Welcome to the Shadow War

The pullout of U.S. forces in Iraq threatens to unleash a dangerous and deadly struggle with Iran and within the Iraqi army.

BY MICHAEL KNIGHTS | OCTOBER 24, 2011

"The last American soldiers will cross the border out of Iraq -- with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops," President Barack Obama announced last week. "That is how America's military efforts in Iraq will end."

But the American departure marks the beginning, not the end, of the struggle facing the Iraqi Army. Iraq's military remains divided by conflicts between its traditional, nationalist officer corps and Iran-sponsored interlopers, and paralyzed by the dysfunctional politics in Baghdad and the withdrawal of U.S. military support. If Iraq is to develop into a strong and secure nation, capable of guiding its own affairs, much depends on its army's ability to overcome these hurdles.

I recently spent a period of three weeks embedded with Iraqi Army headquarters in the south of Iraq Though one has to be careful drawing conclusions about this large, varied country from observations gathered in any one of its regions, the view from southern Iraq is particularly relevant at this time. The south is Iran's backyard -- the part of Iraq where Tehran's ambitions are focused  due to its political, religious, and economic connections to the predominately Shiite population, and where its influence is most keenly felt. Iraqi Army headquarters in the south have also been operating largely autonomously of U.S. or British support since foreign troops drew down to low levels in 2009 -- making them a window into the future of the Iraqi military after the U.S. exit.

Obama's announcement may have marked a milestone for many Americans, but in the view of Iraqi security leaders, the United States has been gone for a long time in much of the country. The die was cast as soon as the 2008 U.S.-Iraq security agreement -- in effect, the U.S. withdrawal timetable -- was ratified by the Iraqi cabinet on Nov. 16, 2008. From that date onward, it became increasingly difficult for both U.S. and Iraqi forces to arrest, detain, or prosecute Iraqi suspects because only Iraqi warrants carried legal weight. Though U.S. forces have gradually drawn down, their physical presence on their bases has meant less and less to Iraqis because U.S. capability to influence security on the ground had been legally and politically neutered.

The slow fade-out of the U.S. presence has left Iraqi Army leaders exposed to political attacks.  Numerous interviews with Iraqi officers paint a picture of the shadow war being fought within the Iraqi security sector on the eve of U.S. departure. On one side is the class of Shiite Arab political appointees seeded throughout the security establishment since the ascendance of a predominantly Shiite government in Baghdad . Many of these individuals were members of Badr Corps, the agency formed by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to pit exiled Iraqi Shiites against Saddam Hussein's military. Others are current supporters of Shiite hardline politician Moqtada al-Sadr, or breakaways from his movement. These groups oppose any U.S. influence over the Iraqi government and security sector, and support a clerical role in government similar to that practiced in Iran. Within their narrative, attacks against U.S. military targets are not considered criminal actions -- they are only interested in pursuing former Baathists and al Qaeda terrorists.

The other side -- currently beleaguered and perpetually looking over its shoulder -- is the class of traditional Iraqi nationalists that still makes up a considerable portion of the Iraqi army leadership in the south. Many of today's generals fought at the tip of the spear in the long and bloody Iran-Iraq War, as young lieutenants and majors. Due to their service in Saddam's military, these men can easily be targeted for investigation of suspected Baathist ties. Indeed, before the March 2010 elections, the so-called de-Baathification committee produced a list of over 70 senior officers, smearing them as alleged Baathists. These career officers deeply resent the presence of demaj (meaning "amalgamation") officers -- political appointees from the Islamist parties who were given rank after 2003 without graduating from military academies. Due to the operational security problem posed by these newcomers, the veteran officers banded together, forming tight command groups comprised exclusively of their old war buddies -- sidelining the demaj officers to less important jobs, and encouraging them to take extended periods of leave.

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

 

Michael Knights is a Lafer Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He travels regularly to Iraq and has written a number of books and reports on the security and politics of Iraq, most recently "The Iraqi Security Forces: Local Context and U.S. Assistance."

NICOLAS19

6:00 AM ET

October 25, 2011

shall we erect monuments?

The article is written as if the US and Iraq were fighting together against Iran, lamenting about the impoverished, fragmented and destroyed state of the country, and its inability to stand up against Iranian influence. NO. The US fought AGAINST Iraq, against its government and its people.

