Is teh Surge losing its Magick?

McClatchy’s Washington Bureau (formerly Knight-Ridder, which printed Cassandra-esque articles questioning the WMD lies pushed by the Bush Administration prior to the war) has an article calling into question whether the diminution in violence which has accompanied increased deployment of US troops is sustainable in the absence of significant progress in solving political rifts destabilizing Iraq:

Is ’success’ of U.S. surge in Iraq about to unravel?

BAGHDAD — A cease-fire critical to the improved security situation in Iraq appeared to unravel Monday when a militia loyal to radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al Sadr began shutting down neighborhoods in west Baghdad and issuing demands of the central government.

Simultaneously, in the strategic southern port city of Basra, where Sadr’s Mahdi militia is in control, the Iraqi government launched a crackdown in the face of warnings by Sadr’s followers that they’ll fight government forces if any Sadrists are detained. By 1 a.m. Arab satellite news channels reported clashes between the Mahdi Army and police in Basra.

The freeze on offensive activity by Sadr’s Mahdi Army has been a major factor behind the recent drop in violence in Iraq, and there were fears that the confrontation that’s erupted in Baghdad and Basra could end the lull in attacks, assassinations, kidnappings and bombings.

~~~

On Sunday, a barrage of at least 17 rockets hit the heavily fortified Green Zone and surrounding neighborhoods, where both the U.S. and Iraqi government headquarters are housed, according to police. Most of them were launched from the outskirts of Sadr City and Bayaa, both Mahdi Army-controlled neighborhoods.

On Monday, the Sadrists all but shut down the neighborhoods they control on the west bank of Baghdad. Gunmen went to stores and ordered them to close as militiamen stood in the streets. Mosques used their loudspeakers to urge people to come forward and join the protest.

Fliers were distributed with the Sadrists’ three demands of the Iraqi government: to release detainees, stop targeting Sadrist members and apologize to the families and the tribal sheiks of the men.

The re-entry of the Mahdi Army into the civil conflict in Iraq would rapidly ratchet up the violence. Some of the worst months, in terms of U.S. losses in Iraq, occurred when our forces battled Sadr’s militias.

Thus far the Surge, which was supposed to enable Iraqi political reconciliation and permit the redeployment of US forces out of Iraq, has resulted in an at least temporary dampening of violence, but has not enabled the US to elude the quagmire in Iraq.

Rather, the current plan is to keep more troops in Iraq than there were, pre-Surge, and the US is attempting to convince — with little or no success — the British into halting their withdrawal from Iraq and going the surge route in southern Iraq, although the British are expected to draw out their timetable for withdrawal to the end of the year, “because of increased attacks in Basra.”

Hardly cause for celebration.

If the Bush Administration expected the Shiite militias to accede to an extended occupation by US troops, past the announced parameters of the so-called Surge plan, it would appear that their plan and intelligence is every bit as flawed as prior execution of the war.

At least one Wingnut war fanatic views the onset of a full civil war in Iraq as an “opportunity”:

Sounds like it could also be a chance to make up for past opportunities missed, deal with some unfinished business. Wack al-Sadr and destroy the Mahdi Army. That would complicate anyone’s exit plans, but it hardly seems to make sense to leave the place with a major illegal Iranian-backed force in place.

After 5 years of occupation and supposed Iraqi political reconciliation, the possibility of open civil war involving one of the most significant factions in the US-backed Iraqi government is an opportunity??

“Complicate anyone’s exit plans” is an understatement — open conflict between Sadr and US/Iraqi government forces would destroy the existing government and leave us in the position of starting from ground zero. And as for leaving Iraq in the hands of a major Iranian-backed force, the entire Shia leadership of the current government was sheltered in Iraq for years, and the hero’s welcome the al Maliki government accorded Ahmadinejad during his 3 day triumphal visit should dissipate any illusions about who we will be leaving in power in Iraq.

The question is whether this is another case of Sadr’s brinksmanship — threatening to explode the current government if he is not granted greater authority and autonomy in areas which comprise his political base — or a move to open warfare. And the other question is whether the Bush Administration has the capacity and judgment to apprehend the difference. Thus far, they’ve demonstrated only a miserable incapacity to assess Sadr’s influence and intentions. Our miscalculations are largely responsible for creating the man as a significant political force in Iraq.