Posted on 09/03/2007 1:45:56 PM PDT by familyop
Inhabitants awake to a new dawn, with some hailing departure of ‘occupiers’ and others fearful of rival militias battling for control
Basra was a city divided yesterday after the withdrawal of British troops left some residents hailing the departure of “the occupiers” and others fearing for their safety if Iraqi security forces were unable to control rival militias.
The withdrawal was the top story on all the Iraqi television stations until it was superseded by President Bush’s arrival in Anbar province in the afternoon. Pictures showed Iraqi soldiers hoisting the black, white and red national flag above the palace complex, and Iraqi guards taking up positions outside.
The nocturnal withdrawal took residents by surprise. They awoke to find Iraqi troops and police flooding the dusty, rubbish-strewn streets and manning checkpoints in a determined effort to show that the Iraqi security forces could maintain order.
Major-General Mohan al-Firaji, commander of Iraqi security operations in Basra, set the tone with an early-morning press conference in which he declared: “We have control of the palace, and the Army has orders to allow no one inside until the Prime Minister decides what to do with it.” He announced the British departure hours before it was confirmed by the Ministry of Defence in London.
Abu Ahmad, 36, an aide to Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical antiAmerican Shia cleric, toldThe Times: “This victory happened with the help of Allah and all those who gave their lives to achieve this goal, the nightly attacks on the palace with mortars and shells, under Moqtada’s leadership.”
Nine members of The 4th Rifles battle group based in the palace have been killed and 40 wounded since May 21.
Some residents hailed the departure of the foreign troops who had occupied their city since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. “The withdrawal of British Forces was a success for the Mahdi Army and a victory for the people of Basra,” Zuher Abid Ali, 41, an engineer, said. “We’re happy to be rid of the British. They were harassing us in the streets and raided our houses and arrested our sons,” Sadoun Hami, an army officer, said.
Inhabitants who live close to the palace also rejoiced because there was no longer the danger of their homes being hit by stray shells and mortars. “I am very happy. Now I will be able to go back to my house,” said Sabah Lateef Muhasen, 36, a shopkeeper who had been forced to move his family elsewhere.
But some feared that without the British presence Basra’s militias - the al-Mahdi Army, the Badr Brigade and the Fadela - would run amok. The three have waged vicious campaigns of killing, kidnapping and extortion as they have battled for control of the city on the Shatt al-Arab waterway. The police force is infested with al-Mahdi Army militiamen, and it will be weeks before the Iraqi Army is up to strength in the city.
Kathum Jawad, 34, a doctor, said: “The British withdrawal with all the militias and corrupt police in Basra is very dangerous for the city. We should have more trust in the Iraqi security forces before the British left. I can’t feel safe any more and I think the militias will start looting and kidnapping and killing without any forces to stop them.”
A leading ally of Hojatoleslam al-Sadr claimed that militiamen loyal to the cleric drove the military from Basra. “The withdrawal is an historic victory for the Sadrists,” Nasar al-Ru-baie, leader of the Sadrist bloc in the Iraqi parliament, told The Times.
Mr Rubaie also insisted that security in the violent, militia-infested city would improve, not deteriorate, now the British had gone. “Everybody who was betting that the withdrawal of the occupying forces would mean a worse security situation will see the city’s security improve. The occupation was stimulating terrorism,” he argued.
The British Government has repeatedly denied that its troops have been “defeated”, and Gordon Brown rejected suggestions yesterday that they had retreated under fire. The withdrawal was a “preplanned and organised move,” he said. British troops would continue to train their Iraqi counterparts, and to “reintervene in certain circumstances”.
Last week Hojatoleslam al-Sadr ordered his army to suspend activities for six months, a move welcomed by British and American military leaders
Secret talks between Iraqi Sunni and Shia groups ended yesterday after they heard from Martin McGuinness and former loyalist prisoners about making peace in Northern Ireland (David Sharrock writes). The former chief of staff of the Provisional IRA, who is now Deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland’s power-sharing executive, was one of 30 participants at the four-day seminar in Finland.
Organisers declined to say whether the meeting helped to bring the two sides closer. But one source described the mood as “guardedly optimistic”.
Representatives of Moqtada al-Sadr, Adnan al-Dulaimi, the leader of the largest Sunni Arab political group, and Humam Hammoudi, the Shia chairman of the Iraqi parliament’s foreign affairs committee, are reported to have attended the seminar.
Yep.....now these folks will revert to what is natural for them, albeit sans saddam.
Exactly
This will be a huge test of the Iraqi Army...and the Iraqi people.
If they hold — it will be a heartening sign..
If they fail — it will be a sign of the future the middle east will be forced to live with..
Chaos — the inevitable and unavoidable consequences of Islam...
Their future is in their hands.....
