just-mean-another-crisis/

Opinion

The next US victory in Iraq may just mean another crisis

By Judith Miller and Charles Duelfer
May 15, 2016 | 10:10pm


President Obama could end his presidency with a crisis in Iraq of his own making.

In April, the president said the conditions for liberating Mosul from the Islamic State should be in place by year’s end. But Sunni Iraqi tribal leaders and Kurds are quietly warning that “doing Mosul” is likely to result not in military victory but a humanitarian and political disaster.

First, Iraq’s second-largest city is home to 1 million to 2 million people. ISIS, which hasn’t hesitated to slaughter fellow Arabs and flatten cities, has had ample time to prepare to take hostages and booby-trap buildings.

Consider the Iraqi government’s recent “victory” in Ramadi, with a population far smaller than Mosul. ISIS virtually flattened it before being ousted in January. ISIS is even more deeply embedded in Mosul, which it has occupied since June 2014. Its fanatics haven’t hesitated to use chemical weapons in Syria and against Kurdish peshmerga forces.

An offensive would spread panic among the city’s beleaguered residents, who would be trapped inside Mosul along with their occupiers. Baghdad’s plans to liberate the city include strangling ISIS by laying siege to Mosul in preparation for a full assault. If Ramadi is any example, liberation could turn Mosul into an uninhabitable ghost town.

Second, Mosul’s Sunnis still distrust Baghdad. Many fear Iraq’s semi-independent Shiite militias, some backed by Iran and encouraged by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, pose a greater long-term threat to them than ISIS. Horrific images of Shiite militia-inflicted atrocities vie on Sunni smartphone screens with ISIS’s beheadings and corporal punishments. Every family has a relative whom the militias have brutalized and killed.

Third, even if the US-backed Iraqi forces succeed in expelling ISIS from Mosul, then what? Who will occupy and administer the city? After the US occupation of Baghdad in April 2003, American officials gave Sunnis little stake in the planning for and future of a post-Saddam Hussein era. Why should Mosul’s Sunnis believe that the chaotic central government in Baghdad has their interests at heart? Many Sunnis continue to view the 2007 “surge” as a “bait and switch” by Washington, at their expense.

Fourth, Iran seems determined to continue fomenting conflict within Iraq as long as possible. Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Quds Force who fought against Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in 1980-1988, has greater control over some militias than the nominal political leadership in Baghdad. Few Sunnis in Mosul believe that Baghdad can protect them.

Fifth, chaos in Mosul could trigger even greater chaos in Baghdad. Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi seems to be trying to limit corruption and run a more inclusive regime. But trying to reclaim Mosul before Sunnis derive benefit from his efforts is risky, and American officials have signaled deep concern about the Abadi government’s stability.

No strong Sunni voices in Mosul have expressed support for the invasion/liberation of their city by Iraqi forces. They know all too well America won’t be there to protect them. Many continue to see the growing influence of Iran and its surrogate militias as a longer-term threat to their survival than ISIS, particularly given the nuclear deal with Iran, yet another signal of

America’s realignment in the Middle East.

Obama faces a tough choice, perhaps more consequential than his decision to launch the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Should he try to encourage Iraqi forces to retake Mosul before leaving office to claim another victory over the radical jihadis he has vowed to “degrade and destroy,” or encourage Baghdad to wait until a more cohesive government is in place?

While reclaiming Mosul would enable Obama to claim yet another “legacy” achievement, liberation of the city under current conditions is likely to result in more bloodshed, higher casualties, greater destruction and the creation of thousands more refugees in Iraq — a tragic, but utterly predictable coda to the Obama presidency.


Charles Duelfer is the former special adviser to the CIA for Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction who led the Iraq Survey Group’s hunt for WMDs. Judith Miller is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of “The Story, A Reporter’s Journey.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
I just can't keep up with the day to day attacks behind the government lines.....


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-blast-idUSKCN0Y8103

World | Tue May 17, 2016 10:19am EDT
Related: World, Iraq

Three bombings in Baghdad kill 63: police, medical sources

BAGHDAD | By Kareem Raheem


Three bombings killed at least 63 people and wounded more than 100 in Baghdad on Tuesday, police and medical sources said, extending the deadliest spate of attacks in the Iraqi capital so far this year.

A suicide bombing claimed by Islamic State in a marketplace in the northern, mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of al-Shaab killed 38 people and wounded over 70, while a car bomb in nearby Shi'ite Sadr City left at least 19 more dead and 17 wounded.

