by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 7, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

romising to “transform the Middle East,” President George W. Bush won't back down from a growing revolt, insisting that “democracy” is the highest aspiration of the Iraqi people. When U.S. troops landed at Umm Qassar in early April 2003 they were supposed to be greeted by flag-waiving Shiites, the majority population under Saddam's brutal grip. Instead of throwing rose-petals, troops endured Kalashnakovs, rocket-propelled grenades and roadside bombs. Democratizing Iraq now replaces Bush's original mission of eliminating Saddam's alleged arsenal of deadly weapons. With Iraq's sovereignty scheduled for June 30, the White House doesn't have much time to contatin a growing Shiite insurgency, led by the 30-year-old radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the militant rebel loyal to the Iraq's grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a servant to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

      When four Blackwater Security contractors were torched and strung up over the weekend by al-Sadr's Shiite militia, U.S. Civilian Administrator L. Paul Bremer III promised revenge, admitting things weren't under control. Over past 72-hours, at least 35 coalition troops and 200 Iraqis died in escalating violence spreading across Iraq. Calling al-Sadr's militants “minority extremist elements,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan put the best face on a bad situation, implying that a growing rebellion represented a small slice of Iraq's population. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani called the violence unfortunate, stopping short of demanding al-Sadr end his offensive. Spelling trouble ahead, Iraq's Sunni community—including Bin Laden's mujhahedeen, foreign “holy warriors”—have joined al-Sadr's jihad against American occupation, throwing the White House for a loop.

      With escalating violence only three months away from handing sovereignty to Iraqis, the White House faces tough choices, especially augmenting troops. Former U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Dr. Hans Blix sees Iraq deteriorating into civil war. “The country is on the verge of civil war today. The majority of Iraqis are certainly happy to be rid of Saddam Hussein, but they are against the American occupation, which is resented as humiliation,” Blix told the Le Parisian Daily, disputing White House claims that today's anarchy is merely isolated pockets of resistance. Before the U.S. commits more troops, it should ascertain whether the vast majority of Iraqis want Bush's plan for democratization. Imposing democracy is not only incompatible with Iraq but hurts the overall U.S. strategic plan by handing sovereignty to a hostile Shiite majority loyal to Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei.

      Moqtada al-Sadr's rise to power signals growing resistance to U.S. plans for representative government in Iraq. Suppressed by Saddam for 25 years, the Sunni minority stands to lose political clout in country dominated by Shiites, seeking supremacy after years of Sunni Rule. Joining forces with foreign terrorists and former Baathists—Saddam's ruling party—al Sadr's Mehdi militia gained increased strength, not, as the White House insists, as an isolated uprising but as a nationalistic movement to expel American occupation. U.S. plans to hand over sovereignty not only fly in the face of today's anarchy but invite Shiites to seize power, paving the way for another radical Islamic theocracy hostile to the U.S. With Iran busy developing nuclear bombs, the U.S. can't afford to allow Iraq to join forces with Tehran. While the U.S. military thinks it can neutralize al-Sadr, it can't stop a growing nationalistic movement.

      Winning the hearts-and-minds of rank-and-file Iraqis requires more than setting down rebellions or suppressing resistance. Blowing up mosques and killing civilians won't convince Iraqis that Bush's plans match their own aspirations. “The president is very proud of our troops. He know our troops will prevail against this violent power play by a relatively small number of extremist elements in Iraq,” said McClellan, pretending that opposition stems only from only fringe groups. Supporting leaders like Ahmed Chalabi, the exact same person who fed the Pentagon hogwash about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and whose bogus intelligence “misled” Secretary of State Colin L. Powell when he pressed the U.S. case for war to the U.N. Security Council, invites revolt. Installing dubious figures like Chalabi on the Governing Council breed rebellion both inside and outside Iraq.

      Violence and chaos across Iraq marks a dangerous turning point, nearly one year after Bush declared an end to combat operations. Recent developments, especially the rise of Moqtadar al-Sadr, indicate that a growing convergence of factions oppose U.S. involvement in Iraq. Killing or capturing al-Sadr won't arrest the Islamic movement against U.S. occupation. No matter how many minor military victories, it's difficult stopping a nationalistic movement committed to defeating foreign occupation. When Sunnis, Shiites and Bin Laden's mujahedeen join hands to defeat a common enemy, it spells trouble for U.S. plans. No transition government can work without a broad consensus, including a binding commitment to make democracy work. Without winning the hearts-and-minds of ordinary Iraqis, no military can stop a rebellion and create a stable government.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.