As the war against insurgents gets deadlier and political reconciliation stalls, Washington's surge strategy seems to be crumbling, writes Salah Hemeid Codenamed Arrowhead Ripper, the operation launched last week by US and Iraqi troops in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, is one of the biggest campaigns undertaken by American troops since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The large-scale offensive involved some 10,000 troops -- roughly 6,000 US and 4,000 Iraqis -- flown in by helicopters and bolstered by the massive firepower of tanks, artillery and close air support. The goal of the campaign, spelled out by the commander of coalition forces in the area, Brig Gen Mick Bednarek, was "to destroy the Al-Qaeda influence in this province and eliminate their threat against the people". He made it clear that this meant killing or capturing Sunni militants rather than allowing them to escape, regroup and return once the heat was off, as had happened elsewhere in the past four years. In Diyala, US forces have also been pursuing a tactic which their commanders claim has paid off in Anbar province, west of Baghdad. Insurgent activity in Anbar has dropped off noticeably since some of the local Sunni tribes and groups turned against the Al-Qaeda-related radical Islamist factions, some of which are believed to have moved to other provinces, notably Diyala, as a result. The Diyala Salvation Council has been established, similar to that set up by Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar, to resist Al-Qaeda and support the government. Some former insurgents from nationalist Sunni groups -- such as the 1920 Revolution Brigade -- are reported to have been armed and funded by the US military in exchange for cooperation against the Al-Qaeda militants. The Diyala operation is part of a number of major offensive operations throughout the belt regions of Baghdad. Iraqi and US forces have launched a large scale operation in Arab Jbor, another main hub of Al-Qaeda south of Baghdad. More than 2,000 American troops, along with about 1,000 Iraqi soldiers are pushing south along the Tigris River through the Sunni insurgent haven in a formidable operation that is part of an overall US strategy to take control of the terrain encircling the capital. Arab Jbor, almost exclusively Sunni and home to many prominent members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party had been off limits to US and Iraqi government troops. Two other brigades operating on the eastern and western flanks of the Marne Torch operation are trying to keep fighters from leaving the area. The key is to prevent the insurgents from moving into Baghdad to carry out bombings. As in Diyala, US commanders acknowledged that the insurgents were very effective and said they expected a long summer of fighting. Part of the plan is political and aims to bring about a swift restoration of Iraqi government services and activities, which have been virtually suspended in some areas for months, with provincial council budgets largely unspent. One of the priorities is getting the Iraqi government to start providing fundamental services, such as food, fuel and education. Evidently, the campaigns also aim to give Sunnis a sense of participation and control over their own areas once the militant groups are flushed out. American officials hope that a package of new laws will empower the Sunnis. This includes reintegrating former Baathists, sharing national resources and restructuring the army and security forces on a non-sectarian basis in a bid to end the insurgency. But the Iraqi government seems unmoved by the US tactics. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari admitted that the relationship between Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki and American top commander in Iraq Gen David Petraeus is tense. He told Newsweek Magazine this week that Al-Maliki is not being briefed by the American general about his plans. "Who's in charge? Who decides? I sympathise because the lines are blurred. The prime minister cannot just pick up the phone and have Iraqi army units do what he says. Al-Maliki needs more leverage," Zebari complained. As the war continues amidst wrangling with the Baghdad government, the debate rages in Washington about the future of American troops in Iraq. Last month, Congress set a 15 September deadline for Petraeus, demanding an assessment of progress there, following the troops surge he requested to defeat the insurgency and before authorising billions dollars more to finance the military effort to stabilise the country. In recent days, Petraeus, said that his report would be only a snapshot of trends, strongly suggesting he will be asking for more time. In addition, the American ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan C Crocker seems to be commissioning other assessments that critics say could dilute findings about the impact of the current troops increase and give President Bush a wide range of options. American intelligence agencies are reportedly preparing to submit their own assessment of Iraq's progress. This is expected to include a judgement of whether Al-Maliki is willing or capable of striking the kind of Shia-Sunni political balance Bush said was the ultimate objective of the American strategy, and whether the passage of political compromises, none of which have yet cleared Iraq's parliament, have any hope of reducing the violence. Congress has also asked for an independent commission to report on whether Iraqi security forces are ready to take on the greater role in stabilising the country. The Congress did not mandate who would conduct the assessment, but reportedly the task would be assigned to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a bipartisan Washington policy institute that has regularly published scholarly evaluations of strategic blunders in the administration's strategy. As more assessments are being made concerning the surge, evidence is emerging that the plan is crumbling. The goal of bringing about 30,000 more soldiers to Iraq was to reduce the violence to a level to which the Iraqis can cope so that the American troops can begin to go home. American military commanders now seriously doubt that the Iraqi security forces will be able to hold the ground that US troops are fighting to clear -- gloomy predictions that strike at the heart of Washington's key strategy to turn the tide in Iraq. In recent days, American commanders have warned that Iraqi troops are still unprepared for maintaining security on their own in hot spots, including Baghdad and the recently reclaimed areas around Diyala and Arab Jbor. With the political reconciliation at a stalemate and violence still raging, this would present a challenge and the Bush administration would then face the dilemma of maintaining substantial forces in Iraq for years or risk the turmoil spreading to other parts of the Middle East.
