In the first of a two-part dispatch, "Disintegrating
Iraqi Sovereignty," Michael Schwartz explored Iraq's missing "sovereignty."
Most of us take sovereignty for granted, but under the pressure of invasion,
occupation, destruction, and arrogance as well as increasing ethnic/religious
strife and rippling chaos, it has proved ever harder to bring to bear in Iraq.
Schwartz explored an unstable, extremely volatile "stalemate" of sovereignty
that has developed there in which a central government without the means of
coercion or of administration or significant economic resources cowers in
Baghdad's Green Zone; the Americans occupy their bases and any place they care
to put their troops (but no place else); while, in southern Iraq, Shia religious
parties, and in the north, Kurdish parties, each with their own militias, established
local governments at odds with the central government and the Americans, but
have proved capable of wielding only limited and partial power themselves. He
now turns to the rebellious Sunni provinces of Iraq and considers the nature
of the Iraqi "power vacuum" there. Tom
Iraq's Sovereignty Vacuum (Part 2)
by Michael Schwartz
The December elections in Iraq did not initiate
a period of state-building, but instead marked an expanding, many-sided conflict
whose latest major horror was the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra and
the carnage it triggered. All the conflicts of the present moment have metastasized
and spread from the ill-fated attempt by American-led forces to pacify Sunni
communities in Baghdad and in four provinces to the north and west. Today, not
only is the country edging toward an ever more virulent civil war, but the Sunni
resistance is stronger than ever, registering about 100 attacks a day in January.
This original war remains the central front in the ongoing battle
for domination in Iraq and, as the core conflict, it continues to cast off
enough bitterness, suffering, destruction, and rebellion to guarantee its
never-ending spread to new areas and groups.
More than anything else, this low-level but fierce war is responsible
for the constantly diminishing reservoir of sovereignty in Iraq. If the Americans
sought to establish the legitimacy of the occupation by crushing early signs
of Sunni resistance, that effort has, in the end, only helped convince Iraqis
of the illegitimacy of the American presence. For all its failures, however,
the occupation has succeeded in one endeavor. It has managed to undermine
all efforts by other parties to establish their own legitimacy and therefore
to build a foundation for a new and sovereign Iraq. If one day Iraq ceases
to be, splitting chaotically into several entities, the way the occupation
destroyed sovereignty (along with parts of Sunni cities) will certainly come
in for a major share of the blame.
The Sunni Resistance
What the world has come to call the "insurgency "in Iraq is largely
located in Baghdad and the Sunni-dominated cities to the north and west of
the capital. In the Kurdish north and Shia south, residents have largely been
organized into local quasi-governments that are frequently at odds with the
American occupation (and therefore with the central government in the capital);
but despite notable moments of great violence none of these localities
has mounted a sustained war against the American-led presence as the Sunnis
have.
While the Sunni insurgency is certainly the focus of Iraqi news
coverage, the actual nature of the war in Sunni areas goes largely unreported.
Coverage tends to focus on spectacular moments of violence and destruction,
especially car bombs and other suicide attacks against civilian targets. Only
rarely mentioned are the multitude of small-scale confrontations between resistance
fighters and patrolling American troops that account for the majority of violent
clashes. As a result, the methods
of the American side the use of assault weapons, tanks, artillery,
and air power and so the spreading "collateral" damage to Iraqi civilians
is significantly underreported.
A recent James Glanz piece in the New
York Times proved an exception to this pattern. Based on U.S. military
statistics, Glanz offered strong evidence against the administration portrait
of a weakening (or at least stalemated) resistance movement. Guerrilla attacks
had, in fact, "steadily grown in the nearly three years since the invasion."
Even during a "lull" in December 2005, the 2,500 violent confrontations over
80 per day were "almost 250 percent [higher than] the number in March 2004,"
which, in turn was twice the level of August 2003.
The chart that
accompanied the article (originally delivered to the Senate Foreign Affairs
Committee by Joseph A. Christoff of the Government Accountability Office) contained
an even more significant fact, almost unknown to the American public: Despite
the impression we may have from news reports, Iraqi civilians constitute only
a small proportion of resistance targets each month never exceeding 20 percent
and typically falling well below 10 percent. In December 2005, they accounted
for just 8 percent about 200 of the 2,500 attacks.
