A key benchmark dictated to the Iraq government requires it to disarm the several militias that roam Baghdad. In a move that should earn them honourary NRA membership, many have already said there's no way they'll give up their weapons.
It's a vicious circle. The militiamen say they can't disarm until the security of their people is guaranteed and yet the greatest threat to the security of Baghdad's neighbourhoods comes from hostile militia fighters. Toss in car bombings and rocket attacks by the Sunni insurgency and al-Qaeda and you have a situation in which those who see themselves as protecting their own will flatly refuse to disarm.
If Maliki can't get the Sunni and Shia militias to disarm voluntarily, then what? Do the Americans take these small armies on, one by one, and, if so, which side gets it first? Maliki has said he wants the US troops to tackle the Sunni militias while he deals with the very Shia forces that have kept him in power. It's already been demonstrated that Iraq's army refuses to fight their fellow Shiites.
On the other hand, if the Americans first focus on al-Sadr's Mahdi army they're likely in for a repeat of the carnage that ensued in their two previous battles against Sadr forces. That, in turn, could well destabilize the Maliki government.
Molly Hennesy-Fiske writing in the LA Times reports some Iraqis are actually hoarding weapons in preparation for what they expect to be a coming fight with the Americans. These are ordinary Iraqis who are prepared to fight alongside the militias that have been their sole protection.
No comments:
Post a Comment