Roads to Iraq

Confusing messages from Mosul explained

How can I explain the confusing messages about what’s really going on, without telling a short history of Mosul?

About two days ago, news agencies reported that Iraqi security forces carried out mass arrests in Mosul, about 900 former-army officers (not connected to al-Qaeda) who are given “amnesty” few months ago, al-Hayat reported today:

[The arrests] included former members of Ba’ath party, well known personalities, and former army officers,…. Officials in the government assured the armed factions who are not connected to al-Qaeda that they are not targeted by this campaign, Ba’athists and former army officers will be released soon.

In 1913, a secret organization called “The Covenant Council” formed in Aleppo - Syria by Arab officers serving in the Ottoman army [living in Istanbul] and opened two representations in Baghdad and Mosul [the orginization considered ‘till today; the first seed of what later called "pan-Arabism"], with a the goal of “some kind” of self-rule status inside the Ottoman Empire, from the organization’s 490 members, there were 319 Iraqi and all of them were Sunnis [because Shiite supreme Cleric forbid Shiites from joining the Ottoman army, they even punished the few Shiite who are already participated like "Ja'far Abu al-Temin"], the majority of these officers came originally from Mosul for simple reason: The Ottomans believed that militarizing Mosul [because of its geography] is best way and first defense strategy against the Kurds who at time causing problems and rebel against the Empire.

After the defeat and collapse of the Ottoman Empire by the British, the “The Covenant Council” dissolved itself [no reason for its existence], inspired by a new movement in Turkey led by Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, many of the “Kamalists” [as called by the British, in Iraq we called them "Afandiya" which later became a moderation social movement] returned home and started to cause “unrest” for the British at the “northern region” even after the British appointed an Arab King [Faisal] in Iraq [see Gertrude Bell 8 Sep. 1922]

The British learned the lesson from the Ottomans after the Kurds started to rebel against them, by cutting a deal with the “Afandiya”, allowing them to join the “new formed” Iraqi army giving them high-rank positions using their previous military experience to stand against the Kurds as first defense line “trench” near Kurdistan and last Arab Sunni stronghold in Iraq.

Since that time until 2003 invasion, Mosul is “all-military” province, Mosulis officers were about 75% of the former Iraqi army.

Americans, Iranians, Kurds and Maliki know that strong, military oriented Mosul stands against “Kurds expansion plans”, “Americans occupation”, “Iranian influence”, and Maliki’s government existence.

Jordanian thinker and researcher Dr. Akram Hijazi from [Arab Institute of Middle East Studies] wrote an excellent article in his Blog about the coming battle of Mosul:

The Sunni al-Tawafiq [Accordance Front] are enthusiastically pushing to start the Mosul operation and the remarkably semi-silence of the Kurds and al-Hakim group, …the Iraqi government is implementing the American - Iran project agreed by both, to prepare a suitable ground for the coming provincial election, with the South under the Iranian control, and the North under the Kurds control.

There were reasons behind the delay of Mosul operation, by their experience in Fallujha, the Americans know that wining the Battle of Mosul with its 4Million residents is something semi-impassible, the victory of a battle in a city of this size will be at a big cost if not defeat.

Before the announcement of the start of the operations, the Americans started a propaganda campaign such as the arrest of Baghdadi [head of the so called Islamic State of Iraq], and the arrest of al-Muhajir to create confusion among the armed factions in Mosul to follow their leadership.

The resistance intensified their attacks in Anbar, attacking the gates of the “Green Zone”, and even Hiro’s [Talabani's wife] convoy creating fear in the Iraqi government, giving a message that they can hit and attack at the heart of Baghdad if Mosul destroyed.

The writer also thinks that the surprise news reported on al-Jazeera two days ago that “Jihad and Reform Front” announces its alliances with al-Qaeda meant to creates confusion among the attacking forces, and achieved some success represented by the confusion statement announced by the Iraqi government, raising doubts about the goals of the campaign, if it is bring peace to the city or surrender the city to the Kurds to prepare the division of Iraq.

4 Comments, Comment or Ping

  1. Interested reader

    Thanks, could you give more info on the announced aliance between RJF and al Qaeda (suppose he´s referring to Islamic State)?That´s very interesting. You said it appeared on al jazeera.

    I think the Mosul offensive is going to be a disaster, the insurgents are simply lying low, the Iraqi Army doesn´t have a clue on where or who they are (they just announced the capture of 18 grenades, 150 firearms…and 1000+ people!!!) and the insurgents are determined to go on with the fight once the storm has passed. This offensive is a micromanaged blind sweep.

    I have understood that in Mosul there wasn´t so heavy insurgent infighting as in the rest of the country. Also although attacks (presumably by the Islamic State and possibly Ansar al Islam) continue, there haven´t been more no news of clashes between insurgent groups for several months. There is no Sahwa and there is more or less consensus among insurgent groups since even “moderates” proudly boast about attacks on Iraqi forces, the Islamic Army claims a lot of attacks on the Peshmerga.

    I also understand that groups other than the ISI and Ansar al Islam, those that didn´t join the Sahwa don´t want to get into trouble with the Sahwa either. So in areas where the Sahwa is in control, they´re simply lying low or making sporadic attacks. These seem to be getting less sporadic now with some attacks on US forces being reported in sahwa-controlled areas. However i think that if the ISI keeps striking at the Sahwa with outrageous attacks like the Abu Ghrayb suicide bombing it will be a disaster again.

    By the way did you see the posting on al-ekhlaas forum. Attacks by the insurgents really suffered in 2007 as a result of the Sahwa, particularly those by Islamic State which used to be an extremely powerful group have plummeted. Other groups also suffered but less so, and there seems to be an uptick now - the daily average for May is rising.

    link is here

    link is here

    From what i read in insurgent claims there also seems to be new, small insurgent groups popping up - maybe from large groups like the Islamic Army which were partly paralyzed. But i can´t really know.

  2. It seems Chalabi’s poodle, and one the people who fixed Iraq’s sectarian war Nibras Kazimi owner of the theory “arrest every male in the city”, came up this time with few charts saying: Iraq’s resistance is finished, the resistance defeated and everybody can go home happy.

    In his Friday speech yesterday, Sistani spokesman said: The improved security situation in Iraq is a lie, the high level the assassinations is contrary to the statement of government officials.

    This shows thatb the Maliki & Co are playing down the numbers of the attacks, the same goes to the occupation forces, there are daily unreported attacks on American forces, these are reported today for example:

    Mujahdeen Army
    : Destroying an American military vehicle in Mosul.

    link is here: A road side bomb exploded caused the destruction of an American vehicle.

Mini posts