New Basra Offensive

By Cernig

The Maliki government's forces have launched a new offensive in the Southern city of Basra, backed by heavy applications of US airpower and British artillery. But reports are conflicted, with both the Iraqi Army and Mahdi Militia saying resistance was light but eyewitnesses and a British officer saying there was some fierce fighting at first which was put down by US airstrikes.

The LA Times (link above) writes, in early reporting:

Artillery fire and bomb blasts shook a militia-held district in the southern city of Basra today as U.S. and British forces backed up Iraqi troops launching a new offensive in the area.

The fighting was concentrated in Hyaniyah, in western Basra, a stronghold of Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr and his Mahdi Army. Witnesses who spoke on condition of anonymity because of security concerns said Iraqi forces were trying to wrest control of the area from the Mahdi Army, known by its Arabic acronym JAM.

"JAM tried to prevent them from entering, but fierce air strikes enabled the Iraqi Army to take over control of the main streets and roads in Hayaniyah," one witness said.

A British military spokesman in Basra, Capt. Chris Ford, said the battles marked the start of a "new phase" in the offensive launched March 25 by Prime Minister Nouri Maliki against Shiite militias.

Hyaniyah has been surrounded by Iraqi forces for several days, but today's actions marked the first time they had attempted to take over the neighborhood.

Ford said Iraqi forces had entered Hyaniyah after the initial bombardments by U.S. and British forces. "There were violent clashes with gunmen there" when the Iraqis moved in, he said.

A report from KUNA (which isn't always a reliable source) agrees with the Brit officer's version, citing witness reports that there were "fierce", "armed clashes" which "coincided with bursts of explosions and overflights by gunship helicopters."

But later reports had the Iraqi Army saying it was incontrol of the whole area, not just main streets - and a Mahdi Army spokesman agreeing. The New York Times:

The Iraqi government announced success in controlling a key neighborhood of Basra, Hayyania. Iraqi forces and militia fighters had been at a standstill in Basra for almost four weeks after an initial government offensive stalled. But on Saturday, an Interior Ministry spokesman said Iraqi forces had moved in with little resistance, and that Hayyania was calm by nightfall.

“The operation was completed successfully,” said Gen. Abdul Karim Khalaf, the spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry in Baghdad.

“Our forces are inside Hayyania and have not met with any resistance. Now they are searching houses and taking up positions on the roofs of high buildings,” he said, adding that Iraqi soldiers control all the exits and entrances to the area.

Both Mr. Sadr’s office in Basra and the Iraqi general in charge of the operation said there had been little resistance from gunmen there. “The Iraqi Army entered Hayyania, and the Mahdi Army did not resist because they made a commitment to obey Moktada al-Sadr’s order,” said Harith al-Athari, the head of the Sadr office in Basra. He was referring to the cleric’s announcement that he would not contest government control of the city as long as the government met its commitments.

My own guess is that this is exactly what it looks like - the JAM resisted the Iraqi Army and was doing OK at that until US airpower made their position untenable - and now both the IA and JAM are trying to spin events as being what they intended all along.

The Iranian government, interestingly, has backed the Iraqi government's operation in Basra while at the same time condemming US involvement in attacks on Sadr City in Baghdad. It looks to me like they're still backing Maliki's Badrist/Dawa coalition over the Sadrists, just as they always have, but will happily back anyone who can tar-pit the US military for a while longer. The longer the US is in Iraq the more Iran's hand is strengthened, especially when the US is also backing Iran's main Dawa/Badrist proxies.

Meanwhile, there would certainly be some sense in Sadr continuing his calls for his militia to hang fire in Basra. As Matt Duss guesting for Attackerman notes from yesterday's story about the IA surrounding Sadr's HQ in the city, the Iraqi Army are providing him with a powerful narrative on the Iraqi street:

From a Washington Post story about “pressure” on the Sadrists, this jumped out at me:

Also Friday, Sadr supporters said Iraqi troops surrounded Sadr’s main office in Basra and halted Friday prayers.

“The army did not want anything from us today but to terrify us and ban us from practicing our normal religious ceremonies. We left the office then because we don’t intend to exercise any kind of violence against them,” said Ali al-Suaidi, a spokesman for Sadr’s office in Basra.

Muqtada’s father Grand Ayatollah Sadeq al-Sadr initiated Friday prayers in the mid-90s as part of his “speaking cleric” program, first using the sermons to differentiate himself from the “silent clerics” like Sistani and the Najaf establishment, whom Sadr criticized for holding themselves aloof from the population, and later using them to direct veiled condemnations at Saddam. Right before Sadr’s assassination in 1999, Saddam demanded that Sadr halt Friday prayers, which Sadr refused.

And now Iraqi government troops have halted Friday prayers.

The bold emphasis is mine - but that's a narrative with considerable power to persuade both poor Iraqi Shgiites and Sunnis alike. The Maliki government is showing itself to Shiites as a Persian elite dictatorship over the common Iraqi and to Sunnis as a Shiite version of Saddam, ready to do to Sunnis what Saddam did to Shiites. Aptly enough, that's what both constituencies already believe, so this kind of thing simply reinforces their beliefs. Maliki may believe that he can dictate political affairs at gunpoint but these things have a habit of getting out of military control.

Comments

[Annole Broade]

“The LA Times (link above) writes, in early reporting:

The fighting was concentrated in Hyaniyah, in western Basra, a stronghold of Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr and his Mahdi Army. Witnesses who spoke on condition of anonymity because of security concerns said Iraqi forces were trying to wrest control of the area from the Mahdi Army, known by its Arabic acronym JAM.”

Maybe I’m reading more into this than there is, but it bothered me when I saw you repeating the same acronym (JAM) in this paragraph:

“… My own guess is that this is exactly what it looks like - the JAM resisted the Iraqi Army and was doing OK at that until US airpower made their position untenable - and now both the IA and JAM are trying to spin events as being what they intended all along…”

Is this statement, “known by its Arabic acronym JAM” , true?

The Jaysh al Mahdi in Arabic is جيش المهدي.

Then I remembered this from the McClatchy story:

GIs in Sadr City caught between warring Iraqi sides

".........Is that IA or JAM?" he asked, using the initials for the Iraqi army and for Jaysh al Mahdi, the Arabic name of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army militia.......

"........Over the radio, the soldiers heard that Sadr's brother-in-law had been killed, and that the assassination could increase the violence. They were told not to refer to the enemy as JAM but as insurgents or special groups............."

Just Venting