Another car bomb, in the mixed Shi'ite-Sunni southern neighbourhood of al-Rasheed, killed six and wounded 21, the sources said, in what a military spokesman described as a suicide attack.

Security has improved somewhat in Baghdad in recent years, even as the Sunni militant Islamic State (IS) seized swathes of the country almost up to the outskirts of the capital.

But attacks claimed by IS in and around the city last week killed more than 100 people, sparking anger in the streets over the government's failure to ensure security.

There are fears that Baghdad could relapse into the bloodletting of a decade ago when sectarian-motivated suicide bombings killed scores of people every week.

That has cranked up pressure on Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to resolve a political crisis or risk losing control of parts of Baghdad even as the military wages a counter-offensive against Islamic State in Iraq's north and west with the help of a U.S.-led coalition.

Abadi has said the crisis, sparked by his attempt to reshuffle the cabinet in an anti-corruption bid, is hampering the fight against Islamic State and creating space for more insurgent attacks on the civilian population.

A spokesman for the Baghdad Operations Command told state television the attacker in the al-Shaab neighbourhood had detonated an explosives-filled vest in coordination with a planted bomb. Initial investigations revealed that the bomber was a woman, he said.

Islamic State said in a statement distributed online by supporters that one of its fighters had targeted Shi'ite militiamen with hand grenades and a suicide vest. There were no immediate claims of responsibility for the other two bombings.


(Additional reporting by Saif Hameed and Mostafa Hashem in Cairo; Writing by Stephen Kalin; Editing by Mark Heinrich)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-security-idUSKCN0Y91Y4

World | Wed May 18, 2016 10:21am EDT
Related: World

Iraq's Sadr pulls out forces from Baghdad districts hit by bombs

Powerful Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has ordered his armed followers to withdraw from the streets of Baghdad districts that have been hit by deadly bombings claimed by Islamic State, an aide said on Wednesday.

Sadr's Saraya al-Salam, or Peace Brigades, had deployed hundreds of militiamen in Sadr City and five other mainly Shi'ite areas of the capital after he accused the government of failing to prevent the attacks by the hardline Sunni group.

At least 77 people were killed and more than 140 wounded by three bombings in Baghdad on Tuesday, extending the deadliest spate of attacks in the Iraqi capital so far this year.

The cleric "ordered that no arm be displayed in public, avoid friction with the security forces and avoid being dragged into violence," one aide said.

Witnesses said Saraya al-Salam pulled out of the streets of Sadr City overnight on Tuesday.

The bombings cranked up pressure on Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to solve a political crisis brought on by his attempt to reshuffle the cabinet in a drive to tackle corruption.

The crisis has crippled parliament and hampered government action, creating space for more insurgent attacks on civilians.


(Reporting by Ahmed Rasheed and Kareem Raheem; Editing by Angus MacSwan)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...ces-prepare-to-retake-Fallujah/1101463937018/

Iraqi forces prepare to retake Fallujah

By Allen Cone | May 22, 2016 at 2:27 PM

BAGHDAD, May 22 (UPI) -- The Iraqi government told residents of Fallujah on Sunday to flee their city because a military coalition plans to retake the city from the Islamic State.

Civilian families would be allowed to leave the city through designated safe zones, the military's Joint Operations Command said. Those who cannot leave should raise white flags, according to a broadcast on state TV.

The command did not say when the operation would take place by the Iraqi army, counterterrorism forces, police, tribal fighters and Shiite militias.

About 20,000 federal police officers with armored vehicles and artillery are on the outskirts of Fallujah "in preparation for storming the city," Lt Gen. Raeed Shakir Jawdat, commander of the federal police, said in a statement.

Fallujah is one of the last holdings in Iraq by the IS, also known as ISIS, ISIL and Daesh.

The city on the Euphrates River had a pre-war population of about 300,000. It has been encircled by Iraqi forces and a coalition of Shia Muslim armed groups known as Hashid Shaabi.

Eissa al-Issawi, the exiled mayor of Fallujah, said IS militants were retreating from the outskirts to the center of the city Sunday.

The recapture of Fallujah would leave Mosul as IS's only major foothold in Iraq.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi spoke with President Barack Obama on Saturday night, according to the White House. The prime minister gave an update on progress in Anbar province and vowed that Fallujah would be liberated soon.

Obama reaffirmed U.S. support for Iraqi Security Forces, emphasizing its key role in defeating IS. He noted the United States and the International Coalition will continue to train, advise and assist Iraqi forces.

The IS took control of Fallujah in December 2013.
 
Top