Bring em on!

I have spent the last several years trying figure out if the Bush/Cheney administration and the neocons are stupid and delusional, just plain crazy or if there is some bizarre method to their madness. I'm beginning to think it must be all of the above. They are constantly ranting about Iran but they have and continue to do all of Iran's dirty work in Iraq. They toppled Iran's arch enemy, Saddam, they put the most pro-Iranian elements in Iraq in power and they continue to defend those elements with US blood and treasure. The latest example is this:
Iraqi Army Takes Last Basra Areas From Sadr Force
But of course they didn't do it alone.

BAGHDAD — Iraqi soldiers took control of the last bastions of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr’s militia in Basra on Saturday, and Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad strongly endorsed the Iraqi government’s monthlong military operation against the fighters.

By Saturday evening, Basra was calm, but only after air and artillery strikes by American and British forces cleared the way for Iraqi troops to move into the Hayaniya district and other remaining Mahdi Army militia strongholds and begin house-to house searches, Iraqi officials said. Iraqi troops were meeting little resistance, said Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, the spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry in Baghdad.

While the administration talks about about Iran's support for al-Sadr the Iranians are laughing. They like al-Maliki's government just fine since it is supported and controlled by the pro-Iranian ISCI and Da'wa party. The Iraqi security forces are primarily members of the Badr Brigade - a creation of the Iranians.

While that is stupid it is not nearly as stupid as this:
Secretary of State Rice Mocks Muslim Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as a Coward

BAGHDAD — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mocked anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as a coward on Sunday, hours after the radical leader threatened to declare war unless U.S. and Iraqi forces end a military crackdown on his followers.

Now the American and British air strikes may have driven the Mehdi army underground but only to fight another day. The always stupid and incompetent Rice has just poured gasoline on embers which will flare up even sooner resulting in the deaths of both Iraqis and Americans. This administration is criminally stupid and incompetent.

You and who's army?

Al-Maliki vows crackdown in Baghdad

BAGHDAD - Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Thursday he planned to launch more security crackdowns like the one in Basra against "criminal gangs" in Baghdad.

And al-Maliki sounds more like the Bush administration everyday.

"We did not make mistakes, but we had points of weakness," al-Maliki said of the performance of the security forces. "We discovered that we have a shortage of appropriate weapons for the fight in Basra which we will work quickly to end."

As we saw in Basra al-Maliki can't do it with his Army so you know who's army he wants to do the fighting.

And about that surging ceasefire

Now I'm still waiting to hear what John McCain has to say about this but it would appear the Badr-Mehdi ceasefire may have been short lived.
No peace in Basra despite Sadr call

HOPES for a ceasefire in Iraq's developing Shia civil war were swiftly undermined yesterday when the Government said it would not stop attacking outlaw militia members, despite an offer from militia leaders to freeze the conflict.

Fierce fighting went on in areas of Basra loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr, despite the rebel cleric's call to his militiamen to put down their weapons.

Sadr's statement was hammered out in elaborate negotiations over the past few days with senior Iraqi officials, some of whom travelled to Iran to meet the Shia cleric, according to several officials involved in the discussions.

In Baghdad, mortars continued to slam into the Green Zone government compound.

British troops stationed at Basra airport were deployed outside their base at the weekend for the first time, backing up Iraqi forces on the edge of the city.

While Maliki calls his crackdown a success al-Sadr is not impressed and indicates he is ready to continue fighting.

BAGHDAD -- Prime Minister Nouri Maliki described his crackdown on Shiite militias in southern Iraq as a success Tuesday, even as Britain said the situation had turned too volatile to pull more of its troops from the region as planned.

Representatives of Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr, who on Sunday ordered his Mahdi Army militia to stop fighting, accused Iraqi forces of violating the cease-fire with new raids Tuesday in Basra and Hillah and warned that such actions could ignite further bloodshed. Iraqi security forces denied the allegations, the latest indication of the ongoing animosity between Sadr and the Iraqi government and the tenuous state of the truce.

So what will the US do? What will the Iranians do? The really odd thing is they are both betting on the same horse in this race, the ISCI and the Badr brigade. The Bush administration doesn't like al-Sadr because he is anti American occupation and if he should gain legitimate power in October he will demand the occupation end. The Iranians don't like al-Sadr because he is above all an Iraqi nationalist and Iran's interests are not a priority with him.

Now we know!