Britain's decision is a wake-up call for Iraq
THE great strength that justified the US-led coalition campaign to remove dictator Saddam Hussein and help build democracy in Iraq was the fact it was always conceived as a liberation, not occupation. As such, military intervention came with the guarantee that foreign troops would one day leave and political decision-making and security enforcement would be left in the hands of an elected Iraqi government. The withdrawal of British troops from a former presidential palace compound in the southern Iraq city of Basra to a military base near the airport is a welcome first sign that this promise is coming closer to reality. There are, of course, many layers of politics at play in Britain's decision. For the UK, the decision reflects a desire by newly appointed Prime Minister Gordon Brown to differentiate his premiership from that of the recently retired Tony Blair. It is calculated to take some heat out of the Iraq issue in preparation for what could well be an early general election. For Washington, Britain's decision is something of a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it has the potential to send a worrying message to insurgent forces and any wavering coalition partners that America's major ally in Iraq has watered down its commitment. On the other hand, Britain's staged retreat sends a much-needed message to the Iraqi Government, led by Nouri al-Maliki, that local politicians must face the reality that foreign troops will not be in Iraq forever and they must step up to the plate. This is exactly the message that John Howard has been emphasising to Mr Maliki in recent correspondence. It will also test the political capacity of radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who has wide support in the region.
Britain's decision to negotiate with Sadr and begin to withdraw troops should not be seen as confirmation that it has abandoned support for the coalition objectives in Iraq. Basra is not Baghdad, and removing 500 troops from the city does not signal a unilateral withdrawal. Rather, it represents the first stage of a carefully managed soft transfer of authority to Iraqi forces. By pulling troops out at night, without the glare of publicity, Britain has sought to limit the opportunity for insurgent forces to briefly escalate the level of violence, providing an easy but superficial comparison with America's humiliating military retreat from Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War. The next phase in Britain's strategy in southern Iraq will be a formal handover of control of the city to Iraqi forces, which is expected to happen sometime in October. In the meantime, Britain will retain a 5500-strong troop presence at its military base near Basra airport from which it will be able quickly to provide military assistance to Iraqi forces if required. Britain will continue to train local troops and help Iraqi patrols secure the river border with Iran.
fantastic post man, cheers for that.
FYI see: #5 & #6
It’s from an aussie newspaper, The Australian, established by Rupert Murdoch.
Everything else I’ve read on the subject makes it appear as if the British have totally pulled out of Iraq. (And that’s exactly what the Left wants us to think. Just another form of Bush-bashing IMO.)
Thanks Fred!
ahh he of NewsCorp, Sky TV et al?
I’m just glad that someone has managed to find a decent account of the event. Pulling out of a city is only a failure if you had no intention of leaving it in the first place, which would mean that the reasoning behind the war and the subsequent occupation, were all lies.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22342096-28737,00.html
What was clear from yesterday’s 45-minute audience with Bush is that with 16 months left of his administration, this is not a President disengaging. If anything, the deadline to his tenure - January 2009 - appears to be energising Bush. While his domestic agenda is hamstrung by a Democratic-controlled Congress, as President and commander in chief Bush has wide powers to pursue foreign policy as he sees fit. It shows.
He’s making no apologies for the administration’s military response to the September 11 attacks and is urging Muslim countries in our region, for instance - Malaysia and Indonesia - not to view the US’s war on terror as an attack on Islam but “an attack for liberty”.
In one of the more compelling moments in yesterday’s interview with five Asia-Pacific regional journalists, including me, Bush singles out the two female reporters at the roundtable meeting, Tia Mutiasara of Indonesia’s Antara news service and Salmy Ghleblawi of Malaysia’s Bernama agency and, pointing to them, says: “Think about a society in which you two could not function in what you’re doing because of your gender. Why? Because the vision of these people - who murder the innocent, by the way, to achieve their vision - is that women aren’t equal. And it just so happened that, given the way the world is today, that that kind of ideologue provided safe haven for people who plotted and killed people in our country.
“One, I’m not going to stand for it. I’m going to protect America, just like any other leader would protect their own country. And two, one way to achieve long-term peace is to help people realise forms of government that give hope.
“And so whether it be in Afghanistan or Iraq, we’re helping people realise the blessings of freedom. And frankly the world ought to be in there helping. And they are, many are.”
“And so whether it be in Afghanistan or Iraq, we’re helping people realise the blessings of freedom.”
I despise religion for its preaching. The same then, must apply to GWB. And he cannot equate the invasion of iraq to American security. SH was placed in power precisely to ensure a barrier against Shia Iran. I dont suffer fools gladly.
Nice one for ‘coming out’ as it were, and confessing to your profession. Respect man.
I posted excerpts from two articles in the Australian Newspaper...established by Rupert Murdoch, and you interpret this as 'coming out' and 'confessing my profession'? Allow me to quote the man's motto: WE REPORT YOU DECIDE. The Australian Newspaper articles serve to illustrate the huge abyss between what we read and what the Left PREACHES to you, in the US!
Thanks!
Go for it, Fred.
It's great news that more people should see.
Use it all you want.
thanks....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1890793/posts
I did it again! This post might be of interest.
Re-read and understood.
“The Australian Newspaper articles serve to illustrate the huge abyss between what we read and what the Left PREACHES to you, in the US!”
No insult intended mate. BTW, I’m a Pom. Don’t know if you think this is better or worse!
Can we have our Ashes back please.....
Neither! But I don't like your new Prime Minister one bit...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.