Recent Visitors to Iraq Question US Tactics
by
Jim Lobe
by Jim Lobe
While
electricity generation now exceeds pre-invasion levels, markets
are plentiful, and virtually all school-aged children are back at
their desks, the war for Iraqi "hearts and minds" remains very
much up in the air, say independent analysts who have recently returned
from that country.
"This
could go either way," Kenneth Pollack, a former Middle East
analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), told an audience
gathered
at the Brookings Institution here Tuesday.
"There's
a great deal of good going on Iraq, but there's also a great deal
of bad."
Like
many experts, Pollack, who supported last spring's invasion, is
growing increasingly concerned that U.S. military tactics in trying
to defeat resistance to the occupation might in fact be creating
new enemies among the population.
Serious
political mistakes have also undermined the prospects for eventual
US success, according to these analysts.
Charles
Duelfer, another Middle East specialist who served as a deputy chief
inspector of the United Nations disarmament team in Iraq, said the
early dissolution of the Ba'ath Party and of the Iraqi army and
security services were potentially fatal mistakes that have permanently
alienated a key part of the population and, in their eyes, transformed
them into enemies.
Duelfer,
who supported the aim of ousting former president Saddam Hussein,
told the same group at Brookings that the military's increasingly
aggressive strategy in the so-called "Sunni Triangle" of central
Iraq was only compounding the problem.
"These
raids are highly embarrassing and insulting for a lot of Iraqis,"
said Duelfer, currently based at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International
Scholars. "The echo from this has created a feeling (among
Iraqis) that ... the US doesn't know what it's doing."
After
taking steadily rising casualties over the summer and into the fall,
the US military has tried to "take the war to the enemy"
in a much more aggressive fashion since early November.
New
tactics have included bombing and strafing by combat helicopters
and even fixed-wing aircraft, more frequent raids on homes and hideouts
of suspected resistance fighters, and more arrests.
While
the number of daily attacks on US units which had doubled
by late October to more than 30 since the summer fell sharply
last month, November was still the deadliest month to date for US
soldiers in Iraq. Seventy-nine were killed, including 39 in the
crashes of four military helicopters.
But
while some Pentagon officials hailed the drop in the number of Iraqi
attacks as signaling a potential turning point in the war, others
pointed to a rise in attacks on Iraqi targets, mainly police, municipal
officials and others who have been working with US forces.
Also,
November saw a record number of non-U.S. occupation officials, including
some 16 Italian carabinieri and eight Spanish intelligence agents,
killed.
There
was also a geographical expansion of armed resistance to the occupation,
a development that clearly concerns both independent analysts and
military planners alike.
While
US military officers have claimed that more than 90 percent of the
military resistance was taking place within the Sunni Triangle,
Lawrence Korb, a senior defense official in the Reagan administration,
said after returning from a trip to Iraq earlier this month that
the actual figures showed the central region accounted for only
60 percent of the attacks on US and coalition forces.
"Even
when we were in safe areas and were driving to see a Shiite cleric
(in the south)," Korb told the Council
on Foreign Relations (CFR), "(the military authorities)
made us wear flak jackets, and they had Humvees and armored personnel
carriers escorting us with guns pointed at the population. This
is the so-called safe Shiite area," he said.
Experts
note a serious "disconnect" between the US military and
the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) under L. Paul Bremer.
Retired
Rear Admiral David Oliver, who just returned from six months working
with the CPA in Baghdad, told reporters last week that the two have
"opposing goals." On the one hand, Army Gen. Ricardo Sanchez's
forces are focused on the "tactical and immediate" goals
of keeping order and hunting down suspected Ba'ath loyalists, while
Bremer is trying to win the confidence of the Iraqi people.
"The
military's goal has nothing to do with the (coalition's) success,"
Oliver told Defense News. "In my opinion, it is a mistake
that ... Gen. Sanchez does not work directly for Bremer."
The
CFR's Korb made a similar point, asserting that the "dual chain
of command" Bremer reports to the Pentagon and the White House,
while Sanchez reports to the Central Command was creating tension
between Bremer and the military over issues such as how much force
can be used in populated areas.
"The
more force you use, the higher the risk that you will alienate the
population. The less force you use, the more you put your troops
in danger," said Korb.
"The
military guys are mainly concerned about their troops and their
military mission, (but) Bremer obviously has a different agenda."
Pollack
said one of his greatest complaints was precisely the military's
"obsession with force protection," a worry he said was shared
by British occupation officials as well.
While
heavily armed US transports speed through towns and villages from
mission to mission, the local population continues to suffer extremely
high rates of crime.
"What
I heard from Iraqis is that they are terrified of going out on the
streets at night," said Pollack, suggesting that the military should
return to patrolling the streets, preferably with new Iraqi police
and soldiers.
But
Bremer and the CPA, ensconced behind kilometers of razor wire and
other defenses, are also too isolated from the population, according
to virtually all of the analysts who have returned recently.
"People
feel there's no way to interact with the CPA," Duelfer said. "I'm
not sure that it knows what's going on," he added, beyond what
is reported to it by members of the Iraqi Governing Council, most
of who have very little if any political support.
"The
CPA in Baghdad remains over-isolated from the military, is an over-centralized
bureaucracy, is slow to respond or non-responsive to coalition forces
and workers in the field, and relies far too much on contractors,
plans too much in theory, and is not realistically evaluating developments
in the field," according to Anthony Cordesman, a military expert
at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), in
an influential
report concluded after a visit to Iraq earlier this month.
The
answer, according to Pollard, is "lots more people" including
civil affairs specialists, translators and interpreters and infantry
who can patrol the streets.
But
that may be politically impossible for the Bush administration,
which has already committed itself to drawing down at least 30,000
soldiers from the present levels of almost 140,000 by next summer,
when the presidential election campaign will be in full swing.
"We
have to start looking fast to our friends overseas," according
to Pollack, echoing similar suggestions from Cordesman and Korb.
December
3, 2003
Jim
Lobe is Inter Press Service's correspondent in Washington, DC.
Copyright
© 2003 Inter Press Service
Jim
Lobe Archives
|