McClatchy gives us a good run down of the events in the hours before al-Sadr's cease fire offer.
Sadr rebuffs Iraq government envoy as offensive sputters

BAGHDAD - After failing to break the resistance of Shiite militias in the five-day siege of oil rich Basra, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki sent a top general to hold talks with his Shiite rival, Muqtada al Sadr, Saturday night only to be rebuffed by the firebrand cleric, an Iraqi official close to the negotiations said.

Maliki denounced Shia militants in Basra as the equivalent of Al Qaida, and Sadr told his supporters not to hand over their arms to a puppet state of the United States.

The diplomatic initiative and the harsh rebuff further eroded expectations for a successful outcome to the offensive, which Maliki is personally directing from the presidential palace in the southern port city. It was not the only sign of problems.

Maliki issued orders Friday to enlist volunteers for the battle against the Shiite militias, and his Dawa party sought to enlist fighters. The U.S. military raised its profile in Basra still further, providing protection for installations including the palace where Maliki is housed, Iraqi Interior Ministry officials said.

There were more U.S. air strikes in the Sadrist stronghold of Sadr City, and local officials said U.S. forces joined Iraqi security forces in clashes against Sadrists lasting hours south of Hilla, which lies south of Baghdad. Meanwhile, Sadr's Mahdi Army militia went door to door in Sadr City with a list of those employed by government security services, demanding that they not report to their jobs, local residents said.

The circumstances in which the negotiations with Sadr took place suggested the government is no longer able to dictate the terms of an agreement with Sadr but now must seek a deal. General Hussein al Assadi, a Baghdad-based commander, traveled to Najaf to call on the head of Sadr's political bureau there, Lewaa Smaisam. From his office, the two men telephoned Sadr, who is believed to be in Iran, where he is studying religion. But they could not reach agreement, an official close to the negotiations said. He would not give his name due to the sensitivity of the subject.

Of course shortly after this al-Sadr offered his conditions for a cease fire which had to be very unpalatable to al-Malaki but which he accepted. So what does this tell us? It tells us who is calling the shots in Iraq and it's not the Bush administration or General Petraeus - it's the Mullahs in Tehran. It was Tehran who told al-Sadr to make the offer and Tehran who told al-Malaki to accept. The US may have 150,000 troops on the ground but it's Tehran that is running the show. The war is over and the winner is Iran.

Mission Accomplished Again

I see that Don Surber has not heeded the advice of his wiser colleague Rick Moran and has donned his own manly codpiece and declared "mission accomplished". Sorry Don, while violence may have temporarily been reduced to the same levels it was a couple of years ago the surge is still a failure as the Iraqis are no closer to political reconciliation than they were a couple of years ago. As I recall that reconciliation was the goal of the surge - not a few less bodies on the street. The New York Times got it right yesterday.
Still No Way Out

There has been so much horrible news out of Iraq for so long that it is natural to want to celebrate better news. Sending another 30,000 American troops into Iraq has made life better: attacks are down, as are the number of American and Iraqi casualties. Some refugees are even venturing home. The news has cheered Americans and dampened Democrats’ enthusiasm for keeping up the pressure on Iraq policy. Unfortunately, it is just as important to look at what has not happened since President Bush announced his surge: Iraq’s leaders are no closer to making the political deals that are the only hope for building a self-sustaining peace.

Without a serious effort at national conciliation, American troops are just holding down the lid on a pressure cooker. Iraq’s rival militias, the insurgents, the bitter sectarian resentments and the meddling neighbors haven’t gone anywhere. Consider this all too familiar horror: yesterday, police said they pulled six bodies from the Tigris River about 25 miles south of Baghdad. They were handcuffed and showed signs of having been tortured. And five, including a child, had been beheaded.

Perhaps 160,000 American troops could hold down the overall casualty numbers indefinitely, but they cannot wipe away that sort of hatred. That’s the job of Iraq’s leaders. Either way, the American military doesn’t have enough troops for such an occupation without end, and the American Treasury can’t keep spending $10 billion a month to maintain it.

Mr. Bush’s escalation was sold as a way to buy Iraqi politicians breathing room to finally address the problems driving the sectarian violence: by agreeing on an equitable division of oil wealth, rules for provincial elections and ways to bring more Sunnis and former Baath Party members into the Shiite-dominated government.

