“IRANIAN forces were involved in the recent battle for Basra, General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, is expected to tell Congress this week.
Military and intelligence sources believe Iranians were operating at a tactical command level with the Shi’ite militias fighting Iraqi security forces; some were directing operations on the ground, they think.
Petraeus intends to use the evidence of Iranian involvement to argue against any reductions in US forces.
Dr Daniel Goure, a defence analyst at the Lexington Institute in Virginia, said: “There is no question that Petraeus will be tough on Iran. It is one thing to withdraw troops when there is purely sectarian fighting but it is another thing if it leaves the Iranians to move in.”
Meanwhile Hugh Hewitt asks why Obama hasn’t been pressed on Iran, he has been allowed to skate through the primaries spewing empty platitudes.
Senator Obama is within a few weeks of clinching the Democrats’ nomination and he has not been pressed on Iran. When the subject has come up at all, Obama has retreated into his trade-mark ambiguity dressed up in soaring rhetoric. His generalities about meeting with Ahmadinejad underscore that Obama’s not prepared or even informed on the subject, but the MSM is allowing him to march to Denver without engaging in an extended conversation about what to do with the increasing militancy of Iran (and its proxy Hezbollah).
Well, he is the chosen one….so it just wouldn’t do to press him on anything. He will make a speech and the world will become a heaven on earth. One other note the MSM missed during this whole Basra thing is the fact that the majority of political blocs supported the crackdown:
Iraq’s political blocs backed a government crackdown on Shiite militias and a demand by the country’s political council for parties to disband their militias as a condition for participation in a key local election, an Iraqi lawmaker said Sunday.
In a meeting on Saturday evening, Iraq’s political council of national security gave its backing to a government offensive against Shiite militants in oil-rich southern Basra province and other areas, MP Fouad Masum said.
The council representing the country’s sectarian, ethnic and political groups is made up of the Kurdish president, his two Sunni and Shiite vice-presidents, a Shiite premier and leaders of major political blocs.
The council endorsed a statement supporting the crackdown in Basra and other provinces and urged all political parties to disband their militias as a condition for participation in the political process, Masum told the Voices of Iraq (VOI) news agency.
‘All political parties and blocs are urged to immediately disband their militias and hand in their arms to the state and switch to peaceful civilian activities as a condition to participation in the political process and election,’ the council said in a statement.
Only the Sadrist bloc of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr objected to the council’s support for the government offensive and its call for disbanding militias, said Masum from the Kurdish Alliance bloc.
In the end the only way for us to leave Iraq a successful country is to deal with Iran.
UPDATE
Good update on how the Basra fight went and is still continuing to go:
The Iraqis planned and executed the operation with little U.S. involvement and managed to commit more than 40,000 troops in high-intensity combat against well-armed, militia-terrorists in six cities — a feat that would have been impossible just six months ago.
Conventional Iraqi army and police units operated effectively together in multiple large-scale, simultaneous urban combat for the first time. Though there were inevitable foul-ups, most of the problems were logistical, not operational. All commended the courage and tenacity of the Iraqi soldiers.
The Iraqi Special Operations Forces (ISOF) and Hillah SWAT units, with which we were embedded in December, killed or captured more than 200 “high profile criminals” for which they had arrest warrants. Most of those apprehended or killed were renegade members of Muqtada al-Sadr’s Jaish al Mahdi — the Mahdi Army.
Intelligence collected during the operation confirms that Iranian Quds Force fighters have heavily infiltrated southern Iraq and that Iranian weapons, explosives and equipment continue to be delivered to areas previously controlled by the Mahdi Army.
Though the ISF lacks the sophisticated casualty evacuation and medical treatment available to U.S. troops, their compassion toward wounded and injured noncombatants rallied civilians to the side of the Iraqi government.
One U.S. commander summed it up: “This was a necessary operation — and it couldn’t have happened without ‘the surge.’ By going after the Shi’ite militias, Mr. al-Maliki has proven to the Sunnis that he intends to be even-handed in the process of bringing law and order to Iraq. The Iraqi troops fought well in both day and night operations. Their officers and NCOs are leading from the front. The militias — and their Iranian sponsors — got their butts kicked.”
See author page
I see that Senator Joe Biden was out there on Saturday calling the Surge a failure and saying we are just “treading water” in Iraq. I wonder if he stole that line from Senator Ted “Swimmer” Kennedy?
What’s clear is that this was an Iraqi operation. And it demonstrates that Iraqis are meeting the conditions for VICTORY that President Bush often describes as an Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself and be an ally in the war on terror.