Four words: it is your fault. Who bombed Iraq? US. Who invaded it? US. Who caused death, waves of refugees, distrust and ultimately weakness in Iraq? US. Who made Iraq as susceptible to foreign influence as ever? US.

Like an ignorant kid stripping a bird from its feathers, they pitying it for being unable to fly. You can hold your head as high as you can, but you made a mess, and somebody else has already started to clean it up.

 

GRECOSALATA

9:44 AM ET

October 25, 2011

NICOLAS19

"NO. The US fought AGAINST Iraq, against its government and its people."

Yes the US fought against an Iraq that invaded Kuwait and gassed 40'000 Kurds.
Yes the US fought against Saddam Hussein's oppressive government.
Yes the US fought against Iraqi people who were pro-dictatorship and oppression.

Since the invasion the US has been battling foreign mujahideen and local Iraqi warlords trying to oppress people of other religions or muslim denominations.

Get your facts straight Nicolas and spare the plucked bird/destructive child condescension.

If the Allies had attacked the Third Reich in 1937 people like you would have defended the Nazis and lambasted the Allies.

 

ZORRO

2:03 PM ET

October 25, 2011

15 Years Later

Attacking Nazi Germany in 1958 or so might be a better comparison. Funny btw how unhappy people seems to be about being "liberated", but I guess they are only "ungrateful" of US "sacrifices". Go 1948!

 

JAYDEE001

12:09 PM ET

October 25, 2011

Its mystifying...

The author seems to favor return to some sort of military dictatorship (just not another Saddam!) that can stand up to Iran. It is certainly ironic that many Iraqi soldiers and citizens seem to favor a "strongman" to deal with the country's multitude of ethnic and sectarian issues. That is not what US soldiers fought and died for. Come to think of it, what was all the fighting and dying about? WMD? Collaboration with Al Qaeda? No, those have all been disproved - no evidence whatsoever.

Please spare us the arguments about Saddam being such a bad man and that getting rid of him was morally right- that was not the justification for the invasion and eight years of occupation. We cultivated his favor long before we decided he needed to be removed. We supported him in the long and bloody war against Iran, and he was our boy until he made the mistake of invading Kuwait. We did nothing to stop him from gassing his own people until he no longer acted like our lap-dog. We drove him out of Kuwait, and that could have been the end of it - except for the personal vendetta of Bush and the neocons.

It was very likely (and forseeable) that removing Saddam from power and destroying the Sunni apparatus that he used to oppress the majority Shiite would lead to a closer alliance between that majority and Shiite Iran. Bellyaching over the possibility that our acts might have benefitted Iran by strengthening its position in the region is too little, and pathetically late.

The comments by many Iraqi that they want the US invaders out of their land do seem very much the same as "Please leave and don't let the door hit you on the a$$ on the way out" - hardly the thanks we were led to believe we might receive for giving the Iraqi their "freedom from Saddam". There is a lesson in there that we can apply to future experiences in Afghanistan.

 

TARQUINIS

12:31 PM ET

October 25, 2011

Blowback is on the way

We shattered Iraq, for no good reason and many outright false ones.

As bad a guy as Saddam was, Iraq is far worse off now considering the blasted infrastructure and the mass deaths resulting from our invasion, anywhere from 100k to 500k, and two million now in exile.

We removed the sole force opposing Iranian influence in Iraq. There will be consequential results from our folly. It is inescapable.

 

LEERICHARTNR

8:02 PM ET

November 21, 2011

I relish in reading this

I relish in reading this article. I demand to learn more on this topic.. Say thank you you as a replacement for journalism leading article this considerable info.. Anyway, I am gonna subscribe to your rss and I wish you write great articles again soon. Really effective info. HGH Reviews

 

ZORRO

2:05 PM ET

October 25, 2011

Gasp!

WINEP scaremongering about Iran! What's going to happen next? The heaven falling on our heads?!

 

VDELMONTE

6:19 AM ET

October 30, 2011

Good point

And the scaremongering is just war propaganda. Over the next few months there going to be spreading all kinds of lies about Ahmadinejad and the Iranians to get public support for an invasion. They will even go as far as staging terror attacks to then be blamed on Iran. The reason they want to invade is simple, they don't control Iran, nor did they control Libya or Syria. And not to mention the fact that they (the Zionist crime network) are sick of Ahmadinejad exposing there agenda in the UN.