Instead, Iraq’s politicians — and their American backers — have squandered the time and the best efforts of American troops. Mr. Bush’s generals are so frustrated that they’ve begun to complain publicly about the fecklessness of Iraq’s leaders. The ever-feckless White House, rather than looking for ways to compel Iraq’s leaders to perform, is lessening the pressure.

And then we have this from the man who would be king.

On Monday, Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a declaration pledging that their governments would put in place a long-term political and security pact sometime next year. "The shape and size of any long-term, or longer than 2008, U.S. presence in Iraq will be a key matter for negotiation between the two parties, Iraq and the United States," Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the White House official in charge of Iraq war matters, said at the briefing unveiling the agreement.

What Bush will almost surely be pushing for is permanent U.S. bases in Iraq, enshrined in a pact he can sign a few months before he leaves office. And here, as they used to say, is the beauty part: As far as Bush is concerned, he doesn't have to seek congressional ratification for such an enduring commitment of American force, treasure and lives.

Of course this will be an empty and meaningless agreement since it won't be approved by either the US Congress or the Iraqi Parliament. Both Bush a al-Maliki are at least smart enough to know they will never get that kind of approval. Bush has thrown the Republican candidates another boat anchor - they either have to distance themselves from the agreement and piss off the 24 percenters they need to win the nomination or piss off everyone else and lose the general election. The best way for the Democrats to handle this issue is to point out that without congressional approval it is non-binding.

Meanwhile it would appear the the Demcrats may have finally grown a pair.
Pelosi won't budge on troop pullback dates in war funding bill

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A top Democrat who had hinted that a compromise on war funding was possible appeared to back away from the idea Friday as the Democratic congressional leadership refused to consider it.

On Thursday, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, said he and the White House Iraq coordinator Gen. Douglas Lute discussed a compromise in which Congress would provide additional funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if the administration accepted readiness standards for the troops sent into battle and a ban on the use of torture.

The Democrats' part of the compromise would be to extend the time period in which they would demand that troops be withdrawn from Iraq, Murtha said.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi showed no sign of accepting such a compromise and said the Democratic Congress would not pass a war funding bill other than the one that had already passed the House.

"We have provided every penny that is currently necessary to fund Defense Department operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world," Pelosi said. "It is President Bush and his Republican allies in the Senate who are preventing extra funds from reaching our troops."

On Friday, Murtha appeared to back away from supporting the compromise, saying "the fact remains that the war in Iraq cannot be won militarily" and that the Iraqi government has failed to capitalize on "window of opportunity" created by the additional U.S. troops.

Murtha and called for "an orderly redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as practicable."

"The House of Representatives has passed a $50 billion funding bill that provides the president, our troops, and our nation with a responsible plan for bringing our troops home," Murtha said. "The president should heed the advice of the American people and allow this funding bill to become law."

It's about time.

Civil War On Hold?

The purpose of the "surge" was booked as an attempt to reduce violence so that the Iraqi government would have a chance to begin a stabilization and national reconciliation process. It would appear that it has indeed reduced the violence bur and reconciliation between the Shiites and the Sunni appears as far away as ever. Thomas Ricks has just returned from Iraq and reports that military commanders see it the same way.
Iraqis Wasting An Opportunity, U.S. Officers Say

CAMP LIBERTY, Iraq -- Senior military commanders here now portray the intransigence of Iraq's Shiite-dominated government as the key threat facing the U.S. effort in Iraq, rather than al-Qaeda terrorists, Sunni insurgents or Iranian-backed militias.

In more than a dozen interviews, U.S. military officials expressed growing concern over the Iraqi government's failure to capitalize on sharp declines in attacks against U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians. A window of opportunity has opened for the government to reach out to its former foes, said Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the commander of day-to-day U.S. military operations in Iraq, but "it's unclear how long that window is going to be open."

The lack of political progress calls into question the core rationale behind the troop buildup President Bush announced in January, which was premised on the notion that improved security would create space for Iraqis to arrive at new power-sharing arrangements. And what if there is no such breakthrough by next summer? "If that doesn't happen," Odierno said, "we're going to have to review our strategy."

Brig. Gen. John F. Campbell, deputy commanding general of the 1st Cavalry Division, complained last week that Iraqi politicians appear out of touch with everyday citizens. "The ministers, they don't get out," he said. "They don't know what the hell is going on on the ground." Campbell noted approvingly that Lt. Gen. Aboud Qanbar, the top Iraqi commander in the Baghdad security offensive, lately has begun escorting cabinet officials involved in health, housing, oil and other issues out of the Green Zone to show them, as Campbell put it, "Hey, I got the security, bring in the [expletive] essential services."

