| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Early Iraq Handover Signals Serious Loss of Ground |
| 2004-06-29 |
| DEBKAfile Special Analysis June 28th, 2004, 1:21 PM (GMT+02:00) A final cordial moment in Baghdad The US-led coalition administration of Iraq came to an end at a hasty, secretive ceremony in the most heavily protected corner of Baghdad Monday, June 28, 48 hours ahead of the scheduled June 30 date. US administrator Paul Bremer handed the document to interim president Ghazi al-Yawar, who was flanked by prime minister Iyad Allawi and justice minister Dr. Malik Dohan Al-Hassan. Not a single American or Middle East television station was allowed to broadcast the epic occasion live from coalition headquarters in the Green Zone. Only after the fact was it made known in Istanbul, as forty-four world leaders assembled for their annual NATO summit. President George W. Bush and UK premier Tony Blair met Monday afternoon to decide what would happen next in Iraq. The clandestine ceremony was followed pell-mell by two events: Bremer, ex-US administrator, flew out of Baghdad, and the sovereign prime minister in his first public statement pledged elections on schedule next January. The surprise move prompted a rush of explanations by various informed sources who presented it as: 1. An attempt to pre-empt the spectacular Iraqi guerrilla-al Qaeda terrorist strikes that intelligence experts judged were scheduled for June 30. It was hoped that the secretly-planned fait accompli of the transition would catch the enemy off-balance. 2. A demonstration to the assembled NATO leaders that Washington and London, in asking for alliance assistance for the Iraqi army, seriously meant what they said about handing power over to an indigenous regime in Baghdad. The formal act was supposed to finally win round any waverers. However, DEBKAfile political and military analysts believe these arguments which may sit well in the diplomatic arena are unlikely to stand the test of reality inside Iraq, where the precipitate handover looks less like a coolly reasoned move and more like a counsel of desperation, or even the loss of control by coalition leaders. Military and intelligence experts question the value of the powers handed over to the interim Iraqi government and its ability to establish stability and security when 80 percent of the new 260,000-strong Iraqi army are untrained or disloyal - many have been caught collaborating with Iraqi insurgents fighting US and coalition forces. In these circumstances, even if NATO leaders vote to aid the sovereign Iraq armed forces, their decision is unlikely to come to fruition for two main reasons: First, The European powers insist on training the troops outside Iraq. According to intelligence estimates, once tens of thousands of Iraqi security personnel reach Europe, most will go AWOL from their training facilities and claim the status of political refugees. The mass exodus will leave the newly empowered government in Baghdad worse off than before and even more dependent on American forces. Europe, for its part, will be landed with a new refugee problem. Second, Attempts to train Iraqi forces in Jordan last year have proved unsuccessful. As soon as they crossed the border, they were penetrated by undercover agents sent in by Iraqi guerrilla forces and returned home implanted with subversive cells. President Bush has little hope therefore of leaving Istanbul with a NATO pledge of substantial assistance to the sovereign Iraqi army in his pocket, an asset he had hoped to gain for his re-election campaign. Neither can the interim government in Baghdad count on much succor from NATO. Iraqâs interim foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari, in Istanbul for the NATO summit, explained the move in a nutshell. He said power was transferred ahead of time in view of âthe deteriorating security situation.â In other words, the Americans and British passed a hot potato to Baghdad before the brew heated up still further. Yet, despite all the evidence to the contrary, Western diplomats in Istanbul were still insisting that the change of date must have shocked and dismayed the insurgents into abandoning their planned terror spectaculars on or around the transition. According to our sources in Baghdad, their motivation for fighting the Americans and toppling the interim government remain as high as ever. After the capture of Saddam Hussein last December, it was also hoped that that the level of violence would decline; instead it has climbed, spread and become more sophisticated. In the view of DEBKAfileâs counter-terror experts, Iraqi guerrillas have in the last six months improved their tactical flexibility and ability to adapt to changing conditions, so that logistically they are capable of rescheduling their major terrorist drama to fit the new circumstances. The date is less important than the fact that the insurgents and al Qaeda retain the initiative for striking whenever they choose, regardless of the step taken by decision-makers in Istanbul. An important point to be considered now is this: in what light does the change of the sovereignty handover date present the US president in the Middle East and key nations like Pakistan and Afghanistan where the global war on terror is being fought? And what signals does it send to the Islamic terrorists? According to our sources around the region, it is seen as a loss of ground for US military and political positions in Iraq and the war on terror. Americaâs enemies will be encouraged to redouble their pressure on US troops and their coalition partners in the hope of putting them to flight. For the present, the ball is very much in the hands of the insurgent and Islamic groups holding five hostages under threat of death, including for the first time a US marine, Wassaf Ali Hassoun, one Pakistani driver and three Turkish civilians. US ex-administrator Bremer left the hornetsâ nest of sovereign Iraq behind him when he made haste to depart Baghdad on Monday. |