The overwhelming target of such attacks in a typical month around 80 percent
of them was the American military and its coalition allies, mainly the British.
Last December, the figure was a little over 70 percent; some months it reaches
90 percent. The Iraqi armed forces (integrated, as they are, into the American
command) account for another 5-10 percent of the targets.
Until now, at least, the war in the Sunni areas of Iraq has largely
been between the Americans and the guerrillas. The Iraqi government itself
is not a factor in this confrontation, and consequently is rarely mentioned
even in a pro forma way in news accounts of the battles, negotiations,
and other elements of the war.
How then, as best we can tell, is the Sunni resistance organized
in the many cities in the four provinces in central Iraq and in Baghdad where
the war is an ongoing part of life?
Though it is divided into two ideologically contrary groups the
guerrillas who target the occupation and the jihadists who tend to seek out
civilian targets and within those divisions into many grouplets, the Sunni
resistance is coherent enough to be another contender for sovereignty, at
least in its own areas. It has tied down and exhausted the U.S. military,
forcing strategic and tactical alterations
in American policy. It continues to influence both national and local
Iraqi politics, even as its internal contradictions increasingly set jihadists
and guerrillas against each other.
The role played by the Sunni resistance can best be understood by briefly reviewing
the situation in Fallujah before its recapture by American forces in November
2004. In April of that year, after an abortive attempt to seize the city, the
U.S. military had withdrawn, leaving it in the hands of the "Fallujah Brigade,"
made up mainly of Ba'athist army veterans. They were assigned the job of pacifying
the city. Instead, the Brigade gave its support to a group of local religious
leaders allied with the insurgency that soon evolved into a local government.
Borrowing its organizational skeleton from the rich community organizations
traditionally connected to Sunni mosques (including their Sharia courts), it
used the resistance fighters as
a police force. Perhaps not surprisingly, the structure that developed was
similar to those that had already formed in Shia cities like Basra.
During the period from April to November, Fallujah had only the most tenuous
ties to the national government in Baghdad. Nir Rosen, an independent journalist,
produced remarkable descriptions of the city in this period (for the New
Yorker and Asia
Times). His pieces give a sense of the developing tensions between the
jihadists, who wanted to establish Fallujah as a safe rear area for their larger
operations, and the local resistance, determined to keep the Americans out but
uninterested in going on the offensive. The new government also heightened tensions
by enforcing cultural customs similar to those adopted in Basra: head scarves
for women, facial hair for men, and the abolition of liquor and western music.
In these months, street crime disappeared, as did armed confrontations of any
sort. They would prove the most peaceful in Fallujah since the fall of Saddam's
regime.
As this interlude indicated, in the Sunni areas local clerics already
constituted a proto-government-in-waiting, quite capable of enforcing "law
and order" if not challenged by the occupation military. The fighting in Sunni
cities comes and goes with the arrival and departure of the occupation military.
When the occupation forces enter a city (or a neighborhood in Baghdad), the
IEDs begin to explode, snipers fire away, and hit-and-run attacks start up.
As soon as they withdraw to pacify another town, the city in question, in
a more battered state, falls back into the hands of local clerics and their
allies among the guerrillas.
At no time does the Iraqi government figure significantly into this
process. Occasionally, it may appoint a governor or police chief, but these
functionaries quickly discover (like their counterparts in Basra and Kirkuk)
that they have little choice but to work with the local power structure, resign
in protest over their lack of authority, or become assassination targets.
In a sense, the difference between Sunni cities most of which
have been wracked by fighting and their Shia or Kurdish counterparts has
been the determination of the American military to pacify them.
The Guerrilla War in Baiji
The experience of Baiji
illustrates how little leverage the Iraqi government has over events on
the ground in Sunni Iraq. As the site of the largest oil refining plant in the
country, it is a more important city than its population of 70,000 might suggest.
During the Hussein years, its 98 percent Sunni inhabitants were supported by
well-paying jobs in a government-owned industrial district that grew up around
the oil-refining facilities.
After the American-led invasion, however, Baiji fell on hard times.
Thanks to one of the first executive orders issued by L. Paul Bremer, the
Bush-appointed head of the Coalition Provisional Authority that was then ruling
from Baghdad, all government-owned enterprises, with the exception of the
oil industry itself, were shuttered. This was in preparation for a privatization
program considered crucial by American economic planners. Unemployment swept
through Baiji, generating bitterness, inspiring a variety of protests, and
eventually energizing what had until then been an exceedingly modest resistance
to the U.S. presence.
