Author Topic: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening  (Read 1081 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« on: September 16, 2007, 12:51:58 PM »
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/II14Ak04.html

Behind the Anbar Myth ? Pepe Escobar in Asia Times  [first part of article has been omitted, but I recommend reading it as well at the above website] -- As I suspected, the whole thing is an elaborate crock, concocted by The Crock himself and the original Ass-Kissing Little Chickenshit.  Nice try, fellas!  {I omitted the quote marks because from here on down, it's all quotes}

 .  .  .  Petraeus was indeed smart enough to marvel at the possibilities of a marriage of convenience between the occupation and Sunni tribes. Al-Qaeda for its part was clumsy enough to force "Talibanization" down Anbar people's throats. But this does not mean that Abu Risha and his 200 tribal leaders are pro-occupation, or even pro-Iraqi government. Eighty percent of these tribes are sub-clans of the very powerful Dulaimi tribe. Al-Qaeda's close relationship is with the Mashadani tribe, which used to be very close to Saddam Hussein. What matters is that with varying degrees of disgust, both big tribes detest the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in Baghdad.

Way beyond any "success" claimed by Petraeus, what's happening in Anbar is once again a replay of what happened in eastern Afghanistan in 2001. Local tribes profit from US largesse - and weapons - and then proceed with their own tribal and/or nationalist agenda. What matters for all these players, most of all, is restoration of Sunni power. The Dulaimi tribe and sub-clans, armed by the Americans, as soon as they have a chance, will try to topple the US-sponsored puppet government in Baghdad.

Petraeus has not been able to seduce or bribe Sunni guerrillas. Far from it: leading groups such as the Jaysh Ansar al-Sunna, the 1920 Revolution Brigades and the Islamic Front for the Iraqi Resistance make it very clear their enemies remain the US occupation, the Maliki government and al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers.

This summer, three of these groups - the 1920 Revolution Brigades, Ansar al-Sunna and Iraqi Hamas - formed the Political Office for the Iraqi Resistance, a public political alliance basically to throw out all of Petraeus's troops, block any collaboration with occupation-endorsed political institutions, and declare null and void any agreement between the US and the Iraqi government.

By this time, way into the "surge", Petraeus had certainly figured out that Anbar was not a relevant war theater anymore. He can use it to spin the "success" of his counterinsurgency methods, but he knows the three really relevant, internal wars in Iraq, for the near future, will be in Baghdad (between Sunnis and Shi'ites), in Basra (between Shi'ite militias, to see who gets to control the oil) and in Kirkuk (between Kurds and Arabs/Turkomans, for the same reason).

So why not spice it all up with some extra divide and rule - to justify an eternal US presence? Arming Sunni tribals in Anbar, under these circumstances, makes sense. The occupation does not need to fight Sunnis in oil-deprived Anbar. The Bush administration is now full steam ahead on fighting Shi'ites - both in Iran (the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) and in Iraq (from the Maliki government to Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army). Shi'ites in both Iran and southern Iraq are sitting over a wealth of oil. The Sunnis are needed to advance this agenda.

A (minor) problem is what Iraqi Sunnis think of all this. According to the latest BBC/ABC News poll, no less than 97% of Iraqi Sunnis want a unified, centralized Iraq with Baghdad as capital. Only 56% of Shi'ites want it, not to mention only 9% of Kurds. No less than 98% of Sunnis are against the Maliki government. And no less than 92% of Sunnis are in favor of attacks against occupation troops, including, of course, all those Dulaimis now supported by the Americans.

Petraeus knows this: virtually no Iraqi Sunni wants to hug him and kiss him. They want the US out. But he also knows the US simply cannot go - what with the new mega-embassy, the secluded military bases, and all that oil.

The magic word "oil" mysteriously vanished from the whole drama performed this week in front of Congress. To get it, the answer is once again divide and rule - let's have those Sunnis and Shi'ites tear each other to bits while we "stay the course" pretending to protect them from themselves while trying to protect "our" oil. Bush's "surge" may indeed be a success - but for all the reasons the general would not dare tell the world.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2007, 12:59:44 PM »
http://www.michaeltotten.com/

Someone is lying , someone isn't.




Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2007, 01:20:51 PM »
I don't think anyone's lying. 

Escobar's article would concede everything I saw in Totten's article (I admit, I had to skim Totten, I'm running short on time) but he (Escobar) puts it in context.  The sheikhs are rivals to al Qaeda in Iraq but they hate the Shi'a government in Baghdad and are arming for a confrontation with it.  Anything they say to the contrary if reported by Totten (I didn't see it as I skimmed) would have to be taken with a large grain of salt. 

