iraq timeline

SUNDAY, JUN 15, 2014 12:00 PM EDT
How the U.S. helped turn Iraq into an al-Qaida haven in just 53 steps

Eleven years after the U.S. invasion, Iraq is on the brink of collapse. We have only ourselves to blame
PETER GELLING, KYLE KIM AND TIMOTHY MCGRATH, GLOBALPOST

How the U.S. helped turn Iraq into an al-Qaida haven in just 53 steps
Militants from the al-Qaida-inspired Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) people raising their flag at the entrance of an army base in Ninevah Province. Iraq. (Credit: AP)
This article originally appeared on GlobalPost.

Here’s the short version: The United States invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had both weapons of mass destruction and connections to Al Qaeda. He had neither. Today, both Saddam Hussein and the United States are gone from Iraq.  In their place? Al Qaeda.

This week, an Al Qaeda splinter group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) seized the country’s second-largest city — Mosul — and several other towns. Latest reports have the militant group at the gates of Baghdad.

With US-trained Iraqi security forces now frantically fleeing the arrival of the ISIL militants — who are so extreme even Al Qaeda couldn’t hang with them, causing the two groups to split — and a central government in total disarray, it’s looking bleak. Someone call the Coalition of the Willing!

So how did it all go so wrong? In these 53 steps.

1. May 28, 1990: Saddam Hussein says oil overproduction in Kuwait is “economic warfare”

2. Aug. 2, 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait

3. Aug. 6, 1990: UN imposes economic sanctions on Iraq

4. Jan. 17, 1991: US launches air operations to liberate Kuwait (and its oil)

5. Feb. 24, 1991: US deploys ground war in Kuwait

6. Feb. 26, 1991: Saddam Hussein orders withdrawal from Kuwait

7. Feb. 28, 1991: US President George W. Bush Sr. says Kuwait is now free

8. April 3, 1991: UN extends sanctions on Iraq for next 10-plus years. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children die as a result of ballooning poverty, malnutrition and disease

9. June 26, 1993: Bill Clinton launches cruise missile attack on Baghdad in retaliation for failed assassination attempt on Bush Sr.

10. Dec. 16, 1998: US and UK launch four-day bombing campaign against sites in Iraq thought to be housing weapons of mass destruction

11. Dec. 19, 1998: Clinton is impeached for lying about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky

12. Sept. 11, 2001: The 9/11 attacks kill almost 3,000 people. 15 of the 19 Al Qaeda militants are from Saudi Arabia. US launches war in Afghansitan, where Al Qaeda is believed to be based