- Vince Delmonte

 

GRECOSALATA

5:12 PM ET

October 25, 2011

RE: Zorro and Jaydee

Yes we all now know that Iraq didnt have WMDs, but it was more than reasonable for people to think that they did in 2002/3. Do some research on the agent "curveball". And look up how Saddam Hussein played cat and mouse with UN Weapons Inspectors for 10 years from 1992-2002. Hussein wanted us to believe that he had the weapons and he sure convinced me.
Hence Iraq circa 2003 is to Nazi Germany circa 1937 and not Nazi Germany 1958. There was probable cause. Hussein fired Scuds at Israel, paid money to the families of Hamas suicide bombers (sponsorship of terrorism) and tried to assassinate George Bush Snr. So spare me the liberal line that he was our best friend and a great guy and we aribtrarily decided to invade a country because we are mean greedy Americans.

Zorro, you talk about people scaremongering but have you read any of the statements that the regime in Iran has made about wiping other countries off the face of the earth? Dont accuse people of scaremongering if they are repeating threats that others have actually made.

Jaydee Iran wasnt saber-rattling as much prior to 2003 as it is now so your point about wanting to keep a dictator with the above credentials in power to counter them is moot. As for your statement "The comments by many Iraqi that they want the US invaders out of their land". Do you realize that you are implying that you (whoever you are) are so reliable and credible that everyone reading this should trust that you can accurately summarize the feelings of the majority of Iraqis? In other words: please dont make things up because they sound correct to you or support your point.

Anyways both of you can keep opining and patting yourselves on the back for hindsight about WMDs and your mind-numbing insinuations that the world would be a wonderful place if it wasnt for America.

 

DIPLOMARK

9:36 PM ET

October 25, 2011

How long should we have stayed?

Honestly. How long should we have stayed? It's been a very long war. McCain thinks this is all one big victory for Iran too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/iraq-withdrawal-seen-as-victory-for-iran-says-sen-john-mccain-and-brookings-robert-kagan/2011/10/23/gIQAm1iuCM_blog.html

But what was the alternative? Permanent occupation is completely unacceptable and anyone in their right mind knows it.

 

DR. SARDONICUS

9:53 PM ET

October 25, 2011

Forget it!

Oooh! The big, bad Iranians are gonna take over everything!
A combination of senile clerics and neo brown shirt ex-veterans now a kleptocracy extraordinaire: the Iranians in power couldn’t govern their way out of paper bag. Look how popular they are at home, ruling at gunpoint. You think they’ll do a better job with despised Iraqis, than with their own despised citizens?

Stand down and give them enough rope to hang themselves. They can hardly do less damage to Iraq than our own gaga neocons did.

Otherwise, the pair of you will just write another bloody chapter of Mad Magazine Spy v. Spy in tried and true Cold War fashion. Career dirty-trick sociopaths on the loose with unlimited funding and no oversight.

 

JAMEX

10:16 PM ET

October 25, 2011

Peace

Finally it's over, be happy.

You want to "liberate" Iran badly don't you, dear Author.

Just please don't prop up another dictator in Iraq just to "liberate" the country from him in the near future, again.

Greetz from a neutral Country in Europe

 

LISAJANE64

11:46 PM ET

November 15, 2011

Welcome the Shady War

This article just demonstrates how clueless the author is. Thank you, FP for another condescending article that reeks of downright jingoism. Let’s step back and take a look the mess America/NATO made out of Iraq. Collateral damage, no? And now it’s time to designate another bogeyman and stage acts of terror to be blamed to Iran. The patterns are so obvious it hurts.

Much love,
Lisa O.

 

MOSES12

3:19 PM ET

November 23, 2011

What a Quagmire

Thankfully this is the beginning of the end of the Iraq saga and it comes not a year too soon. This has been going on and on and almost seemed like an interminable war, but thankfully it is closing to an end. The thing that I do not like at all about this war is what it has done to the good men and women who were fighting it. I knew a buddy who used to work at a good source of usedcars Austin TX and now he has to get 4 hours of physical therapy a day and is in the process of learning how to walk again. His poor family and he is not alone. There are thousands of other people who are faced with similar challenges.....war is not worth the cost and now look at all of the troubles at home....thank God this is coming to an end.