Indeed, some U.S. Army officers now talk more sympathetically about former insurgents than they do about their ostensible allies in the Shiite-led central government. "It is painful, very painful," dealing with the obstructionism of Iraqi officials, said Army Lt. Col. Mark Fetter. As for the Sunni fighters who for years bombed and shot U.S. soldiers and now want to join the police, Fetter shrugged. "They have got to eat," he said over lunch in the 1st Cavalry Division's mess hall here. "There are so many we've detained and interrogated, they did what they did for money."

A few days ago I reported that as far as the Shiite government of al-Maliki is concerned the reconciliation is complete and the Shiites won. I have also reported on how the al-Malaki government is brings the Shiite militias into the government but wants no part of the Sunnis that the Americans have been arming and training. A reduction of US forces is beginning now and will continue. Will the civil war that's been on hold reboot with intensified vigor. With no change in the political situation that has to be seen as a probability. The surge was a failure by the administrations own metrics.

National Reconciliation or.....

A few days ago I reported that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said that national reconciliation was complete.

What Maliki said was that reconciliation is complete in the Shiites won. Of course the Sunnis probably don't see it that way and knowing now that they are not going to get anything more from the Shia controlled government I wonder how much longer before they start using those shiny new weapons that Petraeus just gave them. If the current reduction in violence is actually real this is probably just the eye of the hurricane not the end of it.

Well now we see that the Shiite-dominated government wants no part of Sunni fighters in the police or military but Shiite militia members are just fine.
Hurdles Stall Plan For Iraqi Recruits
Shiite Leadership Wary of Bringing Fighters Into Ranks

BAGHDAD -- The U.S. effort to organize nearly 70,000 local fighters to solidify security gains in Iraq is facing severe political and logistical challenges as U.S.-led forces struggle to manage the recruits and the central government resists incorporating them into the Iraqi police and army, according to senior military officials.

Gen. David H. Petraeus and other top commanders have hailed the initiative to enlist Iraqi tribes and former insurgents in the battle against extremist groups, but leaders of Iraq's Shiite-dominated government have feared that the local fighters known as "volunteers" -- more than 80 percent of whom are Sunni -- could eventually mount an armed opposition, Iraqi and U.S. officials said.

In some cases, the government has confined the fighters to their headquarters or local mosques. Nevertheless, the volunteers pour in by the hundreds every week, forming a massive but cumbersome force lacking common guidelines, status, pay or uniforms. The effort represents an opportunity to shore up local police and eventually relieve U.S. troops, but one that could prove fleeting or backfire if the volunteers are not organized quickly, officials said.

"To give you a sense of the bureaucratic challenge here, the entire British army is just under 100,000," said Maj. Gen. Paul Newton, the British counterinsurgency expert tapped by Petraeus to lead the effort. "What we've seen in this campaign is already therefore three-quarters of the size of the British army, without any kind of human resource management structure to recruit it, train it, vet it," Newton, 51, said in an interview.

Since taking the job in early June, Newton has met with tribal sheiks, Sunni insurgents, Shiite militia leaders and Iraqi politicians in an attempt to "glue together" the local armed groups with the Iraqi government. But as the local initiatives proliferate, Newton said, the effort is like "trying to sprint while putting your socks on."

More than 67,000 people across 12 of Iraq's 18 provinces are registered under the military designation Concerned Local Citizens, and 51,000 of those have been screened and had their names, fingerprints and other biometric data recorded by the U.S. military, Newton said. Such information is entered into a vast database that soldiers can use to help identify past criminal behavior, such as by matching fingerprints on a roadside bomb component. Eighty-two percent of the volunteers are Sunni and 18 percent are Shiite, he said. About 37,000 are being paid about $300 a month through contracts funded by the U.S.-led military coalition.

Although U.S. commanders stress that the coalition is not forming a Sunni militia, Iraqi leaders complain that paying the fighters is tantamount to arming them. The Iraqi government so far has balked at permanently hiring large numbers of the volunteers, resisting pressure from U.S. commanders to lift caps on the number of police in Anbar and Diyala provinces. Only about 1,600 of the volunteers have been trained and sworn in to the Iraqi security forces, primarily with the police.