In late 2003, in response to this growing discontent, the U.S. initiated what
Washington Post reporter Ann Tyson characterized as "heavy-handed sweeps
through Baiji
[that] left many people angry, frightened, and humiliated."
She quoted Adil Faez Jeel, the director of the oil refinery, saying that the
sweeps only solidified support for an armed resistance: "Most of the people
fighting the Americans tell me they do nothing for us but destroy the houses
and capture people.
There are no jobs, no water, no electricity."
By late 2004, Baiji's guerrillas were strong enough to take control of the
town in response to the American conquest of Fallujah. In addition to skirmishes
with U.S. troops and Iraqi police, the guerrillas began to sabotage pipelines
around the refinery and to attack oil trucks. At one point, they launched a
mortar attack against a mixed American and Iraqi National Guard patrol in the
center of town, triggering two days of running battles. A doctor at the local
hospital told the Agence
France Press that at least 10 civilians were killed and 26 wounded in the
ensuing melee.
For the next year, Baiji was out of the news, largely because the
American military was busy with massive sweeps in the west of Anbar province.
In late 2005, however, the Americans returned to Baiji, characterized at the
time by Tyson as "firmly in the grip of insurgents."
According to U.S. military sources, this pacification attempt was
provoked by suspicions that guerrillas were using Baiji as a staging area
for attacks in Mosul and Baghdad, and more immediately by evidence that,
while targeting oil pipelines and convoys, they were also siphoning off a
significant proportion of the refinery's output for sale on the black market
to finance their activities. A resistance supporter in Baiji told Inter
Press Service reporters Brian Conley and Isam Rashid that that these efforts
were meant to stop what he considered an American "theft" of Iraqi oil.
The Americans temporarily closed the refinery and sent in the 101st
Airborne Division to retake Baiji. For a month, virtually no progress was
made in pacifying the city, while American casualties were high. A quarter
of the 34 soldiers in one platoon suffered casualties of one sort or another.
Sgt. 1st Class Danny Kidd, a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq, attributed the
hard going to the fact that Baiji residents supported the guerrilla fighters:
"They have the place locked down. We have almost no support from the local
people. We talk to 1,000 people and one will come forward."
The degree of this support was illustrated by a gruesome
incident during the early weeks of the campaign. Capt. Matt Bartlett,
accompanied by a convoy of tanks and personnel carriers, sought information
from a tribal chief about a group of bomb-makers suspected of operating in
the chief's domain. The convoy was cordially greeted by the sheik's children,
who accepted the officers' gifts and "traded high-fives with them." Capt.
Bartlett was told, however, that the sheik was hosting a large gathering and
could not meet him that day. Preparing to leave, the Americans found the street
blocked by people and cars, apparently part of the gathering. They were directed
instead down a dirt route along the Tigris River nicknamed "Smugglers' Road."
"A few hundred yards down the road, bordered by fields, the convoy was hit
by a massive explosion. Behind the blast, [First Sgt. Robert] Goudy jumped out
of his Humvee and ran forward toward the huge cloud of smoke and debris. As
it cleared, he was confused by what he found.
"'I saw this big piece of flesh and thought it was a goat or cow. I thought,
'Wow, these guys put an IED in a dead animal,' he recalled. He went on, hoping
to find his men sitting in the truck. But as he got closer, he recalled, 'I
didn't see the truck. I started seeing limbs and body parts.' Goudy tripped
over what was left of one soldier. Then he found the only survivor of the five
soldiers in the Humvee, blinded and screaming.
"'It was horrible,' Bartlett said. 'We had to pick up body parts 200 meters
away.' The Humvee was 'ripped in half and shredded,' he said, by a monster bomb
later found to contain 1,000 pounds of explosives and two antitank mines, with
a 155mm artillery round on top."
Sgt Goudy and the other survivors were "convinced Iraqis living
nearby knew about the bomb but did nothing to warn them." In fact, it appears
that they participated in luring the convoy into a trap. The soldiers' thoughts
naturally turned to revenge: "I felt so angry and violated
. We all wanted
to go out and tear up the city, kick down the doors, shoot the civilians,
blow up the mosque."