13. Oct. 1, 2002: CIA report alleges Iraq is in possession of WMDs, launching build-up to war

14. Feb. 5, 2003: US Secretary of State Colin Powell tells UN that Iraq has WMDs and Al Qaeda links

15. March 19, 2003: Bush Jr. launches Iraq invasion

16. May 1, 2003: Bush declares “Mission Accomplished”

17. July 2, 2003: Turns out mission not yet accomplished. Bush declares, “Bring ‘em on.”

18. Aug. 19, 2003: It’s brought. UN headquarters attacked in Baghdad, killing 17 people. Al Qaeda claims responsibility

19. Jan. 28, 2004: It’s official: no WMDs in Iraq. Bush maintains Iraq War made the world safer

20. Feb. 10, 2004: Iraqis invite Al Qaeda militants to help fight US occupation

21. April 21, 2004: Spate of suicide bombings hits police stations

22. April 27, 2004: Images of US torture at Abu Ghraib prison air on 60 minutes. Shit hits fan

23. Jan. 12, 2005: Search for WMDs fails, is officially declared over

24. Sept. 9, 2005: Powell says he regrets pre-war UN speech

25. June 8, 2006: Al Qaeda leader killed in US air raid

26. Aug. 21, 2006: Bush acknowledges Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks

27. Sept. 12, 2006: Media reports reveal that US spy agencies believe Iraq War increased terror threat

28. Oct. 4, 2006: A 2005 memo made public reveals that Al Qaeda said prolonging Iraq War is in its interest

29. Jan. 10, 2007: Bush announces escalation of Iraq war

30. May 20, 2007: CIA officials say Iraq War has become big “moneymaker” for Al Qaeda

31. June 11, 2007: US forces arm Sunni militias, known as the Sunni Awakening, to fight Al Qaeda

32. Aug. 8, 2007: Roadside bombs reach all-time high

33. March 10, 2008: Pentagon-funded study finds no connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda

34. Sept. 5, 2008: Outgoing Gen. David Petraeus says Al Qaeda remains dangerous threat in Iraq

35. Feb. 16, 2010: Sectarian tensions soar

36. April 19, 2010: US raid kills top 2 Al Qaeda leaders in Iraq

37. May 10, 2010: 71 dead in widespread attacks blamed on Al Qaeda

38. July 23, 2010: Four Al Qaeda suspects escape from Iraqi prison

39. July 29, 2010: Iraqi insurgents plant “Al Qaeda” flag in Baghdad

40. Aug. 31, 2010: Obama announces end of combat mission in Iraq

41. Sept. 27, 2010: Report says Al Qaeda in Iraq, which many thought had been “defeated,” is actually responsible for wave of terror attacks over the summer, causing the highest casualties in more than two years

42. Oct. 16, 2010: Members of US-backed Sunni Awakening return to Al Qaeda ranks

43. Aug. 15, 2011: 42 bombings rock country, killing 89 people

44. Dec. 18, 2011: Last convoy of US troops leaves Iraq

45. March 20, 2012: Dozens of bombs kill 52 across Iraq

46. July 23, 2012: More bombings, 107 killed

47. March 19, 2013: Al Qaeda plants car bomb, kills 56 civilians

48. April 15, 2013: Wave of bombings kills 75, wounds 350 across the country

49. May 15, 2013: Series of deadly bombings and shootings kill at least 450, injure 732

50. July 22, 2013: Suicide bombers drive car bomb through Abu Ghraib prison, freeing hundreds of convicts, mostly senior Al Qaeda members

51. Jan. 2, 2014: Fallujah and other parts of Anbar province falls to Al Qaeda-linked militants now known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL

52. May 28, 2014: A month after elections, attacks kill more than 70 across the country

53. June 10, 2014: ISIL, an Al Qaeda splinter group, seizes Mosul, Iraq’s second-lagest city, and Tikrit as US-trained security forces flee. ISIL marches on to Baghdad

out of iraq?

Last US combat troops leave Iraq

Operations officially end two weeks ahead of Barack Obama’s deadline, leaving 56,000 service personnel in the country

Adam Gabbatt, The Guardian
Link to this video

The last American combat troops left Iraq today, seven-and-a-half years after the US-led invasion, and two weeks ahead of President Barack Obama’s 31 August deadline for withdrawal from the country.

The final troops to leave, 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, rolled in convoy across the border and into Kuwait this morning, officially ending combat operations, which began in March 2003.

Former president George Bush launched the invasion, saying: “This will not be a campaign of half measures and we will accept no outcome but victory.”

The war saw the toppling of Saddam Hussein, but became increasingly unpopular against a backdrop of heavy civilian and troop casualties, arguments over the legality of the conflict and a growing sectarian battle in Iraq.

NBC News video this morning showed the last Stryker armoured vehicles rolling through the border gate into Kuwait, officially ending US combat presence in Iraq.

PJ Crowley, a spokesman for the US state department, said that despite the departure being “an historic moment”, the US mission in Iraq continued.

“We are ending the war … but we are not ending our work in Iraq,” he said. “We have a long-term commitment to Iraq.”

NBC News said that the last soldiers to reach Kuwait were proud of the collective effort in Iraq.

“We are done with operations,” said Lieutenant Steven DeWitt of San José, California, as his vehicle reached the Khabari crossing on the border.

“This was a professional soldier’s job,” he said, describing “a war that has defined this generation of military men and women”.

“And today it’s over,” he added.

The Obama administration had pledged to reduce overall troops numbers to 50,000 by 31 August. CNN, however, said that according to the US military there were still 56,000 US non-combat troops in Iraq, meaning another 6,000 must leave if the president is to meet his own deadline.

“Over the last 18 months, over 90,000 US troops have left Iraq,” the president said in an emailed statement published by the Huffington Post.

