Posted on 08/22/2007 9:56:13 AM PDT by tcrlaf
Baghdad, 22 August (AKI) - The leader of Iraq's banned Baath party, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, has decided to join efforts by the Iraqi authorities to fight al-Qaeda, one of the party's former top officials, Abu Wisam al-Jashaami, told pan-Arab daily Al Hayat.
"AlDouri has decided to sever ties with al-Qaeda and sign up to the programme of the national resistance, which includes routing Islamist terrorists and opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government and foreign forces," al-Jashaami said.
Al-Douri has decided to deal directly with US forces in Iraq, according to al-Jashaami. He figures in the 55-card deck of "most wanted" officials from the former Iraqi regime issued by the US government.
In return, for cooperating in the fight against al-Qaeda, al-Douri has asked for guarantees over his men's safety and for an end to Iraqi army attacks on his militias.
Recent weeks have seen a first step in this direction, when Baathist fighters cooperated with Iraqi government forces in hunting down al-Qaeda operatives in the volatile Diyala province and in several districts of the capital, Baghadad.
Although the Baath party was officially banned after US-led forces in 2003 toppled the regime of Iraq's late president Saddam Hussein, its members have fought in the insurgency.
Until just a few months ago, former Baath party members were helping Islamists carry out terrorist attacks against US forces in Iraq.
DNC Daily Talking Points:
Iraq is a disaster.
We're losing in Iraq.
We can't win in Iraq.
The Surge can't work.
The Surge isn't working.
There's a civil war in Iraq.
The Surge isn't working that well.
The Surge is working but Iraq doesn't have a government.
Even if we win in Iraq we can't stay there forever!!!
Land shark!
Mental Health Clinics across America warned to prepare for an incoming surge of leftist Democrats with Exploding Head Syndrome!
Carolyn
I always that the so-called "de-Baathification" strategy was stupid.
If the Baathists make a deal with the ruling Shiite parties, Iraq will be well on the road to stability.
A LOT of the attacks on American troops were done by Baathists/Criminal gangs PAID by Iran, AQ and others.
They were for sale to whomever had the highest dollar.
Now that things are changing on the ground, they see which side they need to be on. They may be murderous thugs, but they aren’t stupid...
I seriously doubt Iran paid any Baathists. Do you have sources to support that contention?
That the Baathists cooperated in with AQ is certain, though, yes, and they attacked our guys numerous times.
Alliances change and shift constantly in that part of the world. Your enemey yesterday may be your ally today. That's the reality.
No one in Iraq can be trusted.
Alliances there aren't based on trust, but on mutual self interest.
No one who believes in the Koran can be trusted.
I'd say most Baathists don't really believe it. They pretend to for political purposes, like many Democrats pretend to believe the tenants of Christianity. They'll make alliances with Islamic extremists when it's convenient, and then turn around and brutally massacre them when it suits them.
The bottom line is that no entity or group in that part of the world can be trusted, regardless of their devotion to Islam.
Historically, however, few alliances in any part of the world were based on trust.
He finally realized that he cannot win against the US so he figured out to surrender in a “honorable” way by making peace with the Iraqi government.
“I always that the so-called “de-Baathification” strategy was stupid.”
The greatness of our country, and our military, is our ability to adapt. we thought that de-baathification would liberate the country, but uncovered a big sectarian split in the process.
The press has their panties in a bunch over the fact that some of the former sunni insurgents are now allies with us in getting Al Qaeda. Yet we never wanted to make enemies of any particular group, we simply want these groups to join the democratic process.
We dont have permanent enemies if they lay down their arms.
So this is positive, as it shows the unravelling of the insurgency.
“If the Baathists make a deal with the ruling Shiite parties, Iraq will be well on the road to stability.”
The main impediment to peace in Iraq is the fact that neither side has been so far willing to do so. The US is acting as honest broker between these factions. The baathists had previously thought by attacking the US the could regain power. But in the past year, the Iraqi Govt got strong enough, and shiite faction-based enough, for the Sunnis to see US as their ally not enemy in the brokering for power. All the Sunnis needed was proof that we could actually deliver on security ... and the ‘surge’ was the catalyst.
It makes sense to question the reliability of these tribes and militias coming in from the cold, but it also makes sense that they would do so. After seeing the US military close up, and Bush's implacable determination, they may just figure that the game is up. Better to stifle AlQaeda, establish an uneasy peace long enough for the Americans to (largely) go home, then see what differences need settling, without us OR Alqaeda in the mix.
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.