The dog that hasn’t barked

With the whole unfolding tragedy in Iraq, few people have remarked yet on “the dog that didn’t bark” in response to all of this… This dog being… the revamped, up-and-running, almost fully capable New Iraqi Security Forces that we were all assured had many thousands of trained personnel now ready to assure the security of increasing parts of the country.
I’d love to see any reporting that is possible regarding what’s happened to the “Iraqi Security Forces” during the crisis of the past four days. How many units have split along sectarian lines? How many have been successfully deployed? In how many was a deployment attempted but failed? … All those kinds of essential figures.
Scotch-taping together something faintly “credible” called the New Iraqi Security Forces, or whatever, has been an essential dimesnion of the current Bush plan to draw down the US troop level fairly significantly before the November mid-terms… So far, the forces don’t look credible at all as far as I can see.
But we need more information.
(I note that until recently Ayatollah Sistani and other heavyweight leaders in the Shiite community have been urging their followers to join the “Iraqi” forces in response to anti-Shiite attacks. If Sistani is now urging support for tribal levies, instead, as Juan Cole has reported, we might expect to see a further large-scale exodus of Shiites from the “Iraqi” forces.)

24 thoughts on “The dog that hasn’t barked”

  1. Sorry Helena, but the “revamped, up-and-running, almost fully capable New Iraqi Security Forces” simply don’t exist. They are disappearing faster than Saddam’s army did when the U.S. blasted its way into Baghdad –
    WASHINGTON (CNN) — The only Iraqi battalion capable of fighting without U.S. support has been downgraded to a level requiring them to fight with American troops backing them up, the Pentagon said Friday.”
    Iraqi army? There isn’t one.

  2. Experts contintue to furnish positive news. The message: stay the course.
    Military historian Elliot Cohen writes in the WSJ that Iraqi forces are indeed “stepping up” so that Coalition forces can “step down.” In an article entitled Will We Persevere? he assures us that things are on the up and up. Hew saw for himself. A grinning Iraqi private showed Cohen how to fire an AK-47! Another photo-op: Iraqi officers and enlisted men sharing the same chow. He got a helicopter ride over Baghdad, saw loads of satellite dishes, and can asset that 60% of the city is under Iraqi control. What does it matter whether this means police or militia?
    IED’s? Blame the Iranians. Mosque bombing? Er, uh, maybe “the United States does not always have the initiative in what is, in large part, a contest internal to Iraqi society.” [Innocuous enough?]
    Sectarian divisions? Cohen makes a bland observation that “the forces of sectarian resentment, communal suspicion and sheer criminal opportunism make Iraq’s continuation as an effective unitary state a proposition open to doubt.” But it’s not clear whether he investigated any of this in person. Perhaps he plumb forgot to ask. Or, in the presence of those recruits with AK-47s, knew better than to test their grins and open a (last) can of worms.
    Cohen
    authored one of the few books to make it to W’s bedside, praised civilian leaders who order daring military action when generals are too gun shy. Now he urges faith in the military because we now have the “right people / right policies.” He does not think they could deceive or lie.
    Success is possible, he says. All that is needed is patience, cheerful optimism, and a willingness to persevere.
    Can do! Just what his biggest fan would like to read.

  3. CAMP BUTLER, Iraq – Iraqi soldiers of the 2nd Tank Battalion, 2nd Tank Brigade, 9th Iraqi Army Division, conducted a tank gunner range here Feb. 16-21.
    The range served to certify the tankers on T-72 Main Battle Tank, who fired 125mm rounds with pinpoint precision on a designated target a mile away.
    As the rounds exploded, “We have been in training for two months to become a tanker in the new Iraqi army,” said Ramn Abis, an Iraqi tanker who recently qualified on the T-72 to help his country fight against terrorists. “After this, we have a duty to go down to the units and catch terrorists.”
    http://www.mnf-iraq.com/Releases/Feb/060225e.htm
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=FUL20051110&articleId=1230

  4. I’m not sure how Salah’s press release about target practice on a U.S base has a bearing on the existence or nonexistence of independent and loyal Iraqi security forces.
    Besides, tanks and artillery sound a little drastic for urban policing.
    Helena – can’t answer your question, but would say I got the impression that U.S. forces kept quite a low profile in the aftermath of the Samarra attack, and that the militias did not. However, the newswires had plenty of photos of Iraqi police on the streets in various cities – brave men – but of course a photo doesn’t tell you to whom the man in uniform is loyal.

  5. “independent and loyal Iraqi security forces”
    “Independent and loyal Iraqi security forces”? Independent of WHAT? Loyal to WHOM?

  6. Independent of foreign powers – which they currently aren’t.
    Loyal to the Iraqi state – not to sectarian interests, eg, SCIRI, Sadr. Debatable as to whether there is currently an Iraqi state to be loyal to.

Comments are closed.