“By the end of this month, 50,000 troops will be serving in Iraq. As Iraqi security forces take responsibility for securing their country, our troops will move to an advise-and-assist role.

“And, consistent with our agreement with the Iraqi government, all of our troops will be out of Iraq by the end of next year.

“Meanwhile, we will continue to build a strong partnership with the Iraqi people with an increased civilian commitment and diplomatic effort.”

Months of preparation were required before the convoy set off on the 300-mile drive through potentially dangerous parts of the country. The Strykers travelled by night because of security concerns, before finally crossing into Kuwait.

The withdrawal comes in a week when a suicide bomber killed at least 60 army recruits in central Baghdad, highlighting the shaky reality US troops are leaving behind, and the fears that al-Qaida is attempting to make a comeback.

There is unlikely to be much change on the ground in the country after the end of the month, as most US military units actually began switching their focus to training and assisting Iraqi troops and police more than a year ago, when they pulled out of Iraqi urban centres on 30 June 2009.

“Those that remain are conventional combat brigades reconfigured slightly and rebranded ‘advise and assist brigades’,” said the Washington Post. “The primary mission of those units and the roughly 4,500 US special operations forces that will stay behind will be to train Iraqi troops.”

However despite the 56,000 service personnel remaining, The New York Times reported this morning that a “remarkable civilian effort” would be required to fill the void left by the withdrawal, and suggested the number of private security guards could double in the country over the next 18 months.

The state department will assume responsibility for training Iraqi police by October next year.

“I don’t think [the] state [department] has ever operated on its own, independent of the US military, in an environment that is quite as threatening on such a large scale,” James Dobbins, a former ambassador to Afghanistan, Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo and Somalia, told the paper. “It is unprecedented in scale.”

More than 4,400 US troops have been killed in Iraq so far. The current deadline for a full withdrawal of all US forces is the end of 2011, although last week Iraqi Lieutenant General Babakir Zebari said the US would need to maintain a presence in the country beyond then.

“If I were asked about the withdrawal, I would say to politicians: the US army must stay until the Iraqi army is fully ready in 2020,” he said.

Iraq and the US are yet to structure an agreement spelling out future defence arrangements beyond the end of next year, but both sides have indicated that future bilateral ties could extend to border patrols as well as ongoing training and mentoring.

two shoes

Arabs Hail Shoe-Hurling Journalist

By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA and OMAR SINAN

AP

BAGHDAD (Dec. 15) – Thousands of Iraqis took to the streets Monday to demand the release of a reporter who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush, as Arabs across many parts of the Middle East hailed the journalist as a hero and praised his insult as a proper send-off to the unpopular U.S. president.

 

The protests came as suicide bombers and gunmen targeted Iraqi police, U.S.-allied Sunni guards and civilians in a series of attacks Monday that killed at least 17 people and wounded more than a dozen others, officials said.

 

Iraqis took to the streets on Monday to demand the release of a reporter who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush, as Arabs across many parts of the Middle East hailed the journalist as a hero. (Dec. 15)

Journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who was kidnapped by militants last year, was being held by Iraqi security Monday and interrogated about whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at Bush during a press conference the previous day in Baghdad, said an Iraqi official.

 

He was also being tested for alcohol and drugs, and his shoes were being held as evidence, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

 

Showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the Arab world is a sign of extreme disrespect, and throwing your shoes is even worse.

 

Newspapers across the Arab world on Monday printed front-page photos of Bush ducking the flying shoes, and satellite TV stations repeatedly aired the incident, which provided fodder for jokes and was hailed by the president’s many critics in the region.

 

“Iraq considers Sunday as the international day for shoes,” said a joking text message circulating around the Saudi capital Riyadh.

 

Palestinian journalists in the West Bank town of Ramallah joked about who would be brave enough to toss their shoes at Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, another U.S. official widely disliked in the region.

 

Many users of the popular Internet networking site Facebook posted the video of the incident to their profile pages, showing al-Zeidi leap from his chair as Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki were about to shake hands Sunday and hurl his shoes at the president, who was about 20 feet away. Bush ducked the airborne footwear and was not injured in the incident.

 

“This is a farewell kiss, you dog,” al-Zeidi yelled in Arabic as he threw his shoes. “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq.”