Expect the usual Code Pink freak show on Capitol Hill this week as Democrats give them reserved seats directly in line behind Petraeus and the cameras covering the event.
But despite Democrats best efforts, General Petraeus will get across the real story to any Americans willing to listen.
It clearly shows Sadr has been reduced to a figurehead of the Mahdi Army, with the Iranians directing the fight in Basra at the tactical level.
If there should be any satisfaction taken from the Basra operation, it’s that the Iraqi government and security forces are stepping forward. With as many factions present in the Iraqi political landscape, this is no small feat for the major parties to agree and contend with the various militias. And, the Iraqi security forces performed well in their first, large scale operation with limited US support. It shows the “surge” operation provided the Iraqis the time they needed to develop.
“This was a necessary operation”… they “got their butt kicked:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkx-3oYeFwuWKCusr2jrojs98w8wD8VSCIPO0
You know, there’s one question that has just been lurking in the background for years…what are we (or the Iraqis) doing to secure the border, especially the border with Iran? That’s about 900 miles of border that should be absolutely locked down…but I’ve only seen the occasional mention of “Iraqi border police.” What’s going on on that side of the country?
On Iraqi, Iranian borders, business and ties:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/challenges/competitors/2008/0221iranwin.htm
Petty ironic, huh?
Oh my word, Doug… Dreyfuss? the Nation writer??? And Global Policy Forum?? da site that “educates and mobilizes for global citizen participation”. sigh….
Dreyfess manages to wear his personal bias on his sleeve. He ignominiously sweeps Iranian nationals, and the entire banking facility (Bank Melli), into his conspiracy net… attempting to cajole the reader into a distrust of anything Iranian in Iraq. Did he succeed with you??
Well, we have Iranian investors here too, Doug. Most any US bank may, by chance, harbor accounts held by nefarious types (of all nationalities) laundering anything from drugs to weapons. Those accounts that are known to be questionable funds, or that fund terrorists, are frozen. You don’t freeze the gosh darn entire bank branch or institution intself!
And if Dreyfess suggests he knows of such accounts in the Iraqi Bank Melli, he ought to be speaking up instead of slandering the entire Iranian nation.
Instead Dreyfess not-so-subtlely suggests any and all Iranians, and their entire banking institutions are advocates for violent overthrow of the Iraq elected govt. Absurd and offensive. Certainly not the icon of a “tolerant” progressive. But this is all about making the US govt and their battle in the financial realm look bad. It’s all about election time again.
Iranian denizens are far more vocal in their desires for a more western government, and have been for years. They are not all Ahmadinejads there. It’s insane to think Iraq can ban Iranian investors and presence in their new country. They are next door neighbors, and they may even have Shia relatives that reside across their borders.
Iraq will have to do the same as any free country… monitor those suspected of having intentions that are not for the good of their country and freeze accounts when they have proof. Dreyfess is nothing more than a bigoted fool with an agenda.
MataHarley, It appears you sidestepped the border issue.
Regarding Iranian investment in Iraq:
*The ISCI was founded by exiled Iraqi clerics in Iran –with the support of Ayatollah Khomeini.
*The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps created and trained SCIRI’s military wing, the Badr Corps, and serves as an arm of Iran’s Quds Force in Iraq.
*ISCI still gets Iranian funds, and many members of the Badr militia receive pensions from the IRGC.
*Thousands of these Iranian-trained forces have been incorporated into the Iraqi police and army.
Let’s not over-look the obvious. The ISCI is strongly tied to Iranian military influence. What and where their money goes and does is simply ignored by the US in virtue of being a powerful influence in Iraq and, presently, helping to achieve some US goals.
I absolutely agree with you Doug that they must control the jihad crossings and traffic at the Iraq/Iran border. But that means Iraq is left with the same quandry we have here… how to secure borders without being overly inhibiting.. if that is the word… for normal relations between a neighboring country.
Since we have our own problems solving that quandry, can we expect it to be any easier for Iraq? So I do still believe that Dreyfess’s argument was overly broad in presentation. But then, considering Dreyfess himself, that is not surprising.
It appears the NeoConservatives are bound and determined to widen the war to include Iran, more than three times the size of Iraq, as part of thir legacy to America. Do they claim we will be “greeted as liberators” in Tehran as well?
Re: “Iraq will have to do the same as any free country… monitor those suspected of having intentions that are not for the good of their country and freeze accounts when they have proof.”
Which “Iraq”?
The Kurdish Iraq of the North that is on good terms with the government of Iran?
The Sunni west that is at war with Shia and supported by Suadi Arabia?
The Shia South that is little more than a vassal state of iran already?
The meaningless central government that barely exists outside of the Green Zone?
Which one?