General Reveals Rift with Rumsfeld on Insurgents

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

General Reveals Rift with Rumsfeld on Insurgents

Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit

InterPress Service - Apr 15, 2006
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32905

US/IRAQ:
General Reveals Rift with Rumsfeld on Insurgents

by Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON, Apr 15 (IPS) - A military assessment of the Iraqi insurgency in
late 2004 concluded that it had the active support of millions of Sunnis who
rejected the legitimacy of a U.S. installed government, according to Lt.
Gen. John R. Vines, who led all coalition forces in Iraq from January 2005
to January 2006.

That analysis conflicted with the view of Secretary of Defence Donald
Rumsfeld and Vice Pres. *** Cheney, who believed the insurgents represented
only Saddam loyalists and foreign jihadists and could be defeated by a
combination of force and free elections.

Vines's revelation thus provides evidence of differences between top U.S.
generals and U.S. policymakers in 2004-2005 over the nature of the
insurgency and what to do about it.

In a speech at the Washington Institute Thursday, Gen. Vines recalled that
an analysis on which he worked in fall 2004 had portrayed a three-tier
insurgency, the largest element of which consisted of "Sunnis who rejected
the authority of the interim government".

Vines said this element, which was called "Sunni Arab Rejectionists",
included those Sunnis who "agreed that the transitional government could not
be expected to protect their interests". It was "quite a large element," he
said, numbering in the "millions".

Noting that Sunnis were 25 percent of the Iraqi population, Vines said the
Sunni "rejectionists" were a "source of labour for the insurgency -- an
unlimited supply of blue collar thugs". Not all Sunnis were pro-insurgency,
Vines said, but "a significant proportion were".

He described the other two tiers of the insurgency as being a "very small"
contingent of foreign jihadists and some 30,000 loosely coordinated "former
regime elements" with access to large amounts of cash from "Sunni
sympathisers around the world".

Vines recalled that that he and others involved in the assessment "felt as
long as the government was not regarded as legitimate by the Sunnis, the
problem [of the insurgency] would not go away".

Vines strongly implied that he was a key figure in putting together the
analysis. He referred to "the perceptions with which he we entered Iraq in
January 2005" and repeated later that the views he was describing were
"views I held".

Although he did not indicate what institution was primarily responsible for
the analysis, the circumstantial evidence points to CENTCOM, the U.S.
Central Command, with which Vines had close ties. CENTCOM's main function is
to monitor and analyse developments in the 27 countries for which it is
responsible.

Vines's official biography does not show any assignment between October 2003
and his assumption of command in Iraq in January 2005. His prior command of
coalition forces in Afghanistan from May to October 2003, however, suggests
that he was still associated with CENTCOM, which is responsible for both
Afghanistan and Iraq, during the time the study was undertaken.

The Vines assessment was completed in October 2004 just as the Pentagon was
preparing for a major offensive in Fallujah that was based on a very
different set of assumptions about the insurgency.

Rumsfeld revealed in an interview with pro-war Washington Post columnist Jim
Hoagland that the objective of the assault on Fallujah was to "dissuade
Sunni townspeople from joining, supporting or tolerating the insurrection".
The implication was that the price of such support in terms of destruction
and death meted out to the city by the U.S. air and ground attack would be
too high for most civilians.

That approach to the insurgency, which did not require any accommodation to
the interests of the Sunni community, was at odds with the analysis in the
Vines assessment.

In late October 2004, senior officials in Washington and Baghdad leaked
selected bits of information from the assessment to the New York Times and
Washington Post. Both papers published details about the access of Baathist
elements to financial support from abroad, for example.

But neither paper was given any hint of the extremely broad base of support
among Sunnis for the insurgency that had been the main new analytical point
of the analysis. Instead, the Post quoted the officials as saying the
"dominant element of the insurgency" was "a "loose group referred to in U.S.
military documents as 'Sunni Arab rejectionists', consisting largely of
former members of Hussein's government".

Thus senior officials arbitrarily redefined the category of "Sunni Arab
rejectionists" to be consistent with their portrayal of the insurgency as
small and isolated.

The Vines analysis was yet another skirmish in a battle between the
administration and professional analysts over the nature of the insurgency
that had begun in 2003. The key points in the analysis on support for the
insurgency had already been stated in the National Intelligence Estimate
(NIE) on Iraq issued in October 2003 and reissued in June 2004, according to
Wayne White, former deputy director of the State Department's Bureau of
Intelligence and Research.

White, now an Adjunct Scholar at the Middle East Institute, told IPS in a
telephone interview that the NIE had portrayed the insurgency as having an
enormous support base among Sunnis, because of a wide range of grievances,
including unemployment, the arrest and killing of family members, and
destruction of homes as well as opposition to foreign occupation.

The NIE had been requested by CENTCOM, according to unnamed officials quoted
in a Mar. 10 Knight Ridder story by Warren Strobel and Jonathan Landay.

The tension continued through much of 2005 between the top administration
officials and the intelligence and military analysts over the size and
motivation of Sunni support for the insurgency. After his arrival in
Baghdad, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad sided with CENTCOM and the intelligence
community on the need to meet legitimate Sunni grievances.

Rumsfeld and Cheney then accepted the fact that the insurgency had
significant Sunni support, but they began arguing that such support was
motivated only by a desire to regain their old privileges.

The administration's "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq" released on
Nov. 30, 2005 reflected the revised Rumsfeld-Cheney viewpoint. It defined
the "rejectionists" as those Sunni Arabs "who have not embraced the shift
from Saddam Hussein's Iraq to a democratically governed state" and who
opposed "a new Iraq in which they are no longer the privileged elite".

Vines did not directly criticise the administration's military policy in
Iraq in his speech. "I don't intend to get into the policy arena," he said.
He also refused, as an active-duty officer, to comment on retired generals'
calls for Rumsfeld's resignation, despite invitations by reporters at the
speech to do so.

Nevertheless he pointedly observed in his speech, "The policy was directed
by Washington," adding that the command in Iraq had merely carried it out.

And in choosing to focus attention on a previously unknown October 2004
analysis of the insurgency, Vines appears to have been encouraging
comparison between that line of thinking and contrasting policy views of
Rumsfeld and Cheney.

[Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. His
latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in
Vietnam", was published in June 2005.]


*
================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
List Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
Subscribe: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEQmofiz2i76ou9wQRAnwrAJ9+3XqYWnsdV9O7f0tp1IyowSjoFQCgoF58
dlcaGcXLQBubRvPYaX3bmjU=
=Lz53
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

.

Loading