Sunni insurgency: Out of the shadows

I just want to draw attention to a really important story about Iraq, which could easily get lost in the questions about the Mashhadani capture  - the report in the Guardian about the moves to cement the public political profile of the major Sunni insurgency groups, based on a rare interview with leaders of some of the major factions.

For four years, the resistance has stayed in the shadows, without a public face and apparently leaderless, while delivering an ever more violent and devastating campaign that has brought the world's most powerful army to the brink of defeat and changed the balance of global power. As al-Qaida-style suicide atrocities against civilians and Sunni-Shia sectarian death-squad killings have escalated in the past couple of years, they have tended to shift attention away from the guerrilla war against the US and British occupation forces and their client Iraqi army and police. But it is that growing war of attrition - there are now more than 5,000 attacks a month against US forces across Iraq and the past three months have been the bloodiest for US forces since the 2003 invasion (331 deaths and 2,029 wounded) - that has pushed the demand for withdrawal from Iraq to the top of the political agenda in Washington.

Until now, the resistance groups have operated entirely underground and their leaders have communicated with the outside world mainly through internet postings, if at all. (Omary's group specialises in hi-tech communication and produces photos and videos, some of them reproduced here, which are strongly reminiscent of IRA propaganda of the 1980s.) Now they have decided to speak to the western press for the first time as they prepare to launch a public face and a common political programme in anticipation of eventual American and British withdrawal from Iraq. Seven of the most important Sunni-led armed organisations - excluding al-Qaida and the Ba'athists - have agreed to form a united front and have drawn up a series of demands to form the basis of future negotiations with the occupation forces.

These are the same groups about which I've often written (the Guardian names Iraqi Hamas, the 1920 Revolution Brigades, the new Ansar al-Sunna,  Jaish al-Islami, Jaish al-Mujahideen, Jama' and Jaish al-Rashideen), coming together around the same political agenda:  distaste for al-Qaeda, but armed resistance as long as the United States keeps forces in Iraq and a demand for reshaping the Iraqi political system to better represent Sunni interests.   These leaders also say that it is their belief that the US will soon withdraw its forces, and not the strength of the American 'surge', which has prompted their decision to step forward into the public political realm ("it is a common view in the resistance that [the US] will start to withdraw within a year.... Right or wrong, that is one of the factors that has led to the decision to form the new front, which is planned to be called the Political Office for the Iraqi Resistance.")

These moves by the major insurgency factions over the last several months don't fit well within the preferred American narrative.  Their actions are not motivated by the 'surge', but rather by the belief that the US will soon leave.  Their hostility to the Islamic State of Iraq/al-Qaeda does not translate into support for the United States or the current Iraqi government.   They vow to continue armed struggle until the US forces leave, and to stop the violence when they do.  And they have clear demands for changes to the Iraqi political system on behalf of Sunni interests - demands which may be unacceptable to other Iraqis in their current form but at least offer a starting point for real political talks.   These factions have been articulating these positions very clearly and consistently for several months now.   But they repeatedly seem to be marginalized or discounted because they don't fit the American narrative, in which al-Qaeda is the primary enemy and most Sunnis and insurgency groups are switching to the American side.  I really hope that American officials don't really believe their own propaganda and are paying attention to the really significant developments on the Sunni side - because if not, then the political resolution which everyone seems to agree is needed will never be achieved.   

Comments

[kao_hsien_chih]

Assuming that Sunnis actually do organize for political representation, will anybody talk to them...seriously? Sinn Fein in Ireland has been around a long time...but it's still not trusted as a serious negotiating partner. Precisely because it is not taken seriously, it continues to (or at least is believed to) invest in the armed option--which feeds the distrust, in turn. there is no reason to believe, I think, that any of the factions in Iraq will have any more incentive to forego violence against other groups as a viable option even without anyone else involved.

As much as the British experience in Northern Ireland turned out to be unhappy, one does have to wonder if things would have been any more "positive" (whatever that means) for anyone had they pulled out and left the Catholics and Protestants to do as please with each other. Unlike Iraq, Ireland is an isolated piece of real estate that couldn't have caused much damage beyond the immediate vicinity, moreover.

[Muthu]

This war given enough pain to both the sides, I guess no one is strongly believe in continuing this war would yield peace in Iraq. So, why not get back the troops and look for the development?
PVC Windows Diss

[Al-Zainabiyya]

"What do you expect from any resistance movement whether in Iraq or elswhere,did you really believe Ahmed Chalabi when he told you,Iraqis will welcome you with sweet and flowers and maybe with some cucumber and tomatoes.
Off course,any Resistance movement would take arms to defend themselves and liberate their country,wouldn't ya Abu ardvak do the same thing,when your country become under the most brutal and criminal occupation in history?"

WE WOULD MOST CERTAINLY HAVE welcomed Americans with sweet and flowers--we just did not have sweet and flowers. But we did welcome them with tears of joy and with words of gratitude. Damn it, were were then dying of starvation, where do you think we were going to get sweet and flowers from?
It is not their country that they are trying to liberate; it isn't even their country. They are themselves descendents of occupiers, lizard-eating desert rats. They thought they could regain power over the majority by harboring terrorists. This is not going to happen.
We are in the process of cleaning our beloved Iraq from them. Once the American withdraw, the Imam al-Mahdi (my soul be his ransom) army will take good care of them. Rest assured of this. I think the Sneanis know this now; which is why they've stopped asking for a timetable for US withdrawal.

The Sneani "resistance" could function precisely because the US occupation is NOT, as the gentleman put it "the most brutal and criminal occupation in history." In fact it is the other way round; it is a joke. They detain them and release them a few hours/days later.

FOR alurdunialhurr i.e. "free Jordanian."
Of all epithets you chose "al-Hurr" (the free). When have been free? Certainly not the last half a century or so during which the British and their protege kings have been marching you like cattle. Maybe before that? When you were in the desert of Najd perfuming yourself with camel urin, feeding on lizards and fighting among yourselves over a goat?
BTW: there will be no more free Iraqi oil to you Jordanian. Your "heroic" saddam is a corpse now.
If you are a Palestinian, then the Egyptians got it right when they say "tirbaat yuhuud" (reared up by Jews) whenever the word Palestinian is mentioned.
-----------