| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Hezbollah/Iranians have major presence in Basra |
| 2004-09-01 |
| So sez Asia Times anyway According to Asia Times Online contacts in the south, the Lebanese Shi'ite militia Hezbollah has deeply infiltrated Basra and surrounding areas, so much so that it virtually runs the province, with the help of Shi'ite militias, and is committed to establishing vilayat-e-faqih (rule by the religious clergy according to the Shi'ite faith). Most of Iraq's eligible males received military training under the Ba'ath rule of Saddam Hussein, and now the Shi'ite militias have equipped them with arms and ammunition. According to the contacts, much of this activity is being bankrolled through "welfare funds" ostensibly given to mosques and shrines by Iranian intelligence. Also, Iranian Shi'ites are said to be flooding across the porous border in their thousands, including Iranian revolutionary guards, who have already established pockets, especially in Ammarah and Basra. The former residence of the governor of Basra..is now being used by Iranian intelligence under the cover of the Sayyed al-Shohada political party. The party is like many Shi'ite militias and calls itself a branch of the al-Majlis al-Alla (Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq - SCIR) led by Ayatollah Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. However, the office bearers of the organization are not known to local Iraqis, and are generally believed to be Iranian. The Iraqi Hezbollah now has its headquarters right in the middle of Basra, in the old police headquarters. The police have offices in a new building in front of the Shatul Arab waterway. The Iraqi Hezbollah has also established a powerful branch in Ammarah. This combination of Shi'ite militias (reinforced with Iranians) and Iranian intelligence in Basra and Ammarah is taking place under the watchful eyes of the British, who are responsible for security in the south, but they are reluctant to precipitate a major clash, so have kept their distance. These Iranian supported-militias are one part of the Shi'ite political puzzle. There are, of course, other key pieces, notably Muqtada, who if nothing else has earned himself a reputation for opportunism and unpredictability. |
| Posted by:Paul Moloney |
| #15 I don't know why everyone is worried. As soon as Israel wants, it will take out the nuke plants to solve that part of the puzzle. I think it's good it the Brits don't engage. If the whole country blew up it would hurt Bush's chance for relection. Lastly, when the roach motel is finally full and they start trouble the Brits with US Air support will crush them. The papers made Najaf sound like Bataan for us when, in fact, Tater and his Tots got the worse end of that fight. |
| Posted by: 98zulu 2004-09-01 2:06:53 PM |
| #14 BD - yes, quite. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-09-01 12:48:13 PM |
| #13 Lh - do you mean this piece? A mixed bag of good and bad news; e.g. the good: "With special forces operating in the city, the Army has gathered enough intelligence on the key leaders of the estimated 400 insurgents to "take them out if we want to", but the ultimate decision to retake Basra by force rests with Downing Street, according to military sources." ...and the bad: ""These last three weeks have been very difficult for us," said Arrif, 26, a teacher. "It is not safe to go out on the street because there are bombs and shootings. We are afraid the situation will escalate and that this will affect the economy because people cannot go to work. The majority of Basra people want the Army to enter the city." Other residents in the city centre echoed this view, blaming the violence on the lack of British presence. "The people are living from hand to mouth, struggling every day to get food," said Wa'il, 24, a student of English. "People in Basra blame the British forces for this situation. They want them to deploy outside their barracks because this would get rid of the Mahdi army." It's a deterioration relative to three months ago, for sure, but not hopeless. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-09-01 12:44:22 PM |
| #12 Mike! Quick look, it's that Lop Ear again! |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-09-01 10:59:34 AM |
| #11 A couple of days ago - it ALSO suggested that the brit forces ARE staying out of central Basra, and that the anti-Sadr elements in Basra are unhappy with this, and hinted that its about keeping casualties down. No offensive. But still not different from US approach in Anbar province. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-09-01 9:56:49 AM |
| #10 Which DT article, Lh? I'm guessing not recent. From the balance of what I've heard in the last few weeks, the situation in Basra has deteriorated significantly. I'm sure the British forces are responding to attacks with deadly force, but the fact seems to be that they're restricting their movements so as to avoid confrontation and keep it to a minimum. Unless we've just launched an offensive... |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-09-01 9:50:18 AM |
| #9 UFO: We can't wait for that to happen, resolution on Iraq which was also written in 1998 has been carried out and we must act before too many Americans die there and the country loses the will to fight. UFO hopes that Uncle Sam will lose the will to fight, even while he himself cannot summon the will to fight for the other side. This is why UFO's jihadi pals will fail - because guys like UFO are all talk and no action. UFO really needs to go to the nearest mosque and donate to the friendly local jihadi charity so that they won't have to kidnap innocent civilians for ransom. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-09-01 9:46:46 AM |
| #8 Daily Telegraph article implied a firm cordon around central Basra, with Brit troops responding with deadly force to attacks on them, resulting in significant baddie casualties. Apparently quite similar to the USMC approach in Fallujah. Talks of deal with Sadrists in Basra, parallel to talks of deal in Sadr City - no clear confirmation in either case. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-09-01 9:46:13 AM |
| #7 Unfortunately, I don't think we have the time to let Iranians take the initiative, either. Half-to-most of the problems we're having in Iraq are Iran-sponsored, which is costing coalition lives and jeopardising Iraq's future, whilst Iran itself is thundering on towards arming itself with nuclear technology. At the moment, the sands of time are running in Iran's favour. We need to turn that sand on its head. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-09-01 9:39:37 AM |
| #6 Getting Iraq and Afghanistan straightened out with fledgling democracies may be the catalyst we need.. direct action highly improbable unless the mullahs act first. I think that this would be an opportune moment to reinforce Basra with the Ghurkas. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-01 9:35:33 AM |
| #5 "...I believe the Iranian people will eventually get fed up...." We can't wait for that to happen, resolution on Iraq which was also written in 1998 has been carried out and we must act before too many Americans die there and the country loses the will to fight. |
| Posted by: UFO 2004-09-01 9:26:55 AM |
| #4 No need to occupy, just need to blow that power station into a million pieces. Can't have someone who thinks he has a hotline to Allan with his finger on the red button. I believe the Iranian people will eventually get fed up with constant subjugation from a leadership with a stone-age mindset and do the job themselves. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-01 9:08:32 AM |
| #3 "...Something needs to be done to rescue the situation before Basra gets out of hand entirely." Of course, Iran must be occupied next just as planned in 1998, and now we have sufficient grounds -- who do these Moslems think they are?! |
| Posted by: UFO 2004-09-01 9:01:35 AM |
| #2 agreed bulldog , but i expect our surveillance of the situation will be top notch . The time for hands on operations will come soon enough |
| Posted by: MacNails 2004-09-01 8:44:28 AM |
| #1 I wouldn't be surprised. British troops have shamefully allowed no-go areas to become established in large parts of Basra where God-knows-what is going on. Presumably this is because: a) the British forces are inadequate (undermanned and underequipped - the Landrovers, nifty though they are, are death traps for patrolling in urban areas where IEDs are the enemy's weapon of choice). b) Blair won't risk the political damage that greater numbers of British casualties would cause, so he's ordered our troops to pretty much remain on base. Something needs to be done to rescue the situation before Basra gets out of hand entirely. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-09-01 8:37:24 AM |