 

Al-Zeidi was immediately wrestled to the ground by Iraqi security guards. The incident raised fears of a security lapse in the heavily guarded Green Zone where the press conference took place. Reporters were repeatedly searched and asked to show identification before entering and while inside the compound, which houses al-Maliki’s office and the U.S. Embassy.

 

Al-Zeidi’s tirade was echoed by Arabs across the Middle East who are fed up with U.S. policy in the region and still angry over Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 to topple Saddam Hussein.

 

The response to the incident by Arabs in the street was ecstatic.

“Al-Zeidi is the man,” said 42-year-old Jordanian businessman Samer Tabalat. “He did what Arab leaders failed to do.”

 

Hoping to capitalize on this sentiment, al-Zeidi’s TV station, Al-Baghdadia, repeatedly aired pleas to release the reporter Monday, while showing footage of explosions and playing background music that denounced the U.S. in Iraq.

 

“We have all been mobilized to work on releasing him, and all the organizations around the world are with us,” said Abdel-Hameed al-Sayeh, the manager of Al-Baghdadia in Cairo, where the station is based.

 

Al-Jazeera television interviewed Saddam’s former chief lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi, who offered to defend al-Zeidi, calling him a “hero.”

 

In Baghdad’s Shiite slum of Sadr City, thousands of supporters of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr burned American flags to protest against Bush and called for the release of al-Zeidi.

 

“Bush, Bush, listen well: Two shoes on your head,” the protesters chanted in unison.

In Najaf, a Shiite holy city, some protesters threw their shoes at an American patrol as it passed by. Witnesses said the American troops did not respond and continued on their patrol.

 

Al-Zeidi, who is in his late 20s, was kidnapped by Shiite militias on Nov. 16, 2007, and released three days later. His station said no ransom was paid and refused to discuss the case.

 

Violence in Iraq has declined significantly over the past year, but daily attacks continue. A truck bomb killed at least nine police officers Monday and wounded 13 others, including two civilians, in Khan Dhari, west of Baghdad, said Dr. Omar al-Rawi at the Fallujah hospital, where the dead and wounded were taken.

 

Hours earlier, a female suicide bomber knocked on the front door of the home of the leader of a local chapter of the Sunni volunteer militia north of Baghdad and blew herself up, killing him, said an Iraqi police official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the press.

 

Also Monday, gunmen killed seven people from a single family, members of the minority Yazidi sect, when they stormed into their home in northern Iraq, police said.

 

Abdul-Zahra reported from Baghdad and Sinan from Cairo, Egypt. Associated Press writers Muhieddin Rashad in Baghdad, Mohammed Daraghmeh and Diaa Hadid in Ramallah, West Bank, Jamal Halaby in Amman, Jordan, and Donna Abu-Nasr in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, contributed to this report.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.

2008-12-15

new agreement will anger some iraqi groups, and extends u.s. stay

Iraqi cabinet approves U.S. troops agreement

Agence France-Presse Published: Sunday November 16, 2008

BAGHDAD (AFP) – Iraq’s cabinet defied fiery opposition from Shiite hardliners on Sunday and approved a wide-ranging military pact that includes a timetable for the withdrawal of all US troops by the end of 2011.

Baghdad and Washington have been scrambling for months to reach an agreement that will govern the status of more than 150,000 US soldiers stationed in some 400 bases across the country after their UN mandate expires on December 31.

The cabinet approved the agreement after a two and a half hour meeting, with 28 ministers out of 38 voting for it, including Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a government official said.

Iraq’s lead negotiator Muwafaq al-Rubaie told AFP on Friday he believed the draft agreement was a “very good text” and expected it to be approved by parliament as well.

“This text will secure the complete, full, irrevocable sovereignty of Iraq,” he told AFP.

The White House, too, was upbeat on Friday, describing the text of the accord as a “good agreement” that suits both nations.

The draft agreement includes 31 articles and calls for US troops to pull out of Iraqi cities by June 2009 and from the entire country by the end of 2011.

But the pact has drawn fire from hardline nationalists, especially the anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose supporters have called for mass demonstrations to oppose any agreement with the US “occupier.”

Iraq has seen dramatic improvements in security over the past year as US and Iraqi forces have allied with local tribal militias to flush insurgents and militias out of vast swathes of the country that were once ungovernable.

