| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| US in talks with Iraqi insurgents |
| 2006-01-07 |
| American officials are talking with local Iraqi insurgent leaders to exploit a rift that has opened between homegrown insurgents and radical groups like Al Qaeda, and to draw the local leaders into the political process, according to a Western diplomat, an Iraqi political leader and an Iraqi insurgent leader. Clashes between Iraqi groups and Al Qaeda have broken out in several cities across the Sunni Triangle, including Taji, Yusefiya, Qaim and Ramadi, and they appear to have intensified in recent months, according to interviews with insurgents and with American and Iraqi officials. In an interview on Friday, a Western diplomat who supports the talks said that the Americans had opened face-to-face discussions with insurgents in the field, and that they were communicating with senior insurgent leaders through intermediaries. The diplomat said the goal was to take advantage of rifts in the insurgency, particularly between local groups, whose main goal is to expel American forces, and the more radical groups, like Al Qaeda, which have alienated many Iraqis by the mass killing of Iraqi civilians. The talks, which the diplomat said were taking place "inside and outside Iraq," began in the fall, around the time of the referendum on the new Iraqi constitution on Oct. 15. American officials had made contact with insurgent groups before, but the diplomat described the new engagement as much more significant. The effort comes as political leaders await the results of the Dec. 15 election, which will determine the shape of the next government. The diplomat said the talks were aimed at taking advantage of a new willingness to take part in politics among Sunni Arabs, who went to the polls in large numbers for the first time. Their full participation is seen as an essential step in quelling the insurgency, which is led mostly by radical Sunni Arabs. The diplomat said he did not harbor any illusions about securing the immediate surrender of the insurgent groups, or even a cease-fire. In the past two days alone, more than 180 Iraqis have been killed in suicide bombings. Few details of the talks were available. Tarik al-Hashimy, the leader of the Iraqi Islamic Party, who said he was in periodic contact with insurgent leaders and had asked them to hold their fire during the elections, said he did not think the talks had made much progress. One of the main sticking points, he said, was the demand by the insurgents for a timetable for withdrawal of American forces, which President Bush has repeatedly refused. But the Western diplomat said he hoped to begin to convince insurgent groups that the new government, which is expected to contain a number of Sunni leaders, was worthy of their support. "According to Islamic doctrine, as well as democratic principles, there cannot be a legitimate resistance against a legitimate government," the diplomat said. "If we could reach an understanding with each other, meaning the resistance, as they call it, and the coalition, then they will in turn take care of Zarqawi and the terrorists." The diplomat was referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which is believed to be responsible for most of the car and suicide bombings. The diplomat did not specify which groups the Americans were speaking to. But it seemed likely that they included groups like the Islamic Army in Iraq and Muhammad's Army, which are believed to comprise mainly Iraqi nationalists and former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. Their primary goal is to expel the Americans, a wish that is broadly held among Sunnis. The objectives of Al Qaeda are much broader, including using Iraq as the springboard to re-establishing the Islamic caliphate that once reigned over the Middle East. In interviews, Iraqi insurgents say there is widespread hatred for Al Qaeda among ordinary Iraqis. The insurgents blame Al Qaeda for the bloody car bombs and suicide attacks that have killed thousands of civilians. While Al Qaeda's rank and file includes mostly Iraqis, the leadership is believed to contain many foreigners. "We are Iraqis, and Al Qaeda came from outside our borders," said Abu Omar, the nom de guerre of a member of the Islamic Army in Abu Ghraib, west of Baghdad. "They defame the name of the noble resistance inside Iraq." While there was no way to verify that he was an insurgent, Abu Omar provided details of his role in operations against Americans. American and Iraqi officials regard the strife among the guerrillas as presenting an especially promising opportunity, in large part because of the large turnout of Sunni voters in the election. In many cities, insurgents cooperated with the election by largely holding their fire, while Al Qaeda warned of reprisals. In at least one city, Ramadi, insurgents provided security at some polling centers. "We are at the early stages of the process," the diplomat said. "Now, there are discussions with people who know or interact with and