Ramadi battle against ISIS : the marginal role of the militias of the popular crowd
On December 22, of this month , Iraqi forces lead offensive to liberate Ramadi from ISIS in terms that the military operations had began to end the control of the ISIS, “Daash”, on the city of Ramadi. The government had finally marshaled a large enough force to prevail in Ramadi and began a wider operation to fight ISIS in other parts of Anbar Province and the participation in these operations includes the military and security sectors accompanied by “anti-terrorism force” and local police of Anbar province in addition to local Sunni tribal forces, also these operations are supported by air cover of the international coalition led by the United States of America. It is worth noting of these operations that it comes in conformity with the vision of America in giving marginal role to the militias of the popular crowd (al-Hashd al-Shaabi) in the liberation Battle of Ramadi . It is likely that this role assigned to it for political appeasement, keeping Baghdad away from being in critical situation with those sectarian formations that most of its leaders have considerable political influence.
In view of the marginal role of the popular crowd (al-Hashd al-Shaabi) which is not consistent with the military aspirations of the military militias of the popular crowd regarding the future of Iraq, they launched media campaigns against what they considered to impose the US will on Iraqi sovereignty. Some political commentators , who are supporters of the crowd , have attacked what they called obedience of Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to the American dictations in what they called the exclusion of popular crowd militias to participate in the battle .For his part, spokesman of the popular crowd Karim al- Nouri told An Iranian Al-Alalam channel , speaking in Arabic-language “The Iraqis do not want the American way of liberation , and the crowd popular is the one which paved the way for the Liberation of Ramadi ,” adding that “the crowd does not wait for a license from any one to settle the battle, warning of the uniqueness of Washington of the security file because it will put Iraq on the brink of the abyss . ” He also expressed his displeasure of the marginalization of the role of its forces in the Battle of Ramadi, in an interview with ” Russian Sputnik agency” a few days ago, saying that the slow of breakthrough of the city by troops of the government due to the non-participation of elements of the crowd during the breakthrough operation , but attributed the achievements of the Iraqi armed forces in Ramadi to the popular crowed in tightening the noose and dismemberment of Daash months ago. ”
Also it did not lose sight of emphasis on the role of the United States and its insistence on non-participation of the popular crowd to break into the Ramadi operation.He described the coalition led by Washington against ISIS “Daash” as an “ineffective”, noting that “the intervention of coalition –led by US in the battle of Al-Anbar was an attempt by the United States to prove its seriousness in combating Daash even to rise to the Russian position which is the most serious in the face of terrorism. ” Karim Nouri’s statements had come as an extension to the position of the majority of Shiite forces in Iraq calling for involvement of Russia in the war against Daash in Iraq, similar to what is happening in Syria. ”
A spokesman of the militia of popular crowd realizes that what he said to the media completely goes against the truth, and to confront the issue of state regulation in Iraq is not a competitive issue between the United States and Russia, but their secondary role in the battle to liberate Ramadi is taken into the strategic accounts of the US administration. In this context, we wonder about the reasons that prompted the United States to give the militias of the popular crowd this marginal role in the Battle of Ramadi, and to what aim behind it?
Due to the obstructions of Iraqi forces and militias of the popular crowd to end the control of ISIS over the city of Tikrit, the Iraqi government asked the US administration to provide air support to it, which hesitated at first to provide it, because any victory in Tikrit will be calculated to Iran considering that the decision to start the war on state regulation in Salah al-din province, rather than any other region, is the Iranian decision. US administration has expressed its objection to the battle of Tikrit, on the one hand that it is not important from a strategic viewpoint in terms that it is under siege, and close to the points of contact with the Shiite areas, as well as the Iraqi forces did not complete its preparations for battle, especially the construction of the forces that will dominate on the ground in post-liberation stage. Therefore, the Americans did not participate with ground support in Tikrit, and they were contented with providing conditional air support to the Iraqi government that in the event of cleansing Tikrit from state regulation , it is forbidden for the militias of the popular crowd of entry, where these militias were obliged to agree as a result of the urgent need for American air cover. But what happened on the ground, contrary to what has been agreed upon. these militias backed by Iran entered to the city of Tikrit and carried out of the terrible violations of human rights such as the killing of Iraqi citizens as it considered every Iraqi Sunni in Tikrit belongs to ISIS and also had stolen properties of citizens , homes, shops and burnt it then, they were not satisfied at this level of criminality but also they prevented displaced people who have fled due to the control of the organization, to return to their homes. This ban is part of an Iranian plan carried out by militias of the popular crowd in an attempt to liquidate the Sunni presence in the provinces of western Iraq to be starting in Tikrit and pass this liquidation through Al Ramadi city all the way to the province of Mosul city ; to create a safe passage to the Iranian regime to reach their ally “! Bashar al-Assad in Syria and “Lebanese resistant “! Hassan Nasrallah.