Subsequent reports from Baiji contain no accounts of such acts of revenge,
but the incident, and the failure of other strategies to pacify the city, led
to an official escalation of the American assault. According to the Army
Times, the new strategy was modeled after "walls built around Fallujah
and Samarra in recent months [that] have quelled restive insurgent cells." An
earthen barrier was constructed around Siniyah, the most rebellious neighborhood
in the city. Checkpoints were set up to stop "all vehicles leaving or entering
as soldiers look for known insurgents, bomb-making materials, and illegal
weapons."
These draconian measures disrupted normal life. Anyone with business inside
or outside the community could not reliably pass through the checkpoint: College
students interrupted their educations; employees lost their jobs. Sumiya, a
33-year-old Siniyah housewife, who spoke on the phone to Conley and Rashid,
described the situation inside the community of 3,000:
"Siniyah has become a real battlefield now, and the occupation forces have
destroyed many of our homes
. There is no security inside Siniyah and it is
worse than any place in Iraq now. The occupation forces and Iraqi National Guard
are raiding Siniyah houses everyday and arresting many people. There is a curfew
from 5 p.m. to 5 a.m.; in Baghdad it is only midnight to 5 a.m."
One resident commented to the Inter Press reporters, "We live in
a very big jail for three thousand"; while a local cleric told the Army
Times that Siniyah had become "a concentration camp."
This situation will prevail until the American troops move on to "pacify" another
city. At that time, the residents further alienated from the occupation
will attempt to rebuild their lives, though from an even deeper hole than before.
The jerry-rigged local government left behind will have no resources with which
to address their problems, and there will be none forthcoming from either the
Americans or, of course, the Iraqi government, which has none to offer.
As in other Sunni cities, while the fighting in Baiji has occurred
episodically, the physical, economic, and infrastructural decline of the city
has been more or less continuous. So has the inability of either the Americans
or the resistance to create a stable government. Each has undermined the credibility
of the other. And the national government has no presence at all. In such
circumstances, any residual faith residents might have in the idea of a sovereign
state has undoubtedly evaporated as well.
Sovereignty Lost?
"Stay the course," President Bush tells us. "Democracy is being
built," he insists. His case rests on high turnout percentages in the national
elections, which demonstrate, he believes, that the vast majority of Iraqis
want (and support) a national government. American forces, in his view, are
training the Iraqi military and police to provide that government with the
coercive force it needs to destroy a small but persistent insurgency that
relies on intimidation and terror to keep the majority of Iraqis from speaking
out and acting as they might wish. The developing institutions of civil society
will provide, in his opinion, a nonviolent social infrastructure for a successful
central government. But all this naturally takes time and money, and the American
people need to give his administration the space to apply both effectively.
The on-the-ground evidence suggests quite a different reality. Sovereignty
is made up of four ingredients: ultimate control over the means of coercion;
sufficient resources to deliver government services; an administrative apparatus
capable of carrying out these functions; and the acquiescence of most people
in the exercise of such power. The government in Baghdad has none of these,
nor will any of them soon be available to it.
As the war between Sunni communities and the occupation military
continues, and as it throws off pieces of rebellion that set off new conflicts,
the impotent isolation of the Iraqi government within its Green Zone sanctuary
becomes more visible to all. In the meantime, the various contending parties
the occupation, the Sunni resistance, the Shia fundamentalists, and the
Kurdish nationalists frustrate each other's designs on power while destroying
any group's ability to establish sovereignty.
One symptom of the debilitation of Iraq under the weight of this war has been
its ever declining oil production which, in January 2006, fell to perhaps half
of the already depressed production levels during the last embattled years of
Saddam Hussein.
Oil that most precious commodity has become scarce in oil-rich
Iraq. But sovereignty an even more precious commodity is scarcer still.
Michael Schwartz, professor of sociology and faculty director of the Undergraduate
College of Global Studies at Stony Brook University, has written extensively
on popular protest and insurgency, and on American business and government dynamics.
His work on Iraq has appeared at numerous Internet sites, including TomDispatch,
Asia Times, MotherJones.com, and ZNet; and in print in Contexts, Against
the Current, and Z Magazine. His books include Radical Protest
and Social Structure, and Social Policy and the Conservative Agenda
(edited, with Clarence Lo). His e-mail address is Ms42@optonline.net.
Copyright 2006 Michael Schwartz