The Al Fallujah Cease-Fire and the Three-Way Game

THE STRATFOR WEEKLY ^ | 22 April 2004 | Stratfor

[AdmSmith]

I hope that they are right.

[squidly]

Good write-up, thanks for posting.

[I got the rope]

Who wrote this...Dick Morris?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

A very interesting article.

[I got the rope]

I disagree with this article. It sounds as if we are in a position of weakness and we are trying to have discussions and negotiate terms. This is not true. The terms are being dictated by the Marines. Give up your weapons....turn Sadr over so that he can be arrested for the murder of a Cleric. Our Marines are also demanding that the people responsible for the killing of four American contractors be turned over.

They are following the lessons of Sun Tzu:

"The rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided."

"the skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field."

[McGavin999]

LOL, that's what I was thinking too.

[Chief_Joe]

The United States conceded that it could not unilaterally impose its will on Al Fallujah... military reasons...

[olde north church]

A substantial portion of current problems could have been avoided in one step on 1 MAY 2003. The establishment of the the Autonomous Kurdish Republic (AKR) could have been created with minimal coaltion oversight. Gen. Jay Garner, a man of much good will in the area would have made an excellent military governor. The Kurds had 10 years of near autonomy prior to the invasion, they could have been recognized by Coalition states with Assistant Diplomats or Attaches.
Turkey gave up all rights and considerations when they refused American passage through to Iraq. There is also enough buffer territory between Turkey and an autonomous Kurdish state.
The AKR could have standing in an Iraqi government in a later formed government. This would have allowed Coalition troops to focus on the Sunni areas based upon Shia recognition of getting your act together and having near self rule.
Maybe it's somewhat simplistic but think back to that point in time and think about it.

[telebob]

Last week Stratfor was in full quagmire mode beating the drum that defeat was imminent. The US had no plan, had a tiger by the tail and a full scale revolt was close at hand.

Suddenly the situation has spun a 180 and we are in full command militarily, diplomatically and politically.

Wonder what's up for next week...

[Arkinsaw]

STRATFOR is probably the best of these. Sometimes they do have some pretty insightful analysis and I think this is one of those occasions. Last week things looked pretty grim, but the US leadership on the ground played a heck of a game.

Last week I was quite irritated at the cease fire. But as time goes by I see that it was in fact a fairly masterful strategic move. We have basically used the potential power of the Marines to impose our will on the enemy without a nasty door to door fight. It is far better to make the enemy do your bidding by maneuver if you can. The Marines seem to have, for the moment, accomplished major goals with much less risk to our fighting men than might have otherwise been the case.

[clee1]

Wonder what's up for next week...

Oh, they'll be back to sedition-as-usual, I expect.

[Chief_Joe]

This is a good article but overly cute. It still boxes everything within the confines of "Iraq" with the three major "players" vying for control being the Sunnis, the Shia (led by Ali al-Sistani in the north and Muqtada al-Sadr in the south), and the Americans; but this view is only a fractional truth -less than half.  The regional supporters of both of these other groups can not be left out of the equation, and we must not forget they (regional supporters + Sunnis + Shia + Al Queda + ...) have really declared war on us and have long term interest in our demise.

[rob777]

"The terms are being dictated by the Marines. Give up your weapons....turn Sadr over so that he can be arrested for the murder of a Cleric. Our Marines are also demanding that the people responsible for the killing of four American contractors be turned over."



I think that you have things a little confused. The above comments refer to the conflict with the radical Shia group holed up in An Najaf. The article is referring to the conflict with Sunni guerrillas in Al Fallujah

[I got the rope]

The Marines are in both places...it's a three way game! ;^)

[FreedomPoster]

I don't see how these guys can generate an analysis like this, and totally ignore the fact that with the Kurds, it's pretty obviously a 4-way game. Yes, the Kurds may be quiet right now, but that doesn't change the fact that they're very much in the game.

I really wonder when we're going to see trained local defense forces, made up of Kurds, used in other parts of the country. I have a sense that is coming.

[bullseye1911]

Casualties among U.S. troops would have been high, and the forces doing the fighting would have been exhausted. At a time of substantial troop shortages, the level of effort needed to pacify Al Fallujah would have represented a substantial burden. The guerrillas had posed a politico-military problem that could not readily be solved unilaterally.

MY SOLUTION...