Al Qaeda Losing Sunni Arab Support

The new constitution was approved by 78 percent of the ten million Iraqis who voted. It took nearly two weeks to count all the votes. Most of the 22 percent who rejected it were Sunni Arabs, who turned out in large numbers. The Sunni Arabs indicate that they will turn out in large numbers again in December for the parliamentary elections.

The Kurds and Shia Arabs agreed to allow further changes in the constitution once parliament is in session. The Sunni Arabs are most afraid of being cut off from the oil money (nearly all the oil is in areas controlled by Kurds and Shia Arabs, and the new constitution gives local authorities first dibs on oil revenue). In the past, the Sunni Arabs had kept most of the oil revenue for themselves, and they miss it. Also up for negotiation are how many Sunni Arabs will be punished for crimes committed during the three decades of Baath Party (a largely Sunni Arab organization run by Saddam Hussein) rule. Millions of Shia Arabs and Kurds want revenge for murders and other atrocities committed, by Sunni Arabs, against friends and family.

Meanwhile, some Sunni Arabs are determined to get back power the old fashioned way, with force and terror. To that end, Al Qaeda staged a spectacular attack on the Palestine hotel on October 25th. Three car bombs were used, plus gunmen on foot. The whole thing was caught on a network of security cameras. Two car bombs were used to blast a breach in the concrete security wall, then a bomb filled cement truck was to go through the breach, detonate next to the hotel, and create sufficient havoc for over a dozen gunmen to enter and take foreign journalists hostage, and thus create a major publicity event.

The attack failed. The cement truck got stuck in the rubble at the breach, and Iraqi, civilian and American security troops quickly responded to the attack. An American sniper shot the driver of the cement truck, which led to the suicide bomber detonating the explosives while the cement truck was stuck in the breach. Some twenty people were killed in the attack, mainly al Qaeda and civilians who just happened to be in the area. Al Qaeda later took credit for the elaborate attack, and tried to salvage something from it. But the attack was a spectacular failure, and only adds to al Qaedas image woes.

The terrorists are seen as an insensitive (all those dead Moslem civilians) and inept (all those failed attacks) bunch of fanatics (all those improbable plans for world domination.) Iraqi Sunni Arabs have been, in the last year, backing away in their support for al Qaeda. Part of it is practical, because al Qaeda is seen as a bunch of homicidal losers.

There are also nationalistic, political, religious and ideological reasons as well. Iraqi Sunni Arabs have a high opinion of themselves, being the best educated group in Iraq, and the decedents of those who founded one of the world's first civilizations. The al Qaeda crew are largely supported, and staffed, by wealthy Gulf Arabs, especially Saudi Arabians. The Saudis are seen, by the Iraqis, as newly rich nomads, a bunch of camel jockey bumpkins taken by an extreme form of Islam (Wahhabism) that even most Saudis don't much care for. Iraqi Sunni Arabs are also not really keen on being just another province in the al Qaeda world Islamic religious dictatorship. Islamic conservative Iraqi Sunni Arabs prefer to practice Islam their way, not the al Qaeda or Wahhab way.

Without their Sunni Arab support, the largely foreign al Qaeda operatives are more vulnerable, and more of them are getting picked up each month. There are still hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs who will support al Qaeda by either keeping silent (when the cops come looking for information), or providing shelter and information. But most Iraqis see al Qaeda for what they are, killers of anyone who gets in their way, with a plan most Iraqis do not want any part of.

"The high turnout in two elections and the clear approval of a new constitution in Iraq "should" be sending shock waves throughout the Middle East and particularly in the Muslim theocracies."

Well, I added quotes to the word "should" in your sentence. Yes, it "should" have that effect. But will it? Unfortunately, the answer hinges on naked military power, not the hearts and minds of people.

If the Iraqis cannot create an army by 11/2008 capable of maintaining order inside Iraq, that means the Republicans will have to go to the American people and ask, essentially, for another 4 years to try to solve this problem.

It makes some freepers angry to even hear this, but I simply do not believe that the American people will say "yes." I believe they will say "no." No means the election of a Democratic president, and in my opinion, the immediate withdrawal of all US troops by 6/2009.

If this happens, the MSM, the UN, the EU, and the Democrat Party, led by President Hillary, will all begin rewriting history to explain how the Iraqi people never wanted US forces in their country at all, at any time. The sitting Iraqi government will either be overthrown or essentially allow itself to be brought under the control of Iran.

The raw facts of military power on the ground will determine what will happen in Iraq, and what lessons will be drawn from Operation Freedom. Even if we fail, we have already disproved the notion that the people in Arab countries do not want to have freedom and not want to have democracy. We Republican conservatives can rest assured that this is true. However, even future Republican presidents will not be eager to get us into a situation similar to the one in Iraq.

If on the other hand, the Iraqis can create an army by 11/ 2008 that can maintain order inside Iraq, US troops will be able to retreat into a ring on the edge of Iraq---completely sealing off the border and protecting Iraq from invasion. US casualties would drop almost to zero in this situation. US air support would still be available to the Iraqi army.

In this situation, the Republicans can win the presidential election in 11/2008. Then indeed, all of the good things. we envision for Iraq can gradually unfold. As some in this site have pointed out, these changes will take time. However, realistically, these changes will not happen if the U. S. Army is pulled out of Iraq by 6/2009 as a result of the election of a Democratic president.

The references to the American Revolution are well taken, but the differences are worth noting as well. The American people began the revolution themselves and defeated the British (one of the greatest powers in the world, in many ways, the greatest power) in that struggle. That in itself is quite different from what happened in Iraq.

In addition, it is quite true that America went through a long process that could be compared to "childhood". However, for country to undergo such a process, it must be singularly blessed geographically. America has never had a local enemy that has posed a dire threat in the New World. This is quite an extraordinary set of circumstances. It is hardly duplicated anywhere in the world, and is quite far from the case of Iraq. There will be no grace period for Iraq, unless created by the Coalition armed forces.

In addition, some will argue (and have come close to arguing) that the improving political situation in Iraq will cause the insurgency to completely fizzle out, making the job of policing Iraq quite easy. I simply disagree with this view, though it is difficult for me to articulate why. The WOHL will stop at nothing to maintain the insurgency. Essentially, the optimistic views expressed on this site will be proved correct if the insurgency dies. In a very real sense, Iraq is a life or death struggle for the WOHL. for that very reason, the full powers of the WOHL, including that GRU and the FSB, will be expended to keep the insurgency alive. These people are not only ruthless, but highly skilled, and extremely devious.

Of course, I hope the optimistic views are right and I am wrong. But in my view, the insurgency will continue. Our only hope of victory, in my view, is if the Iraqi army can reach the point of being able to contain the insurgency themselves before our next election. Because this is true, however, the WOHL will expend every effort to derail the attempts to make an effective Iraqi army from the inside. These attempts could be defeated, of course, but it would require very competent counterintelligence work on the part of the US. I wonder if anyone in the US government is even seriously thinking about this problem. If not, needless to say, I did not believe that we can win.

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.