Posted on 04/09/2004 9:58:46 PM PDT by yonif
IRAQ'S Governing Council demanded an immediate ceasefire across the country and a halt to "collective punishment" today in a sign of a split between US-picked Iraqi leaders and American administrators over US military operations.
Abdel Karim Mahud al-Mahamadawi, a secular Shi'ite member of Iraq's interim Governing Council, met with radical Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose militia is battling US-led forces in the south.
He said he was suspending his membership in the Iraqi Governing Council until the "bleeding in all Iraq" ends.
Another member, Ghazi al-Yawer, threatened to quit the council over the Marines' bloody siege of the city of Fallujah, aimed at uprooting Sunni insurgents.
US forces have been fighting a two-front battle this week - against Sunni militants in Fallujah and al-Sadr's militia in the south - that has killed more than 460 Iraqis and 45 Americans.
Yesterday's halt in the Fallujah assault was requested by the council to allow for talks on reducing the violence, US coalition spokesman Dan Senor said.
But a top commander, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt insisted the talks "are not negotiations".
Al-Yawer, a Sunni council member, and the representative of another Sunni member met overnight with city leaders in talks at a Marine base outside Fallujah, council member Mahmoud Othman said.
Al-Yawer said that while he has not taken any formal steps, " will quit (the council) if the problem is not solved peacefully, because God will not bless a position of power that does not benefit its people".
"If negotiations fail because of the stubbornness of the American side or the failure to adhere to a cease-fire, I will quit 100 per cent," he told Al-Jazeera TV.
The council request for negotiations pointed to the eagerness of the Iraqi leaders to distance themselves from the assault, which has angered many Iraqis and become for some a symbol of resistance against the Americans.
In a statement issued in the early today, the council demanded "an immediate cease fire" and political solutions for the "situations around the country, particularly in Fallujah".
It also called for an end to the "military solution" and "collective punishment that falls on innocent civilians" - a reference to the Fallujah siege.
It denounced terrorism and noted that "no one is above the law" - a reference to activities by both Sunni and Shiite insurgents.
Shiite council member Abdul-Karim Mahoud al-Mohammedawi met overnight with al-Sadr, whom US commanders have vowed to capture.
"I will not go back to the council until we enter a constructive discussion about Iraq ... to achieve what the Iraqi people really want and to stop the bleeding in all Iraq," he told reporters outside al-Sadr's office in Najaf after the meeting.
"I call on everybody to use the voice of wisdom and avoid violence," he said.
One of the strongest pro-US voices on the council, Adnan Pachachi, denounced the US siege, launched after Sunni insurgents killed four US contract workers and a mob dragged their burned and mutilated bodies through the streets and hung two of them from a bridge.
"These (US) operations were a mass punishment for the people of Fallujah," Pachachi told Al-Arabiya TV.
"It was not right to punish all the people of Fallujah and we consider these operations by the Americans unacceptable and illegal."
Added al-Yawer: "We all agree that those who did that (killed the four Americans) were criminals who deserve to be arrested. But the result was the mass punishment of a city. ... And that we refuse."
Asked about the council members' criticism, Senor said US forces have "a responsibility to address a situation that is hostile".
He said the coalition cannot "just turn our heads and look the other way" when Americans are killed in Fallujah.
"It was not right to punish all the people of Fallujah and we consider these operations by the Americans unacceptable and illegal."
Hmmm... I guess we could leave and see how well these guys do without us, or even how long they stay alive. The main trend I see with these Iraqi council and security forces is to sit on the fence and express sympathy for the mob.
They want to play it safe and pick up the pieces later. The problem is that they appear so weak that there is no chance they will be taken seriously, let alone obeyed, when the transfer of power takes place.
It isn't like Vietnam yet, but there are alarming similarites. A group of opportunists backed by US force of arms and incapable of effective action against a commited opponent on their own initiative.
If they want power, influence and peace there, they will have fight for it.
Just as the coalition is on the verge of ending the insurgency in Ramadi and Fallujah.
Yes, as a matter of fact, Fallujah IS a threat to Rome. And to the United States.
In the twisted minds of certain people, weakness is an invitation to further attack. For instance, our weakness in Mogadishu invited further attack. Our weakness when the Cole was attacked invited further attack. etc.
Failure to respond to the deliberate provocation in Fallujah would have invited further attack. Some of us understand that.
Remember, this is a DESERT climate.
How can the irradiated survivors drink irradiated water?
makes me think they are either being quoted out of context or they aren't really interesting in a peaceful democracy
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.