PDA

View Full Version : Battle For Basra: UK Made A 'Deal' With Sadr



Kathianne
08-07-2008, 01:03 PM
I've read many sites saying Britain acted badly with this. Until now, I've not caught it in the media. It was Britain's military that acted badly, but intelligence agencies and Defense departments. I remember at the beginning of the war, many Brits were saying the US needed to act more like 'them' in Basra. (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/030644.html) However as time went on, Basra became the problem:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article4461023.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1


From The Times
August 5, 2008
Secret deal kept British Army out of battle for Basra

A secret deal between Britain and the notorious al-Mahdi militia prevented British Forces from coming to the aid of their US and Iraqi allies for nearly a week during the battle for Basra this year, The Times has learnt.

Four thousand British troops – including elements of the SAS and an entire mechanised brigade – watched from the sidelines for six days because of an “accommodation” with the Iranian-backed group, according to American and Iraqi officers who took part in the assault.

US Marines and soldiers had to be rushed in to fill the void, fighting bitter street battles and facing mortar fire, rockets and roadside bombs with their Iraqi counterparts.

Hundreds of militiamen were killed or arrested in the fighting. About 60 Iraqis were killed or injured. One US Marine died and sevenwere wounded.
...

The deal, which aimed to encourage the Shia movement back into the political process and marginalise extremist factions, has dealt a huge blow to Britain’s reputation in Iraq.

Under its terms, no British soldier could enter Basra without the permission of Des Browne, the Defence Secretary. By the time he gave his approval, most of the fighting was over and the damage to Britain’s reputation had already been done....

Lieutenant-Colonel Chuck Western, a senior US Marine advising the Iraqi Army, told The Times: “I was not happy. Everybody just assumed that because this deal was cut nobody was going in. Cutting a deal with the bad guys is generally not a good idea.”

He emphasised, however, that he was not being critical of the British military, which he described as first-rate...

“You can accuse the Americans of many things, such as hamfistedness, but you can’t accuse them of not addressing a situation when it arises. While we had a strategy of evasion, the Americans just went in and addressed the problem.”

Another British official said that the deal was intended as an IRA-style reconciliation. “That is what we were trying to do but it did not work.” The official added that “accommodation” had become a dirty word...

Gaffer
08-07-2008, 05:59 PM
I read this a couple of days ago too. Seems the media didn't want to run with this. Another example of the failure of appeasement, which the media doesn't want to advertise.

Accommodating the Irish is one thing, accommodating fundamentalist muslims is a whole different game. It's criminal to have your military stand down while your allies are under attack. I hope some Brit heads roll for this. And not any Brit army guys, just their civilian handlers.

Kathianne
08-08-2008, 06:53 AM
I read this a couple of days ago too. Seems the media didn't want to run with this. Another example of the failure of appeasement, which the media doesn't want to advertise.

Accommodating the Irish is one thing, accommodating fundamentalist muslims is a whole different game. It's criminal to have your military stand down while your allies are under attack. I hope some Brit heads roll for this. And not any Brit army guys, just their civilian handlers.

Seemed pretty big story to me too, yet given the response I guess the media knows what people 'get' and 'don't.' ;)

Kathianne
08-08-2008, 07:53 PM
The writers from Iraq the Model (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/) are even more harsh:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/british-deal-with-al-sadr-betrayed-iraqi-people/



August 8, 2008 - by Omar and Mohammed Fadhil

Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers

The news about a secret deal between the British and anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr did not come as a surprise to us. Britain’s war policy has been clear for the past several years: the country demonstrated no readiness to make sustained efforts in a prolonged war, nor did it act as a serious partner determined to win the conflict.

There are three aspects in this British betrayal. First, striking a deal with the enemy; second, selling an Iraqi city to the enemy of their Iraqi hosts and partners; and third, by not informing their American partners of their plans, enabling the U.S. military’s reliance on an untrustworthy partner — something the British military leadership turned out to be.

What’s worse — even assuming the “accommodation” was a thoughtful plan with good intentions — is that Britain upheld the deal even when the militias violated it. The militias did not renounce violence (attacks continued), and they did not switch to civil political activity. Still, the British didn’t take action.

To be fair, Britain deserves credit for being a good team member during the good days in the beginning of the war. They sent in some 40,000 troops and were enthusiastic about contributing to the quick collapse of Saddam’s defenses.

They sent the largest number of troops after the U.S. and celebrated the initial victory, showing themselves as allies of the U.S. But it looks like Britain wanted to share only the good days, nothing more. Things changed fast soon after. In fact, over the last two years, Britain has adopted a policy in Iraq that is opposite in direction to that of the U.S.

On the one hand, the Americans and Iraqis summoned all the power and resources they could get, and deployed them in an effort to enforce the law and combat the bad guys under a fresh strategy and counterinsurgency doctrine that emphasized having troops as close to the community as possible. Meanwhile, the British were doing exactly the opposite by shrinking away from the fight and from the community...

Gaffer
08-08-2008, 08:31 PM
The writers from Iraq the Model (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/) are even more harsh:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/british-deal-with-al-sadr-betrayed-iraqi-people/

Those guys are very informative of what's going on in iraq. They usually have good inside information.