I was reading a story today on MSNBC…something I’ve been expecting to see given the ramped up violence in Iraq in the last few months. Especially the ramped up violence against Iraqi’s. My impression is that much of the insurgency has been being driven by outside agencies. This was only a guess on my part so I’ve been waiting to see if the Iraqi’s who are unhappy with the American occupation would eventually turn on the foreign fighters, or if they would continue on.
So, is this a new trend or just an isolated incident? If it’s a new trend, what do you think it bodes for Iraq and the future?
I’m surprised it took this long for them to get pissed at foreign insurgents actually. Since they certainly are getting way more TV airtime and are the most brutal with beheadings. Plus many are politically motivated.
I think you will have less foreigners since they have an unknown political allegiance. They aren’t defending Iraq’s pride or honor obviously. Iraq was more secular than their arab neighbors… and many foreigners are religiously motivated too. In compensation you will see more Iraqi insurgents anyway as conditions deteriorate. I don’t think the foreigners are the only ones blowing up stuff…
I suspect Iraqis’d love to kick 'em all out. The foreigners I mean.
I don’t get the feeling that foreigners can be solely or even mostly responsible for the insurgency. I know that the borders’re said to be porous, but come on. Even if it’s true as I’ve read in some reports that there the foreign fighters’ve brought mucho dinero, expertise and organizational skills and are essentially the officers of the insurgency the foot soldiers have to be made up predominantly of Iraqis.
Of course, I don’t know what to believe anymore. Take Mr. Zarkawi for example. He’s been killed by US forces. Then he was captured by US forces. Then he was captured by Iranians. First he had two legs, then he had one leg and at last count he’s back to two legs. I’ve read that people are just using his name to claim responsibility for atrocious acts. Every time he appears on video he has a different scarf over his face.
It does seem that if (enough of) the populace wanted to, they could render foreigners’ resistance movement like what is said to be going on quite ineffectual. Everybody has to eat, sleep and shit. And most often, we need a moment of peace to get these things done. An upset populace could (as is suggested in the article) deny the necessary refuge (cooperation) for these basic functions of life to happen. They’d do it to us, but we have a much greater logistics chain.
It also strikes me as possible that the foreign fighters, “the Arabs” as I’ve often seen them referred to, (are they Saudis or what?) are being scapegoated by a weary populace. It could be that the local populace is eyeball deep in the insurgency themselves but is offering these fellows as a sacrifice.
So just because they decide to leave some uninvited foreigners (as opposed to geusts) out in the cold doesn’t necessarily mean that they have decided to play nice with US troops (for long/ for now/whatever).
I would imagine that the Iraqis themselves are resigned to the fact that the americans are not going to be driven out ,and just want to get on with their lives.
It would be a positive turn for the coalition if this was happening – up till now the anger stirred up by the various terrorist acts seems to have been directed at the occupiers for not providing security.
My greatest fear over Iraq has been the external consequences – the boost given to Al Q or other international bad guys, bases in Iraq replacing those lost in Afghanistan and elsewhere and the possibility of instability spreading in the region (particularly Saudi)
If such foreign agents find it tough to operate in Iraq (though no doubt not impossible – as kept being pointed out Iraq is a big place, easy to hide things in) hopefully the fall-out from whatever happens in Iraq will remain local to Iraq.
Hopefully this is not limited to Fallujah, (and I can’t see why it should be) but I doubt peace and love will break out everywhere anytime soon, there are just too many divisions and conflicting aims for that.
IMO Iraq may turn out to be a running-sore, still consuming money, lives and international credibility over many years – not the free, democratic beacon in the region we were promised, but not the lasting gift to Bin Laden that I personally had feared either.
Just because stateless operators are having a hard time working in Iraq is no assurrance thet the conflagration will remain hemmed in by Iraq’s borders. (I’m not certain you were making any such implication, but I felt I should comment for the people playing at home.)
Hey guys…you are making some unfounded assumptions here. I’m not SAYING that ‘peace and love’ will suddenly break out and the entire Iraqi nation will instantly come to love America or the US/UK occupations, throw flowers at our feet, etc. All I’m asking is…well, what I asked. Is this a new trend or is it an isolated incident? Please leave your assumptions of my thoughts on Iraq at the door and just answer the questions I asked…not the hidden agenda many of you seem to think I have.
Myself, I think it IS a new trend. I think the Iraqi’s are getting both weary of war and death and they are getting a bit pissed off. I DO think the foreign fighters play a key role in the insurgency…though I think the majority of the actual spear carriers are Iraqi. So, I think we will see a steady ramp up of Iraqi’s moving against these foreign fighters in various ways in the future. Doesn’t mean things will suddenly be peaches and cream between US/UK and Iraq…and I never said it did.
My feeling (as SimonX puts it) is that the majority of Iraqi’s just want things to settle down so they can get back to everyday life without having to worry about a car bomb going off, or firefights in their streets. They also (again, just MY feeling) want to get back to business and are getting a bit pissed off about having thier oil infrastructure constantly attacked…thats THEIR money after all.
I think it is a positive sign. I think that the Iraqi government (and US/Coalition leadership) if they are nimble and deft enough diplomatically, might be able to exploit this to negotiate around existing issues between insurgent areas and the government.
I’m aware that loyalties (political, tribal or religious) often cross borders in that region and that always has the potential for trouble. But taking the stateless operators (“International men of misery”?) out of the equation at least lets you try to operate on a local basis.
The foreign fighters have come to Iraq in pursuit of aims that cannot be accommodated by negotiation or compromise – and have an interest in widening the conflict as far as possible. The various local leaders, war-lords etc at least can be bought-off with promises of a role in the power structure (whatever that turns out to be) – and their aims seem to be limited to furthering the interests themselves or their own community within Iraq
Err; I wasn’t assuming that you were assuming that…
Anyway, I don’t know if it’s a widespread trend – I’ve heard reports on the BBC backing up the link in the OP on events in Fallujah, but elsewhere? I can just hope.
You asked:-
so I gave my tuppence ha’penny, for what it’s worth
**Fallujah negotiator questions Zarqawi ultimatum** Thursday, October 14, 2004. 6:00pm (AEST)
Reuters
Iyad Allawi told Iraq’s interim assembly that Fallujah must surrender Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, America’s top enemy in Iraq, or face military action.
“We want to know what proof there is that Zarqawi is in Fallujah,” Hatem Maddab, a member of a Fallujah negotiating committee…
“Zarqawi is like the weapons of mass destruction that America invaded Iraq for,” Mr Maddab said, alluding to Saddam Hussein’s arsenal of banned arms that proved not to exist.
“We hear about that name (Zarqawi), but he is not here. More than 20 or 30 homes have been bombarded because of this Zarqawi and his followers but only women, children and the elderly have been affected.”
“If Zarqawi and his group are not handed over to us, we are ready for major operations in Fallujah,” Mr Allawi said.
Xtisme I think you are giving the “arab foreigners” way to much credit… I too in the beggining thought the insurgency initially were either Saddamites or hard core islamists. Not anymore. Much of the insurgency is spontaneous or fueled by Shia vs Sunni rivalries. Until US troops leave I don’t think there is much possibility of things quieting down.