Escobar analyzes the tribal allegiances of the U.S. "allies" in Anbar and they're pretty much all Dulaimi.  The Dulaimis's main rivals are not in on the project.  The main ambition of all Sunni tribes in Anbar is a Sunni-led Iraq, i.e. something pretty much what was achieved under Saddam. 

That oil is NOT going to go to the U.S.A.  At most, they'll get it for a few years if the right pet Sunnis take over, then it'll be yanked out from under them again as it was from the British when the Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party took over the country.  The people of Iraq want that fucking oil and there's no valid reason on earth why they should piece it out to foreigners.  Any deal they make today will be cancelled tomorrow.  That's how it went down with the British, that's how it'll go down with you.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2007, 01:47:29 PM »
The undercurrent to the Anbar Awakening is tha the sheiks recognized that order and security was good for business.

They weren't getting that with AQI, they can with the Shiites.


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2007, 05:47:39 PM »
<<The undercurrent to the Anbar Awakening is tha the sheiks recognized that order and security was good for business.

<<They weren't getting that with AQI, they can with the Shiites. >>

No they can't.  There's no oil in Anbar Province and they need that fucking stuff.  Or at least they need the money they'll get when it's pumped out and sold.  They want a Sunni-run Iraq so they have the same access to the oil profits of Basra and Kirkuk as they had under Saddam before the U.S. invasion.  Order and security without oil ain't worth shit to them.  They need the oil in the north and the south and they'll have to fight the Shi'ites and/or the Kurds for it sooner or later.  America wants to arm them against AQI, well and good.  That oil doesn't belong to AQI anyway and they were becoming more trouble than they were worth.  They can see past AQI, though.  They see Shi'ites.  And when they put them back in their box, they are not going to forget who killed a million Iraqis, mostly Sunni.  They won't forget who humiliated and then killed Saddam.  They won't forget who tried to put those fucking Shi'ites in power over all of Iraq.   Who gave them an army.  Who tried to grab themselves a big percentage of Iraq's oil.

You must think these people are very, very stupid.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2007, 09:25:12 PM »
I don't see why they need a sunni government to share in oil profits.

If the country is partitioned they have problems, but partition would be necessary only if the various sects refuse to cooperate for the sake of business.

Perhaps it is you who thinks these folks stupid.


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2007, 09:42:56 PM »
It's an unfortunate fact of Iraqi life that Sunnis don't give a shit about Shi'ites and Shi'ites don't give a shit about Sunnis.  A Shi'ite government sees the wells around Basra as "their" wells.  If they bring in a lot of money, that money gets spent on places where the Shi'ites live.  It does not get spent on Anbar Province.  Anbar Province would not support a Shi'ite government and a Shi'ite government would not give jack-shit to Anbar Province.  Maybe YOU don't see why Anbar Province needs a Sunni government to share in the oil profits, but the Sunnis of Anbar Province see that very clearly.  I don't think they're stupid at all.  Just very realistic.  Better aware than you are as to where their own best interests lie.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2007, 10:05:07 PM »
Perhaps you misunderstand the concept of revenue sharing. All provinces share equally.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2007, 10:46:26 PM »
<<Perhaps you misunderstand the concept of revenue sharing. All provinces share equally. >>

Oh, I understand the concept alright.  Except that even in Canada they don't all share equally.  I can only imagine how "equally" they would all share in Iraq.  LMFAO.  I think the Sunni tribal chiefs understand that at least as well as I do.  I don't think they're as confident as you that all Provinces will share equally under a Shi'ite government.  Call them cynical, call them mistrustful, but  .  .  . whaddaya gonna do?

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2007, 10:52:31 PM »
I don't see a minority population capturing the government. Perhaps they had better just negotiate the best deal they can.


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2007, 11:10:11 PM »
<<I don't see a minority population capturing the government.>>

No?  Perhaps you'd better review the history of the Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party in Iraq.  Or Syria.  It's pretty complex.  I don't understand it.  THEY understand it.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2007, 12:04:58 AM »
Glad to hear that. But the Baath weren't a Sunni  sect. They were a political movement.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Myth of the Anbar Awakening
« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2007, 01:14:40 AM »
They were a political movement captured by the Sunni minority in Iraq and the Alawite minority in Syria.