The reduction in violence has also been partly attributed to an order by Sadr at the end of August 2007 to his thousands-strong Mahdi Army militia to observe a ceasefire.

But on Friday Sadr announced the creation of a new militia — the Brigades of the Promised Day — to fight the Americans and demanded that “the occupier leaves our beloved Iraq without any bases and without any accord.”

As the cabinet meeting began a roadside bomb exploded at a Baghdad checkpoint, killing three people — two of them members of a pro-government Sunni militia — according to police.

Another seven people were wounded in the attack, which took place in the capital’s northeast Al-Shaab neighbourhood.

The objections of the firebrand cleric, who is believed to be living in Iran, will have little impact on the decision, given that his party has only hold 28 seats in Iraq’s 275-seat parliament.

The agreement will now go to parliament, where it would have to be approved by a majority before Maliki would sign the agreement with US President George W. Bush.

The SOFA comprises two sections, security chapters initially drafted by the Americans and the general document, the “strategic framework agreement”, put together by the Iraqis.

On November 5, the United States gave Iraq its amended version of the pact and stated the negotiations were finished.

military chief warns against striking iran

By Aamer Madhani | Washington Bureau

July 3, 2008

 

WASHINGTON — The words Wednesday from Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were notable for their blunt pragmatism: An Israeli airstrike on Iran would be high-risk and could further destabilize the region, leading to political and economic chaos.

On Iran’s western border, the U.S. military is more than five years into a war in Iraq that has taken 4,113 American lives and cost U.S. taxpayers more than $600 billion. And on Iran’s eastern border, American commanders are now openly questioning whether they have lost their way in the fight against a resurgent Taliban.

Israel, the United States’ closest ally in the Middle East, has refused to rule out a strike against Iranian nuclear sites, and this week’s New Yorker magazine reported that the U.S. has stepped up its covert operations inside Iran.

While President George W. Bush repeated Wednesday that a military strike remains an option, Mullen’s words of caution underscored the Pentagon’s belief that a move against Iran—by the U.S. or one of its allies—would have an undeniable effect on the ongoing U.S. missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful on us,” Mullen acknowledged during a Pentagon news conference. He added moments later, “This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don’t need it to be more unstable.”

The White House, Israel and Western powers say Iran continues to work toward producing nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is intended only for generating electricity. This week, Iran’s foreign minister struck a conciliatory tone when speaking to reporters about the possibility of Tehran agreeing to suspend its uranium enrichment program.

Mullen’s comments come in the wake of the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Afghanistan in the 7-year-old war, with 27 American service members killed in June. About 32,000 U.S. troops are serving in Afghanistan, compared with 144,000 in Iraq.

Mullen said the possibility of sending more U.S. forces to Afghanistan hinges on the security situation improving in Iraq. Only then, he said, could a stretched U.S. military shift more troops to Afghanistan.

“We’re on an increasingly positive path in Iraq in lots of dimensions,” Mullen said. “And so I’m hopeful toward the end of this year, opportunities like that would be created.”

A potential airstrike against Iran is further complicated by a rapidly changing political scene in Washington, Jerusalem and Tehran. The Bush administration has less than seven months remaining in office, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is embroiled in a bribery scandal and Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has lost clout among Iran’s influential clerics.

There also has been much hand-wringing among Sunni Arab leaders about Iran’s influence over a Shiite-dominated Iraqi government. And the U.S. military has charged that Iran is responsible for arming Shiite militias that have killed hundreds of U.S. service members in Iraq.

An Israeli airstrike on its nuclear reactor sites might not be as damaging for Iran as it would be to the United States and Israel, said Vali Nasr, a professor of international politics at Tufts University.

“The upside could be a political bonanza for Iran,” Nasr said. “Just as Hezbollah became so popular [in the aftermath of the war between Hezbollah and Israel in the summer of 2006], Iran could gain credibility in the Arab street.”

No surprise for Israel

The ratcheting up of tensions between Iran and Israel echoes Israel’s 1981 bombing of an Iraqi plant near Baghdad that was designed to make nuclear weapons. But in this standoff, Israel does not have the element of surprise, and some military experts said that Israel’s potential desire to launch an airstrike is muddied by the U.S. presence in Iraq.

