The deadly insurgency in Iraq is a direct result of tactical missteps by the US during the rush to war a year ago and in the months afterward, some critics say.
US President George W. Bush could have spared himself major headaches if he had heeded the advice of experts who urged him to assemble a larger force, including Muslim soldiers from Turkey and other countries, to go into Iraq. He also should have avoided the assumption that Iraqis would embrace US soldiers as liberators after the ouster of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.
A healthier regard for Arab perceptions could have helped, said Nayef Samhat, a government and international relations expert at Centre College in Danville, Kentucky
PHOTO: AFP
"The invasion was clearly unprovoked and can be easily seen by many in the Arab-Islamic world as nothing more than the reinvention of imperialism," Samhat said.
"The images, too, are quite similar to those of Israeli military actions against Palestinians.
"Arabs will see the similarity," Samhat said, "and associate the two quite easily."
Other US shortcomings, such as failing to work effectively with important Muslim clerics and the inability to halt looting during the fall of Baghdad, have worsened the difficult task of occupying a foreign country.
"Most Iraqis had many reasons to hate Saddam Hussein and we removed him. But that did not automatically make them love us," said Duke University professor Ole Holsti.
"It is at least reasonable to believe that a more orderly and less chaotic transition to a post-Saddam era would have reduced the kinds of frustration that probably underlies at least some of the current problems," Holsti said.
In hindsight, experts say they believe they have been proved right: The military operation in Iraq should have been an international effort from the start, much like it was in Afghanistan, which eventually was taken over by NATO. And, they note, the US should not have dismantled the 200,000-member Iraqi army once Saddam fell.
"If that army had been kept intact, it would have been a trained military force to maintain order," said Pepperdine University political scientist Dan Caldwell.
But more important, many critics believe, Bush should have listened to former Army chief of staff General Eric Shinseki, who said a postwar occupying force in Iraq would have to number in the hundreds of thousands.
Such a force, Shinseki said, is needed to maintain security and calm ethnic tensions in the immediate aftermath of the fall of a government.
The Bush administration settled on a force of about 150,000, expecting it would be augmented by eventual support from other countries.
Reinforcements did not arrive right away or in massive numbers. So when looting broke out, there were not enough soldiers on hand to bring the situation under control.
At the time, Shinseki's troop estimate was called "wildly off the mark" by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.
"It turns out Wolfowitz was wildly wrong," said Joseph Nye, a former assistant defense secretary who is dean of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
"If they had put in more troops, they would have prevented the looting and the situation from deteriorating," Nye said.
Throughout the year since Saddam fell, the US has struggled to build better ties with moderate Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, who had demanded a swift return to Iraqi sovereignty. As the insurgency pulsed through Iraq last week, fueled by militias of a more radical Shiite cleric, the more moderate al-Sistani sat silent.
When he finally spoke at midweek, he condemned the tactics of both the US occupation force and the Shiite militias.
"We have taken a low-level cleric and made him into a national symbol of resistance against the Americans, just before an Islamic holy day, of all times," said George Lopez, international security expert at the University of Notre Dame.
"And we have backed al-Sistani, our one major hope for preaching calm and patience among the Shiites, into a corner."
Republican US lawmakers on Friday criticized US President Joe Biden’s administration after sanctioned Chinese telecoms equipment giant Huawei unveiled a laptop this week powered by an Intel artificial intelligence (AI) chip. The US placed Huawei on a trade restriction list in 2019 for contravening Iran sanctions, part of a broader effort to hobble Beijing’s technological advances. Placement on the list means the company’s suppliers have to seek a special, difficult-to-obtain license before shipping to it. One such license, issued by then-US president Donald Trump’s administration, has allowed Intel to ship central processors to Huawei for use in laptops since 2020. China hardliners
A top Vietnamese property tycoon was on Thursday sentenced to death in one of the biggest corruption cases in history, with an estimated US$27 billion in damages. A panel of three hand-picked jurors and two judges rejected all defense arguments by Truong My Lan, chair of major developer Van Thinh Phat, who was found guilty of swindling cash from Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB) over a decade. “The defendant’s actions ... eroded people’s trust in the leadership of the [Communist] Party and state,” read the verdict at the trial in Ho Chi Minh City. After the five-week trial, 85 others were also sentenced on
‘DELUSIONAL’: Targeting the families of Hamas’ leaders would not push the group to change its position or to give up its demands for Palestinians, Ismail Haniyeh said Israeli aircraft on Wednesday killed three sons of Hamas’ top political leader in the Gaza Strip, striking high-stakes targets at a time when Israel is holding delicate ceasefire negotiations with the militant group. Hamas said four of the leader’s grandchildren were also killed. Ismail Haniyeh’s sons are among the highest-profile figures to be killed in the war so far. Israel said they were Hamas operatives, and Haniyeh accused Israel of acting in “the spirit of revenge and murder.” The deaths threatened to strain the internationally mediated ceasefire talks, which appeared to gain steam in recent days even as the sides remain far
RAMPAGE: A Palestinian man was left dead after dozens of Israeli settlers searching for a missing 14-year-old boy stormed a village in the Israeli-occupied West Bank US President Joe Biden on Friday said he expected Iran to attack Israel “sooner, rather than later” and warned Tehran not to proceed. Asked by reporters about his message to Iran, Biden simply said: “Don’t,” underscoring Washington’s commitment to defend Israel. “We are devoted to the defense of Israel. We will support Israel. We will help defend Israel and Iran will not succeed,” he said. Biden said he would not divulge secure information, but said his expectation was that an attack could come “sooner, rather than later.” Israel braced on Friday for an attack by Iran or its proxies as warnings grew of