(ED NOTE: Wrote this a couple of days ago, but booking it for posterity)
“From a base in Basra, Senior British Military Representative Lieutenant Colonel Michael Shearer told TIME that the Iraqi operation is aimed at quelling criminal activity, and that the city has never been under the "control" of militant groups.”
Shut up.
If I hear one more time about the British/Northern Ireland model, I am going to hurl. The British (politically) surrendered and declared it a peace.
“We know the outcome of the fighting in advance because we already defeated the British in the streets of Basra and forced them to withdraw to their base,” Abu Iman told The Times.
Duh.
The government moves. A nation state has got to do two things:
1. Defend itself
2. Reproduce.
Right now, violence is a commodity in Iraq. Any yahoo with a track suit and an AK-47 can get in on the business. The barriers to entry are that low. The central government has got to become the monopoly provider of violence or they fail. Gidgets launching 107mm’s from the back of pickup trucks is, shall we say, unsustainable.
Most all the rest is window dressing.
JAM/SG/Iran LLC has had a going concern on violence in Basra and Sadr City. As a result, they’ve been able to extract rents form the port and oil lines; the rents help them expand their influence.
Outcomes:
COA 1 (unlikely): JAM/SG/Iran LLC prevails.
COA 2 (moderate likelihood): Maliki prevails; high cost.
COA 3 (unknown): The Sardaukars Coalition Forces intervene on behalf of their levies and end the JAM/SG/Iran LLC product line.
Should the cease-fire collapse entirely, those gains could be in serious jeopardy, making it far more difficult to begin bringing substantial numbers of American troops home.
Concerns about US troop withdrawal timelines: parochial and unworthy.
Navel gazing Green Zone reportage: amusing.
That’s my two and a half cents.
Whatever happens down there, it will be fascinating.