P.J. Crowley, a retired Air Force colonel who was a special assistant to President Bill Clinton for national security affairs, said Israel presumably would have to inform the U.S. military that it would be flying in airspace that is largely American-controlled.

“From a strategic standpoint, it’s hard to see what you gain [from an airstrike] and easy to see what harm you could do to both Israel and U.S. interests,” Crowley said.

In his comments Wednesday, Mullen appeared to veer away from the administration’s stated policy of refusing direct talks when he said there needs to better dialogue on the issue.

“They remain a destabilizing factor in the region,” Mullen said. “But I’m convinced a solution still lies in using other elements of national power to change Iranian behavior, including diplomatic, financial and international pressure. There is a need for better clarity, even dialogue at some level.”

In a separate development, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the Navy’s 5th Fleet, warned Iran on Wednesday that the U.S. would take action if Tehran tried to cut the sea lane through the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point in the flow of much of the world’s oil supply. Cosgriff’s comments were in response to Iranian officials’ threats against Hormuz if there is a Western attack on Iran.

When asked about the threat by Iran to disrupt oil shipments at a White House news conference Wednesday, Bush reiterated that military strikes remain an option but one he preferred not to take.

amadhani@tribune.com

paying the price

By Fatih Abdulsalam

Azzaman, March 29, 2008

Iraq’s never-ending war

All explanations are possible for the current fighting in Basra, the largest city in southern Iraq situated in an area which floats on massive oil riches.

But the reality of the situation which tells volumes about what is happening is the fact that war, in the fullest sense of the word, has been raging without interruption in Iraq for the past five years.

Over those years, bombing by war planes and shelling by heavy artillery have been raging across the country, telling everyone inside and outside Iraq that conditions for normal life are no longer possible.

Amid such circumstances in which villages, towns and cities turn into battle scenes, there are still some whose total state of denial spurs them to speak of successes and achievements.

Every now and then in the past five years, the government or the foreign occupiers would launch massive and bloody operations on Iraqis in major cities such as Karbala, Najaf, Baaqouba, Kut, and Basra and so on and so forth.

Fierce fighting takes place inside these cities with the main fodder being innocent Iraqi civilians among them women and children.

In the past five years, Iraqis have been paying dearly for the blunders first of the foreigners who came to occupy their country and second of the Iraqis these foreigners have nurtured and supported to run the country.

Iraq has turned into a country of armies and militias, all with their own separate agendas and plans. All are bent on fighting each other over influence and privileges whether material or political and have nothing to do with the people and the country they are supposed to serve.

All these armies and militia groups believe their presence and use of force to attain their own ends are legitimate and enshrined in law.

Foreign troops have tailored U.N. Security Council resolutions to justify their presence and deeds in the country. The government leans on a newly designed constitution which only a few respect. And the militias – the real scourge – have their own interpretation for why they need to keep their arms and how to use them.

The tragedy is that almost all political factions are armed and have raised their own militias groups. Even American occupiers today have their own Iraqi militias.

This is the harvest of the political process whose initiators relied on sectarianism to sell it to the Iraqis. It started with the fall of Baghdad to U.S. troops whose commanders and civil leaders sanctioned and Iraqi factional groups jumped on as a means to achieve their ends.

And now neither the Americans nor the factional government have the slightest idea of how to have it solved.

Previously, they spoke of ‘the Sunni Triangle’ where most of the military operations used to take place. They gave the world the impression that the other Iraqi ‘triangles’ were calm and serene.

Southern Iraq was left to its own. Without real administration and civil order, the region, Iraq’s richest in oil reserves, almost turned into a no-man’s land with marauding militias strengthening their grip on almost all aspects of life.

Today the parties responsible for the occupation of the country, whether foreigners or their Iraqi lackeys, are to blame for the loss of a country which, with proper and wise leadership, could have now turned into a beacon of democracy and economic prosperity in the Middle East.

americans engage further in iraqi civil war: using air power and missiles

US jets target Shiite areas in Basra
Sunday March 30 2008 00:00 IST

APBAGHDAD: US forces stepped deeper into the Iraqi government’s fight to cripple Shiite militias, launching airstrikes in the southern city of Basra and firing a missile into the main Shiite stronghold in Baghdad. The American support occurred on Friday as Iraqi troops struggled against strong resistance in Basra and retaliation elsewhere in Shiite areas – including more salvos of rockets or mortars into the US-protected Green Zone in Baghdad.