The civil war is on hold and will flare up with increased violence when the time is right. I suspect the Bush administration knows this and is simply trying to postpone the inevitable until after the 2008 elections.

Update
Shiite-dominated government may not want the Sunnis in the Security Force but Juan Cole reports that they can't get enough Shiite militia men.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that PM al-Malaki has taken the contoversial decision to recruit 18,000 members of Shiite militias into the Iraqi government security forces. (In fact, the Iraqi military has de facto been recruiting a lot of Shiite militiamen anyway).

You have to wonder if this step is intended to offset the American military's pressure to recruit Sunni tribesmen and neighborhood volunteers into the security forces.

Aljazeera is reporting that Iraqi vice president Tariq al-Hashimi has come out vigorously denouncing al-Maliki for this move.

Well, something has to be done with the Shiite militiamen. You can't just demobilize them without risking their turning to violence. I think it would be better to give them civilian desk jobs in some department where they can't do much mischief, until the Iraqi economy can get its act together. (Eventually Iraq is likely to get rich, and there will be plenty of jobs in the oil sector and in industry; the question is what to do with trained militiamen until that comes about.) But putting the militiamen in the official security forces will cause a lot of trouble.

The Calm Before The Storm?

Via Jeb Koogler at The Moderate Voice this from Abu Aardvark:
Maliki: enough about reconciliation

Last week Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki mocked Iraqis calling for national reconciliation and dismissing them as self-interested conspirators. On Friday, he elaborated on his views of the current Iraqi political scene in a very intriguing, and frankly troubling, interview with al-Arabiya.

…[In the interview, Maliki argued] that Iraqi national reconciliation has not only already been achieved, it is “strong and stable and not fragile”. There is no civil war in Iraq, or even any real sectarian conflict anymore - the sectarian hatreds incited by “some” in the past have been overcome. He made clear that he does not equate national reconciliation with political progress at the national level: “I think that national reconciliation will come about not as some understand it, as a reconciliation with this political party governed by an ideology or a specific mentality.” Real national reconciliation, to Maliki, takes place at the local level, when “you can go into the street and meet with a Sunni in Shia areas or with a Shia in Sunni areas, where they live together once again.” That, he suggests, has happened.

The various Sunni awakenings demonstrate reconciliation at the local level, and their support for his national government. He claims that people who fled mixed Sunni-Shia areas are now returning (or are welcome to do so), and that the people now reject sectarianism in favor of national unity and his government. True, some politicians are still demanding reconciliation, but he dismisses them as “minor political parties” whose tiresome complaints now fall on deaf ears with the people.

…this amounts to a public declaration by Maliki that there will be no further efforts to achieve political reconciliation. Don’t expect any more national reconciliation in the form of “legislation” or “benchmarks”, Maliki is signaling.

What Maliki said was that reconciliation is complete in the Shiites won. Of course the Sunnis probably don't see it that way and knowing now that they are not going to get anything more from the Shia controlled government I wonder how much longer before they start using those shiny new weapons that Petraeus just gave them. If the current reduction in violence is actually real this is probably just the eye of the hurricane not the end of it.

Cross Posted at OOIBC

Nonsense, Iraq and Allawi

I have discussed here, here and here that regardless of what you look at Bush's surge has been failure. Of course all of the blame is being placed on Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki and that all that is really needed is for Ayad Allawi to take over. This was repeated by spinning DC pundit David Ignatius today. While al-Maliki does not have the support of enough Iraqis Allawi would have the support of virtually none and would not even have the support of the Security Forces. So what about that Iraqi Army? The Wall Street Journal gives us an idea of who has the support of the Iraq Security Forces in:
UNKNOWN ENEMIES
An Iraqi General Faces Risk
From Within His Ranks

Mahdi Militia Stymies
U.S. Security Push;
New Ceasefire Questioned
BAGHDAD -- Early this month, Brig. Gen. Falah Hassan Kinbar barely escaped a kidnap attempt by the Mahdi Army, a radical Shiite militia. During the attack, more than a dozen of the moderate Shiite general's own men betrayed him, switching sides to aid the militia fighters, U.S. officials say. When it was over, Gen. Kinbar's superiors seemed to distance themselves from him, he says.

[....]

