Intelligence

Islamic Army and Sunni alliances in Iraq

New US ‘allies’ in hostages threat - Times Online

Ali Rifat and Sarah Baxter “JUST walk down the street. Don’t turn back or look around,” said a huge man who was talking on a mobile phone as he approached. He neither paused nor turned his head, but carried on walking.

Two cars cruised slowly down the road. Fifteen minutes later, the same man
reappeared. “Turn left,” he said. Soon afterwards an Audi A6 with tinted
windows drew up. In the car was an elegant man in his thirties wearing an
Italian suit. “We are very sorry for these complications, but we have to
follow security procedures,” he said.

Arranging an appointment with Ibrahim al-Shammari, a representative of the
Islamic Army, a leading Sunni insurgent group, had been fraught with
tension, even though the meeting was in an Arab capital far from Baghdad.
What began as a proposed rendezvous at a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant
turned into a James Bond adventure.

The journey took a further hour and a half in two cars. Every now and then,
new directions would be issued by phone. At last the car stopped outside a
villa. A side door opened and a tall, lithe man with a light grey beard
appeared. It was Shammari.

The Islamic Army is one of Iraq’s best known resistance groups, made up
largely of former members of Saddam Hussein’s army and security forces. In a
turnaround that heartened proponents of the US troop surge, it has lately
been firing its weapons at Al-Qaeda in Iraq instead of American soldiers.
The US military has been discreetly putting out feelers to the Islamic Army
in the hope of winning it over permanently.

But Shammari had an uncompromising message for the Americans. The Islamic Army
and other armed factions would agree to talks only if they accepted that the
“Islamic resistance” was the legitimate representative of the Iraqi people
and agreed to set a clear timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

The government of Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, was finished, he
boasted. “The final countdown has started. It has lost the support of Iraqis
and the American people.”

It was hard to disagree when Senator Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the
Democratic presidential nomination, had just joined a chorus of US
politicians demanding Maliki’s removal. She said she hoped the Iraqi
parliament would replace him with a “less divisive and more unifying figure”.

Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador in Baghdad, told Time magazine, “the fall of
the Maliki government, when it happens, might be a good thing”.

Yet many opponents of the US troop build-up, including Clinton, are coming
round to the view that the surge is partially working – at least to the west
of Baghdad in Anbar province, where Sunni tribesmen have been aiding Iraqi
security forces and the Americans.

According to Shammari, however, the gains in Anbar will be shortlived. He said
the Islamic Army had signed a ceasefire with Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The country
was to be carved into spheres of influence where the Islamic Army and
Al-Qaeda in Iraq could operate independently of each other. It would
represent an enormous setback for the surge.

Shammari admitted Al-Qaeda in Iraq was unpopular. “Local people consider them
enemy number one. They tyrannised people and killed and assaulted tribal
leaders. They lost their bases and supporters and provoked the clans into
rising up against them,” he said.

But the Islamic Army resents the way the Americans have tried to turn the
infighting in Anbar to their advantage. “We’ve had big problems with
Al-Qaeda ever since they began targeting and killing our men,” he said.
“Eventually we had to fight back, but we found American troops were
exploiting the situation by spreading rumours that exacerbated the conflict.”

The Islamic Army has also noted President George Bush’s comments about the
success of the surge. “Bush foolishly announced to the world that all the
Sunnis in Iraq were fighting Al-Qaeda so he could claim to have achieved a
great victory,” Shammari said. “It’s nonsense.”

The Islamic Army is considering resuming the kidnapping of foreigners as a
sign of renewed militancy, Shammari said. In the past, it was responsible
for murdering Enzo Baldoni, an Italian journalist, and a number of foreign
workers. It also kidnapped two French journalists who were later released.

“Every foreigner in Iraq is a potential target for us no matter what his
nationality or religion,” Shammari said. “If he is proven to be a spy, he
will be punished and an Islamic court will determine his fate.”

The purpose of taking hostages would not be to kill them, he added. “We want
western governments to listen to the Iraqi people and stop supporting the
occupation by sending their citizens to Iraq.”

The Islamic Army’s defiance sharpens the dilemma for American forces. Could
progress in Anbar quickly unravel? If the US draws down its forces, will the
Sunnis take the fight, not to Al-Qaeda, but to the Shi’ite government in
Baghdad? And if so, will the US military have helped to build up a brutal
sectarian force?

In Baghdad, Colonel Rick Welch, head of reconciliation for the US military
command, told The Washington Post earlier this month that Sunni groups had
recently provided 5,000 fighters for policing efforts in the capital.

But he admitted that Maliki’s government was “worried that the Sunni tribes
may be using mechanisms to build their strength and power and eventually to
challenge this government. This is a risk for us all”.

The National Intelligence Estimate, drawn up by US intelligence agencies and
published last week, spelt out similar dangers. “Sunni Arab resistance to
Al-Qaeda in Iraq has expanded in the last six to nine months but has not yet
translated into broad Sunni Arab support for the Iraqi government or
widespread willingness to work with the Shia,” it noted.

Back in the villa, Shammari said Maliki’s government would soon be gone. “The
daily contradictions in the statements by American leaders about Iraq prove
that the Iraqi resistance is going in the right direction.”

He added: “The next president should take prompt action to withdraw all US
troops from Iraq.” And Gordon Brown should follow suit, he said, though he
could hardly fail to be aware that plans for British withdrawal in the
coming months are already advanced.

“The new prime minister should save Britain from the humiliating stupidity of
Tony Blair and Bush and start withdrawing troops from Iraq now,” he said.

August 26, 2007 at 11:22 AM in Iraq | Permalink | Top of page | Blog Home