Still unsettled
Toolbox
Published: October 27, 2009
Americans have been hoping that things were settling down in Iraq and troop withdrawals could occur on schedule, leaving worried White House strategists to concentrate their attention on the seemingly endless complexities presented by the situation in Afghanistan. But Sunday's twin bombings proved that the situation remains deeply volatile in Baghdad.
And while it may be premature (and ultimately impossible) to accurately place the blame for these horrific bombings, which took more than 150 lives, including as many as 30 children, it is inevitable that some – especially Iraqis themselves, even those who may have thoroughly despised Saddam Hussein – will want to hold Washington responsible.
"We don't know whether it's the political parties, al-Qaida, neighboring countries or the Americans," one man (whose nephew was run over by a vehicle speeding away from one of the bombings) told reporters. However, he added, Americans are primarily to blame because "they control everything, from the sky to the ground."
Under these circumstances it is understandable that he would express such feelings, but it's also quite clear that if indeed the United States had the luxury of exercising control "from the sky to the ground" then there wouldn't be any such acts of terror because they're completely contrary to America's best interests.
So what do these carefully synchronized bombings tell us? Intelligence analysts may eventually come up with a definitive explanation, but in the meantime perhaps the most logical conclusion is that they provide conclusive proof that the American-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has not yet provided a satisfactory level of national security.
The bombings appear designed to weaken Maliki's hold on the reins of power prior to the January elections. They may also raise questions about the timetable for the withdrawal of American troops, for the killings Sunday demonstrated that the government still needs a great deal of help before it can honestly say it is running Iraq in a safe and efficient manner. And a third rationale is that they reflect unresolved issues of power-sharing among Iraq's Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds.
Sunday's attacks, which took place during the morning rush hour, were Baghdad's worst since 2007, but it was just a few weeks ago, in August, that a bombing killed about 100 people. The insurgents have attacked several centers of the government's power, including the Foreign, Finance, Justice, and Municipalities and Public Works ministries, along with the Baghdad provincial headquarters. Those kinds of targets – as opposed to crowded mosques, restaurants and other public places – appear to be chosen to deliberately weaken the Maliki government.
However, on Monday Washington Post columnist David Ignatius described how Gen. David Petraeus, who commanded American forces in Iraq from 2007 to 2008, found signs of progress as he flew over Baghdad in a Black Hawk helicopter on Sunday, the same day as the bombings.
"See, the houses are occupied again," the general said as he pointed to a neighborhood that had been a virtual ghost town. "Always good to see a crane … traffic jam, that's good to see." Ignatius reported that Petraeus also noticed "the evidence of normality – the schools, the police stations, the sports stadiums, the bus and train stations, the parks and markets and riverside restaurants."
Surveying the cityscape at night, he noted, "People are back out in the parks, " adding, "All the lights are on, cars are driving around." Ignatius asked later if he thought Sunday's violence would lead people to request that American troops return to the cities, and he shook his head: "Iraq is a sovereign country. Iraqis will respond to this."
Let's hope Petraeus' optimism proves justified.
42