| Posted by:Mark Espinola |
| #14 Iraq will remain the focus for now in the WoT. This is the Guadalcanal of the ME. If Iraq is successful in forming some kind of working govt that expels or kills the Islamic terrorists, or at least makes them a minor player, then the terrorists have lost a major battle. So it is really up to Allawi to move rapidly and decisively in eliminating this threat to the life of his new nation. He also has Iran to deal with, who are stoking things up, too. We will have to use our assets in dealing with them. Saudi is the golden egg goose. Al Q is not destroying oil industry infrastructure---they know where their bread and butter comes from. If they succeed in shutting down Saudi oil production, who will get it going again after the "revolution"? I would really like to see an analysis of terrorist funding sources and percentages. That is going to drive our efforts in the WoT. I can't help thinking that the terrorists also want flexibility in financing for their continued survival. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-06-29 4:53:59 PM |
| #13 --three Turkish civilians.-- Not anymore. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-06-29 3:30:30 PM |
| #12 I don't suppose that anyone thought that maybe they were just going to avoid the obvious terror attack at the ceremonies? |
| Posted by: flash91 2004-06-29 1:38:00 PM |
| #11 My understanding is that the interim government is going to announce "special security measures" tomorrow. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-06-29 1:07:55 PM |
| #10 DEBKA is asserting the obvious here, that the situation is still very dangerous and that the enemy, being a terrorist force, has the ability to initiate attacks when/where they see fit. Frank G. makes the critical point looking foreward and it is the one that I believe will determine the success of the new government. If Allawi had the stones, he will declare martial law in Fallujah and other select hell holes. He will then send in combined US and Iraqi forces to crush the terrs, all the while exhorting his countrymen to support his efforts to build a free Iraq. The last point is key and is something that Bremer and the CPA did a miserable job of. Hopefully Allawi will have a better understanding of how to reach out to the Iraqi populace and get them to turn en masse against the terrs. Once the tipping point is reached, the terrs will be finished. To get to that point will require some hard pushing. I hope that they can get it done. |
| Posted by: remote man 2004-06-29 1:03:44 PM |
| #9 good question lucky. Zarq has a lot invested in Iraq, and despite the handover, theres a long way to go to get to security needed for elections. So i think zarq (assuming hes alive) stays and fights in Iraq for some time. If shifts fronts I assume it would be to Saudi. Note that Afghanistan and Pakistan continue to be important fronts as well. This will remain a fluid war (insert Rumsfeldian comment here) |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-06-29 12:31:36 PM |
| #8 So now what happens in the WoT. Does Iraq stay the front lines or does the front change. The idea that the new PM will move hard and fast on insurgency is very appealling. I hope he uses our F-15 wisely and decisively. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-06-29 12:23:50 PM |
| #7 I too think the hand over early was designed to keep the detractors off-balance and good for Bush/Blair for making it happen that way. I bet it took the wind out of a lot of talking heads, demonstrators, and malcontents that were looking to make a âpolitical statementâ both inside and outside Iraq. Now the reality is that there is a sovereign government in place most of the conspiracy theories that were being sold are debunked. I really think that the new PM needs to stomp out the bad guys in the Sunni triangle ASAP (the more brutal the better). Also a speedy trial/execution of the former leadership would bolster his standing amongst the people and remove a banner that all the nutballs are clinging onto. If these fail his government wonât last until the promised January elections. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-06-29 11:49:37 AM |
| #6 I have no idea of the validity of the Debka analysis (Grain of salt usually advised) but Jeez Zhang, Speaking on behalf of liberal arts majors everywhere, it has never been firmly established, to my satisfaction anyway, that BS is limited exclusively in the school of Liberal Arts. It may only seem that way to those who have difficulty interpreting large amounts of ambiguous information. Did some Liberal Arts bully steal your lunch money one day? |
| Posted by: Capsu78 2004-06-29 11:29:41 AM |
| #5 Debka is just spiked cause they can't get rid of the paleos.. |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-06-29 10:44:01 AM |
| #4 If I was a foreign terrorist in Fallujah, I'd sleep lightly. Allawi can whack em like we never could, sensitivities be damned. He knows that getting control of that rathole is job number 1 (same for Ramadi) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-06-29 10:36:05 AM |
| #3 Debka reminds me of the liberal arts students who tried to BS their way past technical questions back in college. Instead of looking at trends in American KIA, Debka looks at qualitative measures like handover mechanics. This Debka article reminds us that a lot of Israelis are Euro-style appeasers, except they're keep on getting jerked back into the real world by mass murdering Muslim Arabs. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-06-29 10:33:39 AM |
| #2 Now that sovereignty exists,how can a Iraqi claim "political refugee" status ? |
| Posted by: rich woods 2004-06-29 10:22:18 AM |
| #1 Nope, no slant here. sheesh. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2004-06-29 8:45:55 AM |