Basra: A Look Into A Democratic Future

March 28, 2008 | By Sniper One |

If you want to see how the proposed Obama/Clinton withdrawal of troops from Iraq is going to go; you need not look any farther than the current events in Basra.

Captain Ed over at Hot Air nails it this morning:

The fighting that has erupted in Basra should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the course of the war in Iraq. While the US has spent the last year increasing force size in western Iraq and more aggressively challenging militias in Baghdad, the British have become more passive in Basra and have significantly reduced their footprint to one-tenth of their original commitment. That has made them almost invisible in the south, and since the Iraqi Army did not have a large enough presence there either, the British reduction allowed competing Shi’ite militias to take control of the area.

…

The British took the wrong tack in the south, and the results have been plain for at least two years. Instead of remaining in control of Basra and keeping order until Iraq could build their new security forces, their reduced footprint created a vacuum for order that the militias were only too happy to fill. The Sadr Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades started seizing control of the streets in 2004, when the British reduced their forces to 8600 troops, and they have only strengthened their grip while the British retreated further. The Washington Post noted the problem last summer, as the surge began showing signs of ending the sectarian strife everywhere else.

The fighting in Basra now was inevitable at some point. Baghdad couldn’t allow a major city like Basra to operate outside its control forever. Instead of an orderly transition from Coalition to Iraqi security control, as is happening in the West, the Maliki government now has to take Basra by force — while the rump of British power sits in its bases, unable to contribute at all to security any longer. Whether Maliki decided to do this next week or next year, the fight in Basra had to happen at some point in order to apply the rule of law throughout Iraq.

That’s why this isn’t a collapse of the American surge, but a demonstration of the folly of premature withdrawal. The lack of fortitude on Iraq left a vacuum that created bigger problems and more serious fighting than tenacity did. Had we listened to the war’s critics in 2005 and 2006, gangsters would have swallowed the entirety of Iraq, and we would have a second Somalia in southwest Asia.

You can’t live life on faith, hope, and pixie dust. The fact is that we need to be in Iraq for several more years. If we do it right we can limit causalities and have our mission/presence in Iraq become similar to our presence in Korea. However, if we pull out early, we risk and encourage disaster.

Sphere: Related Content

Filed Under: News of the Day

Trackback URL

Comments

1 Comment so far

chris on March 28, 2008 21:48
Sniper One-
Anyone who is not a member of some militia, some wannabe, who has the screen name “Sniper One” deserves a high five. I got your connection off of the Alison Carmerota message board and really liked what you had to say. We conservatives- military especially- need to expose the crud that is put out to the public. Thanks, and keep the great messages coming. Rotor Head