Al-Qaida Alive in Iraq

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 23, 2010
All Rights Reserved.                                

                Al-Qaida in Iraq answered the call Friday, killing at least 69 mostly Shiites in Baghdad, retaliation for the April 19 deaths of its local leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi.  “The attack was carried out with ground forces which surrounded the house and also through the use of missiles,” said Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, giving credit to his forces working in concert with the U.S. military.  Following targeted assassinations, al-Qaida typically responds forcefully, a rude reminder that enemy still lurks.  Targeting soft targets around mosques typifies al-Qaida’s modus operandi around Baghdad, trying to foment civil war with Iraq’s warring Shiite and Sunni communities.  Detonating three bombs in impoverished Sadr City, al-Qaida killed at least 39 Shiite loyalists to radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, currently living incognito, exiled in Tehran 

            Bombing Shiite mosques heightens ethnic strife already at the breaking point in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s Baghdad April 9, 2003, only three weeks after Cruise Missiles lit up Baghdad skies March 20, 2003.  “Targeting prayers in areas with a certain majority,” Baghdad security spokesman Maj. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi said, referring to Iraq’s Shiite majority.  Baghdad’s bloodshed “is a revenge for the losses suffered by al-Qaida with the April 19 deaths of Iraq’s al-Qaida top leaders.  For the last few years, al-Qaida has shifted operations to Afghanistan to respond the current U.S. buildup.  Al-Qaida in Iraq is well-aware of the U.S. exit strategy preparing a methodical withdrawal in 2011.  Targeting Shiites helps drive a wedge between Shiites and Sunnis, promote civil war and make peace difficult for the foreseeable future, precisely al-Qaida’s short-term goal.

            Since President Barack Obama’s inauguration Jan. 20, 2009, the U.S. has shifted attention away from Iraq to Afghanistan.  Barack added 20,000 more troops to Afghanistan in March 2009, adding an additional 30,000 in Dec. ’09, directing U.S. priorities away from what former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney called “the central front in the war on terror,” namely, Iraq.  While Barack made good on a campaign promise, U.S. operations in Afghanistan are no more committed to getting Saudi-born terrorist Osama bin Laden or former Taliban chief Mullah Mohammed Omar than Bush’s futile chase for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  Today’s mission in Afghanistan bears no similarities to Operation Enduring Freedom begun Oct. 7, 2991, less than a month after Sept. 11.  Obama’s pursuit of the Taliban in Afghanistan is no different than Bush’s goose chase in Iraq.

            As the death toll for allied forces mount in Afghanistan, Obama must take a serious look at the current U.S. mission of chasing the Taliban out of its strongholds in Kandahar and Helmand province in Southwestern Afghanistan.  Like the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq, chasing out the Taliban results in militants going underground, imbedding themselves in the civilian population.  Chasing down the Taliban doesn’t assure that the current Afghan government of Hamid Karzai rules by popular consent.  When Afghan went to the polls Aug. 20, 2009, they had no idea that Karzai rigged the election, beating his rival, Foreign Minister Dr. Abdullah Abdullah.  While Karzai is preferable to Mullah Mohammed Omar, his brother Ahmed Wali Karzai has close ties to the opium trade.  Wasting more U.S. tax dollars and letting more U.S. forces die for a corrupt government makes no sense.

            More terrorism or ethnic strife in Afghanistan or Iraq is no reason to delay a U.S. exit strategy, currently slated for sometime next year.  As seen in Iraq, there’s now way to purge the country of terrorists, something the Iraqi or Afghan governments must face on their own.  U.S. counterinsurgency operations are no match for indigenous groups capable to receding into the civilian population.  In Afghanistan, Karazi’s Pashtun ethnicity hailing from Kandahar closely matches the Taliban, a more fanatical religious strain but virtually the same ethnicity.   Iraq’s current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki shares the same Shiite tradition as radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, despite allegiances to the United States.   Al-Maliki and al-Sadr’s ties to Tehran should, like Karzai’s ties to the Taliban, give reason for pause.  U.S. officials simply can’t trust either Karzai or al-Maliki with U.S. intelligence.

            Today’s bombings in Iraq remind the White House that a fragile peace keeps Baghdad out of harm’s way.  Al-Qaida in Iraq still has close ties with Sunnis in al-Anabar province, from which most Sunni violence starts.  Former Baathists and Saddam loyalists seek to destabilize the Shiite government, keeping Baghdad in chaos.  No matter what the U.S. military does to reinforce security, they can’t stop a determined insurgency designed to kill Americans and Sunni sympathizers.  Like the political situation in Iraq, Afghanistan must develop their own ways to deal with ethnic strife.  Keeping corrupt puppets that rig elections in Afghanistan or have close ties to the Ayatollah in Iran, doesn’t put either country on the path to stability.  Obama should graciously bow out of both spots at the earliest possible time.  Prolonging either mission continues to harm U.S. national security.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.