"I am all alone on the battlefield," the general told Lt. Col. Steven Miska through an interpreter. "I want to do my duty. But I am very sure my own government will abandon me." Gen. Kinbar pleaded with Col. Miska to help him relocate his wife and two children. "Any country, any country, any country," he said, breaking into English.

[....]

As Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government has teetered in recent weeks, the Mahdi Army seems to have stepped up efforts to consolidate power, say U.S. military officials. In Ghaziliya, a Baghdad neighborhood, the Mahdi Army arrays forces around fuel stations, levying a "security tax" on owners and denying Sunnis fuel, says Col. Miska.

Mahdi fighters have infiltrated the major food-distribution warehouse on Baghdad's west side and shortchange Sunnis of rations, U.S. officials say. Elsewhere, Mahdi Army forces have "infected pieces of the local government" to deny Sunnis health care, water, and electricity, says Maj. Scott Nelson, operations officer for a 5,000-soldier brigade in Baghdad.

Armor-piercing bombs, used primarily by the Mahdi Army, accounted for three-quarters of American deaths and injuries in July, U.S. commanders say. Mr. Sadr yesterday called on Mahdi fighters to halt such attacks.

Today, few districts in Baghdad are more important to the Mahdi Army than Kadhimiya, the area where Col. Miska and Gen. Kinbar are charged with maintaining security. Kadhimiya, home to more than 200,000 Iraqis and the city's holiest Shiite shrine, has become a major center of Shiite political and economic power. Rival Shiite factions compete to dominate the area around the shrine, which draws hundreds of thousands of pilgrims a year. Mahdi fighters also use the Shiite district as a base to launch attacks against Sunnis, U.S. officials say.

This is one of the reasons that an Allawi would not survive long and that the US effort will eventually fail. But perhaps more importantly is what will happen when Bush and the neocons attack Iran. The 150,000 US soldiers in Iraq will become targets for the militias but also a large chunk of the Iraqi Security Forces that they have armed and trained.

Update
This is really going to help Allawi:
Allawi Gets a Baathist Endorsement

Iyad Allawi's bid to become Iraq's prime minister again has received an endorsement from an unexpected source: the Baath Party. A spokesman for the exiled leadership of Saddam Hussein's old party told TIME that Allawi "is the best person at this time to be given the task of ruling Iraq." He said he hoped that Allawi would pave the way for the Baath Party to "return to the political life of Iraq, where we rightfully belong."

The spokesman, known only as Abu Hala, said the Baath leadership under Saddam's deputy, Izzat al-Douri, were "more than willing to work with Allawi, because we see him as a nationalist and Iraqi patriot, and not a sectarian figure." He said the party didn't agree with all of Allawi's policies when he headed a transitional Iraqi government in 2004, but "we have no doubt that he would represent the interests of Iraq, not of Shi'ites or Sunnis or any other group."

The majority of Iraqis already see Allawi as an American tool and the 60% Shi'ite majority won't think to highly of an endorsement from the Baath Party. And about that largely Shi'ite Security Force. It will take a division of US soldiers just to keep Allawi alive.

But what about those purple fingers?

There is one thing about Iraq that nearly everyone can agree on it's that the Iraqi government under Nouri al-Maliki is dis-functional. Now Democracy was never what the Bush administration had in mind for Iraq. They were forced into elections by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. What they had in mind was a friendly tyrant, specifically Ahmad Chalabi. You remember him - the guy that turned out to be an Iranian spy. Now the neocons and the Bush administration would love to be rid of al-Maliki. There are two reports today that indicate that things may be about to change.
Via Think Progress we have this:
GOP Lobbyists Back Allawi

Barbour Griffith & Rogers has long been a powerhouse GOP lobbying firm. Now, apparently, American politics are just too small-time. BGR, according to a report by IraqSlogger's Christina Davidson, is trying to influence Iraqi politics as well.

BGR, the firm started by Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, has been promoting Ayad Allawi, the one-time Iraqi interim prime minister who over the weekend published an op-ed in the Washington Post calling for the parliamentary overthrow of current PM Nouri al-Maliki. The piece amounted to a trial balloon for American support for a second Allawi-led government, promising non-sectarianism and stability. Allawi has decades-old ties to the CIA, making him a known quantity to U.S. officials during a time of extreme frustration with Maliki.