It was the first time American jets have been called to attack militia positions since Iraqi ground forces launched an operation Tuesday to clear Basra of the armed groups that have effectively ruled the streets of the country’s second-largest city for nearly three years.

One militia barrage slammed into the headquarters of the Basra police command late on Friday, triggering a huge fire and explosions when one of the rounds struck a gasoline tanker, police officials said.

Earlier on Friday, US jets struck a building housing militia fighters and blasted a mortar team that was firing on Iraqi forces, British military spokesman Maj. Tim Holloway said without further details.

Many of those groups are believed to receive weapons, money and training from nearby Iran, the world’s most populous Shiite nation.

The crackdown in Basra has provoked a violent reaction – especially from the Mahdi Army of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. His followers accuse rival Shiite parties in the government of trying to crush their movement before provincial elections this fall.

Their anger has led to a sharp increase in attacks against American troops in Shiite areas following months of relative calm after al-Sadr declared a unilateral cease-fire last August.

Before dawn on Friday, a US aircraft fired a Hellfire missile in the Sadr City district – the Baghdad stronghold of the Mahdi Army – after gunmen there opened fire on an American patrol.

The US military said the missile strike killed four militants, but Iraqi officials said nine civilians were killed and nine others wounded.

Another US airstrike targeted a rocket-propelled grenade mounted vehicle in the mostly Sunni neighbourhood of Azamiyah, killing two militants, the military said separately.

US military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss Pentagon assessments, said commanders are wary of bringing major firepower into Shiite areas such as Sadr City, fearing large-scale civilian casualties could bring more backlash through Baghdad.

But, the officials said, American forces are more willing to offer air support in Basra, which is the centerpiece of the current showdown.

Defying a curfew in Baghdad, Shiite extremists lobbed more rockets or mortars against the US-protected Green Zone, which has come under steady barrages this week. The attacks prompted the State Department to order Embassy personnel to stay inside.

At least two rounds Friday struck the Green Zone offices of Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, killing two guards and wounding four, his daughter and executive secretary Lubna al-Hashemi said.

bush as bully to u.n. diplomats

Ambassador: Bush personally bullied UN diplomats into supporting Iraq war

Heraldo Muñoz, a personal friend of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Chilean ambassador to the United Nations, details the Bush administration’s persuasion tactics in the months leading up to the invasion and occupation of Iraq in his upcoming memoir, the Washington Post reports.

“A Solitary War: A Diplomat’s Chronicle of the Iraq War and Its Lessons,” to be released in April 2008, outlines bullying tactics exercised by President Bush in attempts to persuade United Nations diplomats to back a 2003 resolution to authorize military force against Iraq.  Mocking of unsupportive allies, threats of trade reprisals and attempts to fire U.N. envoys were among actions taken by the Bush administration against those less than cooperative, Muñoz writes.

Ultimately, he continues, America’s “rough-and-tumble” strategy backfired, with Bush later reaching out to Chile and Mexico, which he’d earlier spurned for preventing the war resolution, aggressively backed by the United States and Britain, from taking hold.

#

EXCERPTS:

On March 14, 2003, less than one week before the eventual invasion, Chile hosted a meeting of diplomats from the six undecided governments to discuss its proposal. But U.S. ambassador John D. Negroponte and then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell moved quickly to quash the initiative, warning their governments that the effort was viewed as “an unfriendly act” designed to isolate the United States.  The diplomats received calls from their governments ordering them to “leave the meeting immediately,” Muñoz writes.

Muñoz said subsequent ties remained tense at the United Nations, where the United States sought support for  resolutions authorizing the occupation of Iraq.  He said that small countries met privately in a secure room at the German mission that was impervious to eavesdropping.  “It reminded me of a submarine or a giant safe,” Muñoz said in an interview.

The United States, he added, expressed “its displeasure” to the German government every time they held a meeting in the secure room. “They couldn’t listen to what was going on.”

#

The entire Washington Post article can be read HERE.