Basra fears a security disaster if British leave the field to militias

[Barrett808]

Basra fears a security disaster if British leave the field to militias
From James Hider and Tom Baldwin in Washington

EVER since they arrived in southern Iraq, and six Royal Military policemen were killed by an armed mob of tribesmen, British forces have faced at best a mixed reaction from the Shia population.
As General Sir Richard Dannatt’s words were reported around the world, opinion in Washington and also in Basra was divided over whether a British pullout would make matters better or worse.

In 2003 many of Basra’s merchants had been happy that British troops were bringing a semblance of order to the postwar chaos. But the lack of postwar reconstruction progress soon stoked anger among unemployed Shia youths. That anger has been skilfully exploited by hardline Shia militias with Iranian backing.

The infiltration by the religious militias has put the British forces in a difficult position: with fewer than 8,000 troops in the south, plus a contingent of soon-to-depart Italians and Danes, the Army does not have the manpower to go after the armed groups and risk a full-scale Shia rebellion. Such an uprising could dwarf the insurgency that the Americans are struggling to contain within the Sunni minority to the north.

The Army was forced to turn a blind eye as the militias slowly took over the city, killing their opponents and anyone who did not conform to strict Islamic codes — women without head scarves, including Basra’s many Christians, and musicians and alcohol sellers. Most Sunnis have been forced out of the city. Academics have fled to Syria.

(more)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2403727,00.html

[LynnTheDem]

1. Basra before bush was a vibrant, lively place.

Very liberal, where women could walk freely and safely all hours of the day or night.

Not now. Not after bush.

[TheBaldyMan]

2. this is at odds with what the local Iraqi commander said in an

interview on the BBC tonight, in his opinion the presence and participation of British troops makes the Iraqi security services' job harder.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Strange that a story for a British paper about British troops in Basra

is written in Washington. It makes me think the story received its talking points from the American government. The Iraqi commander's view carries a lot more weight.

[fedsron2us]

4. Strange indeed

and surely not unconnected to the statement by Sir General Sir Richard Dannatt suggesting that the British government should be putting in place plans to withdraw its forces from Iraq. Murdoch has clearly instructed his lackeys at the Times to carry out some damage limitation on behalf of the Neocon war party. It is interesting how the right wing press in Britain is splitting on this issue. The Daily Mail which is not renowned for its touchy feely attitudes, has become stridently antiwar. They have been using Dannat's speech to castigate the governments foreign policy. Obviously, they loathe Blair but they have also been poring plenty of vitriol on the Bush administration in Washington as well. It is sad that the Times has sunk to the position where it is little more than Pravda to Bush and Blair's Politburo. Once it was a great newspaper.

[TheBaldyMan]

5. If you have time try and catch Newsnight's report online

it should be availiable until Monday Evening. Mark Urban's report from Basra was due for transmission by chance, the timing of Gen. Dannatts' comments in the Mail was providential.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/default.stm">Newsnight homepage check out the latest programme with the BBC media player. Explosive stuff - a senior Iraqi officer parachuted in from Baghdad to stabilize the region saying that the presence & participation of UK troops make violence more likely, also an admission that the UK will be maintaining at least a brigade sized force for political reasons, at least until the Americans finally withdraw.