But frustration alone doesn't get governments to fall. That's where BGR comes in. On August 17, the firm purchased the domain name Allawi-For-Iraq.com (the site's not yet live). Following publication of the op-ed, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) called on the Iraqi parliament to hold a no-confidence vote on Maliki. BGR circulated Levin's comments around Washington -- and particularly to Congressional staffers -- using the e-mail address DrAyadAllawi@Allawi-for-Iraq.com.

And we have this from Juan Cole:
Military Coup Planned for Iraq?

A rumor is circulating among well-connected and formerly high-level Iraqi bureaucrats in exile in places like Damascus that a military coup is being prepared for Iraq. I received the following from a reliable, knowledgeable contact. There is no certitude that this plan can or will be implemented. That it is being discussed at high levels seems highly likely.

"There is serious talk of a military commission (majlis `askari) to take over the government. The parties would be banned from holding positions, and all the ministers would be technocrats, so to speak. . . [The writer indicates that attempts have been made to recruit cabinet members from the ranks of expatriate technocrats.]

The six-member board or commission would be composed on non-political former military personnel who are presently not part of the government OR the military establishment, such as it is in Iraq at the moment. It is said that the Americans are supporting this behind the scenes.

The plan includes a two-year period during which political parties would not be permitted to be part of the government, but instead would prepare and strengthen the parties for an election which would not have lists, but real people running for real seats. The two year period would be designed to take control of security and restore infrastructure.

. . .[I]t is another [desperate plan], but one which many many Iraqis will support, since they are sick of their country being pulled apart by the "imports" - Maliki, Allawi, Jaafari et al. The military group is composed of internals, people who have the goal of securing the country even at the risk of no democracy, so they say. "

Both of these plans face a major obstacle, Muqtada al-Sadr. In spite of what we hear about the surge al-Sadr's militia still controls Baghdad. He is probably the single most popular figure in Iraq. His supporters make up some portion of the Iraqi army and Security Forces. I really don't see how either one of these plans would do anything to stabilize Iraq and a military coup would lead to further destabilization. Allawi would be seen as nothing but an American puppet and would not have the support of the people or the army.

Iraq - the wall won't fall but Malaki will?

USA Today reports:
Al-Maliki support eroding in Iraq

BAGHDAD — A broad range of prominent Iraqi lawmakers say they have lost confidence in Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's ability to reconcile the country's warring factions. A leading Kurdish lawmaker said al-Maliki should resign.
Legislators from several parties told USA TODAY that al-Maliki lacks the support in parliament to push through laws, such as a plan to distribute oil revenues, that could reduce tensions between Sunnis and Shiites. Iraq's parliament has failed to pass major legislation since a U.S.-led security plan began on Feb. 14.

"He is a weak prime minister," said Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish legislator who supported al-Maliki until recently. "This government hasn't delivered and is not capable of doing the job. They should resign."

Of course the problem is there are no alternatives if he does resign. As Cernig at NewsHoggers points out one of things Malaki couldn't do was stop the wall the Americans are building and is universally disliked by the Iraqis.

Today, according to "Roads To Iraq" blog, the Iraqi newspapers are saying Maliki has u-turned on the wall and that construction will indeed continue. Both Sunnis in general and nationalists of all stripes will see this, if true, as a massive betrayal of themselves and their nation's sovereignty.

I predict that if the wall doesn't come down, Maliki's government will - unless it is propped up at US gunpoint, of course. If Iraq is allowed to have its own political process Maliki's colaition will be replaced by one which wants the US out at the earliest opportunity and which will not be at all friendly to US national interests.

A wink and a nod - "pixie dust" edition

Does anyone really take this seriously?

Al-Maliki gives Mahdi Army blunt choice: disarm or face American onslaught

BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's prime minister has told Mahdi Army militiamen they must surrender their arms or face an all-out assault by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, senior Iraqi officials said Wednesday, revealing a pledge Washington wanted to hear as American and Iraqi troops prepared a fresh operation to end the bloody sectarian war gripping Baghdad.

The blunt message was particularly significant given that Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi leader, previously had blocked several U.S. attempts to crack down on the military wing of radical anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, now one of the most powerful players in Iraq.

Now Al-Maliki knows he has no power to stop or disarm the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr. He also knows full well that his own security forces won't do it and that a few thousand additional troops won't make it possible for the US to defeat the 60,000+ Mahdi Army. This was for US domestic consumption only with a "wink and a nod" to al-Sadr. Yes the "pixie dust" is flying.