Posted on 03/28/2008 12:22:04 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
The fighting that has erupted in Basra should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the course of the war in Iraq. While the US has spent the last year increasing force size in western Iraq and more aggressively challenging militias in Baghdad, the British have become more passive in Basra and have significantly reduced their footprint to one-tenth of their original commitment. That has made them almost invisible in the south, and since the Iraqi Army did not have a large enough presence there either, the British reduction allowed competing Shi’ite militias to take control of the area.
Now that the Iraqi government has enough troops, they have tried to make their writ run in Basra — and as the Times of London notes, that highlights the failure of the British in that area:
British forces, who can probably cobble together an armoured battle group of a few hundred soldiers, may well be asked to intervene should the Iraqi offensive fail. If that happens, any hope of the withdrawal promised by Gordon Brown last year of another 1,500 British troops this spring will have to be shelved until Basra can be stabilised.
It may even be necessary to reinforce the British contingent with more combat troops, something that the Ministry of Defence can ill afford as it prepares for the fighting season in Afghanistan.
The only other option would be for Britain to admit finally that it has lost the fight in southern Iraq. That would mean an ignominious withdrawal and handing over control of Basra to the Americans, who grudgingly would have to take over responsibility for the south. As American officers and officials have privately made clear, much of today’s problems in Basra can be traced back to Britain’s failure to commit the forces necessary to control Basra and southern Iraq in general.
Whereas President Bush’s “surge” tactic of sending 30,000 reinforcements to central Iraq has succeeded in bringing down the level of violence in Baghdad and Anbar province, the Americans believe that the gradual withdrawal of British troops from the south has had the opposite effect, a point that Mr al-Maliki and his soldiers are discovering to their cost on the streets of Basra today.
The British took the wrong tack in the south, and the results have been plain for at least two years. Instead of remaining in control of Basra and keeping order until Iraq could build their new security forces, their reduced footprint created a vacuum for order that the militias were only too happy to fill. The Sadr Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades started seizing control of the streets in 2004, when the British reduced their forces to 8600 troops, and they have only strengthened their grip while the British retreated further. The Washington Post noted the problem last summer, as the surge began showing signs of ending the sectarian strife everywhere else.
The fighting in Basra now was inevitable at some point. Baghdad couldn’t allow a major city like Basra to operate outside its control forever. Instead of an orderly transition from Coalition to Iraqi security control, as is happening in the West, the Maliki government now has to take Basra by force — while the rump of British power sits in its bases, unable to contribute at all to security any longer. Whether Maliki decided to do this next week or next year, the fight in Basra had to happen at some point in order to apply the rule of law throughout Iraq.
That’s why this isn’t a collapse of the American surge, but a demonstration of the folly of premature withdrawal. The lack of fortitude on Iraq left a vacuum that created bigger problems and more serious fighting than tenacity did. Had we listened to the war’s critics in 2005 and 2006, gangsters would have swallowed the entirety of Iraq, and we would have a second Somalia in southwest Asia.
I hope your friend stays safe. Just to note that the ex-US Green Beret Michael Yon reported from Basra last year and had a very different experience to that of your friend:http://www.michaelyon-online.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=297:british-forces-at-war-as-witnessed-by-an-american&catid=63:archive-2007&Itemid=108
I have heard widely differing opinions on various allies in Iraq from literature and discussions with friends who have been to Iraq. I think the one constant is that these nations should be thanked for sending troops and facing dangers where so many others have not.
Which at the time imo was legitimate, although any feelings should have been kept quiet.
The British way in 2003-04 was the correct way for the British sector, but things change and perhaps we realised that too late.
Look, please lets not kid ourselves that either army, esp the US, is an introverted shrinking violet.US forces can be as bullish and cocky as anyone, so arrogance is hardly purely a British trait.
We are.
We are still pretty good at it, but you know what?.We are not perfect, we make mistakes, be it NI or Iraq. And we are doing a brilliant job in Afghanistan, again with not enough troops or equipment.
The main British problem in Iraq?. Not enough men and good material. And hamstrung by political consideration. If anyone has ‘lost’ Britain Basra, its Blair and Brown, Hoon and Browne, not the British squaddie or even the commanders on the ground in general.
We ran an empire and have been fighting terrorists since the days of the Fenian Raids into Canada, so we DO have a history and something to impart to other forces...
Again, right tactics at the time.
WHY do you hate the British so much?.
I would honestly and genuinely like to know.
Is it Irish Republican sympathy?.Or something else.
Yes, and it sums up their mistakes in a nice visual. While Americans were in full body armor, attacking the insurgents wherever they found them the Brits avoided confrontation and confined themselves to peaceful areas where there was little opposition. They still follow this tactic today and are down to a small area around the airport.
“Not enough men and good material.” Precisely. Compare the force levels needed to control Northern Ireland (a far smaller/less populated area than Southern Iraq). 4000-9000 troops to control an area of 4 million people was never going to be realistic. The US has had to pump huge resources and Iraqi forces into Cenrral Iraq to reduce violence there. In Anbar (an areas with abour 2 million inhabitants) 36000 US troops were deployed). Even so, the last few days have shown that Shiite areas under US control have exactly the same problems as those under British supervision.
I think that if Iraqi forces can tame the criminals in Basra (be it by tomorrow or in 2 weeks time) then a key corner will have been turned by Iraq. Uk forces haven’t cut and run. They are still in Iraq (and if the media is to be believed will remain their in similar numbers for a long time to come), capable of reintervention. Lets hope the Iraqis can do this on their own now (as they are similarly being tested in Mosul).
I have nothing bad to say about the brits. I would just say that in the last couple decades, something has overcome them. Socialist diminishment, perhaps. I don’t believe it’s the fault of the people, but the fault of the government they elected. I hope the pendulum is as far as it gets in that direction.
Socialism, lack of cultural pride, anti-religion, and lack of understanding and appreciation of their own remarkable history has weakened a once great nation.
It is happening to us, only on a smaller scale and a bit slower. England needs strong leadership, a strong leadership that can reignite a positive and forward thinking populace. They are not getting it, but what they are getting is a nanny state, PC silliness and lack of vision.
I very much admired Mrs. Thatcher, who saved England for a time. To this day, she is derided and disrespected in the media and in general. The English never appreciate people like her until they find themselves with their backs against the wall.
The difference between us and them is that our ace in the hole is the 2nd amendment, and American individualism. If we lose those things, we are not far behind.
I will be interesting to see what the British decide to do in this matter.
The UK and the US share an unbreakable bond forged through blood and years. It will survive this. I love the UK (spent a semester in Cambridge) and want a country I consider a brother country to succeed and prosper. Sometimes I sharpen a point too much. God Save The Queen!
True, but I bet you're not wearing your berets into battle this time.{8^D}
Sorry for the delay in replying. I appreciate your sentiments. I love the US and its people.
On a side note, I’ve read that the UK is now halting all troop reductions in Iraq until the end of the year at least and that over 150 British military advisors have moved back into Basra (I suspect British special forces have been in there all along).
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.