have influence over groups. There have been discussions with those who have been field commanders in the past and who consider themselves to still be commanders in the field." One challenge for the Americans is identifying guerrilla leaders. The Iraqi insurgency is made up of dozens of loosely connected groups. Abu Amin, an insurgent leader in Yusefiya and a former captain in the Iraqi Army, said the Americans were especially interested in securing the help against Al Qaeda. "Yes, we know with whom they meet," Abu Amin said of the Americans. He said the Americans asked many questions about Al Qaeda: "Do you have a relationship with Al Qaeda? Can you help us attack Al Qaeda? Can you uproot Al Qaeda from Iraq?" He said an early result of those talks came in December, when the Americans released Satam Quaood, a former associate of Mr. Hussein, as a "good-will gesture" to persuade the insurgents to cooperate. Mr. Quaood was released by the Americans, along with more than 20 other detainees, over the objections of the Shiite-led government. Mr. Amin said the release was warmly welcomed by some insurgent groups. But in an interview on Friday, the American ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, said the release of Mr. Quaood had nothing to do with insurgent claims. "We didn't have that in mind," he said. "But I've noticed in discussions we have had since, with some Baathist types, that they have said they regarded that as a positive gesture." In an interview in Jordan this week, Mr. Quaood said he was not aware that his release had been part of any deal with insurgents. But he said that on a trip to Anbar Province after his release, he was approached by people who identified themselves as insurgent leaders and who asked him to "please represent them during negotiations with Americans." He said the insurgent leaders had told him "they had been holding very secret meetings with Americans," he said. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #8 Though, in reference to my above, I must caution that rawing my conclusions requires a presumption that the Sunni political representation is able to act according to its self-interest...as has been said here on my beloved RB before, some groups never miss a chance to miss a chance |
| Posted by: mjh 2006-01-07 20:43 |
| #7 In contrast to Deacon Blues' view, I believe that the Sunnis' intransigence is a negotiating stance only. All groups/individuals act within their best self-interest...in my opinion, the Sunni's know they are at a disadvantage, they know that they would be much worse off on their own (e.g. no oil fields, no skills, no viable institutions of any kind), so they know that eventually will have to accede to their minority status. 1.) I take ANY commentator interviewed on NPR with a salt lick; 2.) the Arab world (particularly Sunni Iraqis) will bluster one thing publicly while planning otherwise; 3.) the Sunnis are starting to grasp the phrase "no better friend, no worse enemy". The insurgent negotiation with the US flies in contrast to the position stated in the NPR interview and appears, to me, the political equivalent of an infant holding on for dear life to his mother's blouse to avoid being put in the playpen with the older children. |
| Posted by: mjh 2006-01-07 20:34 |
| #6 Deacon, I agree. That guy made as much sense as Nancy Pelosi. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-01-07 17:56 |
| #5 "Few details of the talks were available." Apparently, the usual leakers are all in the NSA. |
| Posted by: doc 2006-01-07 17:48 |
| #4 The solution is partition: Kurdistan, an independent Shiite nation, and an independent Sunni nation. (Assuming the Turks don't go ballistic over the prospect of a greater Kurdistan.) |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2006-01-07 10:13 |
| #3 I personally don't believe there will be a viable Shiite/Sunni/Kurd Government in Iraq. Listening to NPR on Thursday a Sunni Leader ( I can't even begin to type his name) said Sunni's will not accept a minorty role in the Government. He said calling the Sunnis a Minority was an insult and would never be accepted. It had to be tried but the Sunnis will not try to make it work. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2006-01-07 08:30 |
| #2 What is driving this, is that the Kurds and Shiias want to bring it down on the Sunnis and the Americans are holding them back. IMO because of fear of headlines that read Sunni Massacre, ethnic cleansing , etc. These things will happen, its just a matter of how long it takes. I just don't buy (allusion deliberate) that getting the Sunnis to participate the political process will achieve any significant power for the Sunni through the ballot box. The reality is the Shiia and the Kurds have a demographic lock on the political process. And that means the Sunni have to accept their second class status one way or another. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-01-07 03:53 |
| #1 divide and conquer. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-01-07 02:40 |