It is worth to be noted that the way the militias of the popular crowed dealt with the city of Tikrit allowed the United States to explicitly declare that is one of the basic conditions for any future battle against ISIS “Daash” in Anbar or Mosul , or else where from controlled areas in Iraq , is not returning of militias of the popular crowd and Iranian advisors to the fore , as it was the matter at the Battle of Tikrit noting that the US position is based on the following prospective :
– It is not because the crowd has not managed to complete the battle without the intervention of the international coalition, after they tried to present the antithesis and alternative strategy of the coalition strategy to address the “state regulation” which is not based on combat troops from within the local community, as planned by alliance ,but based on a trained militia from other regions and other community .
– And not because they have exercised violations after the liberation of Tikrit, which is in fact usual violations with any army or militia in the case of the invasion of civilian populations, especially in the context of the existence of sectarian congestion , but it is because the growing role of the
popular crowd, which is really the growing Iranian role will lead to more political damage and negative political results. So the crowd along with its sectarian composition and the role of Iran in supporting and arming and training its elements, they are considered as an Iranian occupation army of Iraq .
This is inconsistent with US policy in Iraq after the “state regulation” and wanted to be avoided in Ramadi battle when militias of the popular crowd excluded from active participation in the Battle of Ramadi, the United States has found great interest in supporting the refusal of Sunni tribes to the entry of Shiite militias to their regions, so the Iranian-American disagreement is not based on a contradiction in military strategies to be followed against ISIS , but the dispute could be in the struggle between them for influence on Iraq’s future shape; while the Iranian regime supports converting militias of the popular crowd to independent military structure along the lines of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and used it to extend its influence , the United States wants to use the conflict to re-structure of the Iraqi armed forces and the reduction of Iranian influence within it.
a researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Michael Knights argues ” that the threat of state regulation in Iraq and the Levant “Daash” made great opportunity for the United States of America to return to Iraq and the establishment of a strategic partnership with the Iraqi government and the Iraqi armed forces that the United States has played a major role in its formation and structure , train and arming in Iraq after 2003.
As for the goal of the United States of America to make the role of the popular crowd marginal role in the Battle of Ramadi and other upcoming battles against the “state regulation”, and in contrast, the participation of the people of Ramadi of Iraqi Sunni tribes in the battle , is in an attempt to make this force after the liberation of Ramadi, to be the nucleus of the National Guard system as it is included in A document of the political agreement between the political blocs of the program of the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, since this a guard is consisted of the people of each province as a reserve army and police and have specific tasks, and to be entrusted the security file of the province. The United States of America understands that Iraq today can not form an effective security forces or real kind of rule of law without addressing to the sectarian and ethnic divisions that are tearing the country apart . and any US air campaign, or the task of training and assistance, or a mixed group of military advisers can not achieve lasting success if Iraq remained divided to military forces and police dominated by Shiite militias, and the separate Kurdish forces , and the weak mixture of the Sunni tribal forces which its activity are confined in western Iraq.
This idea, National guard, which United States is trying to impose it particularly on the Iraqi Shiite politicians, Iran’s allies in Iraq and those who fear of its application that Guard may be turned to a Sunni power could threaten the Shiite government in Baghdad and can be used from regional powers , it is really an American idea, reproduced from a model of the National Guard in the United States itself as a solution to the problem of the loss of trust among the Iraqi factions , especially in the security issue.
The policy of the United States in reducing the role of the militias of the popular crowd at the Battle of Ramadi shows clearly that it has succeeded till now at drawing a separated limits of the movement of the Shiite militias within the battle against state regulation, and the provinces of Anbar and Nineveh are the areas where the role of the crowd will be precisely determined so that it is a support and a marginal role and not a leading role as it was the case in Diyala and Salah ad-Din. And the restoration of al-Ramadi will be an important event in the conduct of the war against Daash in Iraq , on the grounds that it is a major step towards the restoration of Anbar province, which the city make up its center and it is considered with Fallujah city as a great focal point for the organization. In this sense, the acceptance of the militias of popular crowd of marginal role in the Battle of Anbar reduces its contribution to the war on the organization as a whole.
We conclude by saying, that the real challenge in Iraq is not the expulsion of ISIS “Daash” from the province of Anbar and Nineveh, but to help Iraq to achieve a kind of broader security and political and economic stability. As a matter of fact,, the expulsion of ISIS” from the Sunni areas of western Iraq is a vital necessity, but just a defeat will not make a difference, if this is not part of a broader effort to reach a stable political and economic relationship between Sunnis and Shiites, Arabs and Kurds, and provide security for all of them, and to find a structure of governance which all Iraqis feel that it serves their fundamental interests, and put Iraq on the road of the broader economic recovery, then walk in the direction of the overall development
