Prognosis
by
William S. Lind
DIGG THIS
Most
wars move not at a steady pace but in a series of fits and starts.
For about half a year, we have been enjoying something of a lull
in the war in Iraq. Anything that reduces casualties is to be welcomed.
But the bulletins’ claims that the downward trend in violence will
continue should be seen more as political vaporing than military
analysis. Events begin to suggest that the lull is ending and Mars
is in the ascendant.
To
make a prognosis, we first must understand why we have enjoyed a
period of relative quiet. There are four basic causes. In order
of importance, they are:
- Al Qaeda’s
alienation of much of its Sunni base, to the point where many
Sunni insurgents changed sides. As I have pointed out before,
al Qaeda in Iraq made a common error of revolutionary movements:
it attempted to impose its program before it had consolidated
power. As best I can see from Olympus, it seems to be persisting
in that error, perhaps because its loose discipline does not allow
it to do otherwise. That is good news for us. But we dare not
forget that in 4GW, all alliances are temporary. The Sunni Awakening
militias like our money but they don’t much like us.
- Muqtada
al-Sadr’s decision to order his Mahdi Army to observe a truce,
now extended to August of this year. The truce remains in his
interest, because he needs to husband his strength for a winner-take-all
final gambit.
- Moving
many U.S. troops off their FOBs and into neighborhoods where they
can try to protect the population.
- Last and
least, the "surge." This usefully added some additional
troops for #3, but without the former move it would have simply
created more Fobbits. A question I have not seen addressed is
what percentage of the troops for #3 were already in the country.
My bet is a large majority.
If
we look at where each of these is now going, we see rough water
ahead:
- Al Qaeda
in Iraq and other anti-U.S. forces (there are many) are both attacking
and penetrating Sunni militias now working with U.S. forces; the
latter is likely to prove more effective. U.S. forces are also
killing Sunni militiamen who are working with us, by accident
of course, but sufficiently often to strain relations. Much of
this results from our counter-productive and just plain stupid
continued use of air power in a country we occupy. American attack
aircraft are al Qaeda’s (and the Taliban’s) best friends. The
most powerful alienating factor is the irreconcilable hostility
between most Sunnis and the Shiite government in Baghdad. The
Sunnis know we created the government and remain allied to it.
The government fears any armed Sunnis. We are left with one foot
on the boat and one on the dock, a position that is difficult
to sustain indefinitely.
- Muqtada
al-Sadr is feeling increasing pressure from his "street"
to respond to U.S. attacks (again, often by aircraft) on Shiite
neighborhoods. He has quietly been using U.S. and Iraqi government
forces to "whack" dissenters within his own movement.
But this can easily blow back on him. At this point his "street
cred" is or soon will be on the line, at which point he has
to respond or see his militia fragment (which is the natural tendency
of everything in 4GW). The Mahdi Army can send U.S. casualties
soaring overnight.
- Any rise
in American casualties means politicians in Washington will want
U.S. troops to head back to the FOBs. The absurd American definition
of "force protection" means many within the military
will want to do the same. Petraeus will stay the course (in this
case, rightly), but he’s on his way out. Having gotten this right
doesn’t mean we won’t get it wrong again.
- The extra
troops brought over by the surge will go home this summer. Again,
this is far less important than what the remaining troops do,
and points #1 and #2 also, but it is a factor.
The
main story of the current lull is one of lost opportunity. Whether
soon or in the more distant future, the war in Iraq will get hotter
again. The lull gave us what might be our only opportunity to leave
Iraq with some tailfeathers intact. Just as the Bush administration’s
blindness got us into this war, so its rigidity made us pass over
our best chance to get out. Like opportunity, Mars only knocks once.
Next time, he blows the building.
March
27, 2008
William
Lind is an analyst based in Washington, DC.
Copyright
© 2008 William S. Lind
William
Lind Archives
|