The Final Move Beyond Iraq: The Final Solution While the World Sleeps

by mike Evans

  While the Quartet (the UN, EU, Russia, and the United States) was pushing the Road Map, Iran’s President Khatami was looking for a few good friends in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, all states known to fund and harbor terrorists. In Syria, Khatami deliberated on how the two countries could resist what they saw as the U.S. intentions to occupy the region without antagonizing Washington. Of particular interest was American support for Israel and how to pursue terror activities against that country without retaliation by the United States. Despite these concerns, Hezbollah continued its dogged pursuit of Israeli civilians with rocket fire into Northern Israel.

  Sadly, President Bush’s attempts to gain unilateral Arab support for its liberation of Iraq by tossing out another two-state carrot were met with disdain. The Muslim world recognized long ago that a two-state solution was not the real answer to the “Jewish problem.” The only answer that would suffice would entail pushing the Jews into the Mediterranean, or, as President Ahmadinejad would later opine, wiping Israel “off the map.”

  THE HOPE FOR PEACE

  Coalition forces spent the summer of 2003 still searching for the remnants of the Iraqi government, including Hussein’s two sons, Uday and Qusay, who were killed in gunfire on July 22. In the months following the cessation of major combat, more than two hundred top Baath Party officials were either killed or captured. Saddam himself was eventually found hiding in a spider hole near Tikrit on December 13. Again, many thought these were signs that victory and Middle East peace were well within reach.

  However, the months that followed would paint the war as far from over.

  How was it that the butcher of Baghdad, the rebuilder of Babylon, the supreme leader of Iraq was found cowering in a spider hole in Iraq? Apparently Saddam had set up a meeting with two trusted allies, the brothers al-Omar. Saddam was to meet them and be taken to his next safe house. At the designated spot, Hussein was either taken captive or drugged, then deposited in the spider hole, where he was later discovered by American troops.

  In the perfect “how the mighty are fallen” scenario, the cringing dictator had been unceremoniously dumped into a six-foot-deep hole in the ground with no sanitation and barely room to move about. His hole was well supplied, however, with $750,000 in one hundred dollar bills and stacks of documentation on the Iraqi resistance. For all of his money, he had little food, few clothes, and no way to communicate with the outside world.

  What led the American troops to an isolated farmhouse looking for Saddam Hussein? Days before his capture, army intelligence sources had captured a senior security officer from Hussein’s retinue. After interrogation, the officer, Mohammed Ibrahim Omar al-Musslit, revealed Hussein’s whereabouts. Operation Red Dawn was launched with a convoy of more than thirty armored vehicles and six hundred troops. Special Forces groups searched the two farmhouses indicated by al-Musslit, only to come up empty-handed. They were preparing to depart when a soldier noticed a crack in the ground. Quick reconnaissance revealed the hiding place of the most wanted man in all of Iraq, Saddam Hussein.

  Islamic radicals quickly responded to Hussein’s capture by jockeying for positions of importance in Iran. Al Qaeda was the first to jump on the “Saddam is gone, and we’re taking over” bandwagon. Bin Laden was eager to let the Americans know that he was responsible for the murderous suicide attacks throughout Iraq. He wanted bragging rights for the numbers killed and wounded. He wanted the credit for the anti-American guerrilla warfare that was so rampant in the country. Bin Laden’s lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, was quick to add that American soldiers were cowards and that Al Qaeda would pursue them even into the United States.

  The Iraqi resistance movement was next to step up to the plate to alert the Iraqi people that the capture of Saddam Hussein was simply a photo op to ensure President Bush’s reelection. The Baathists invited all Iraqis to join in the struggle to repel the American invaders. All of the groups urged that the resistance against the U.S. occupation continue in full force. However, it was not the urging of the jihadists that encouraged Iraqis under the umbrella of the radical Islamists; it was the deep dissatisfaction with the political process, the lack of basic services, and the failure to stop the murder and mayhem in the streets of the cities. Faced with what might best be described as anarchy, Washington continued to paint a rosy picture on events in Iraq, going so far as to reiterate that Iraqi resistance was ebbing.

  An announcement that the United States would begin withdrawing from Iraq in mid-2004 was met with skepticism, especially when it was made clear that troops would remain in Iraq for some time. The problem for the coalition leaders would be how to ensure that Iraq didn’t immediately fall into the hands of the Shiite majority, rather than become a democratic government for all the people. As soon as the discussions began, Ayatollah al-Sistani issued yet another fatwa calling for a one-man/one-vote system. The resulting stalemate threatened the entire political process for which the United States–led coalition had fought.

  One London correspondent summed up the situation in Iraq very succinctly when he wrote:

  In this miasma of inaction, the lead roles of the national drama are being filled by an assertive handful of self-interested parties keen to fix things in their favour. The low-level, often inter-ethnic, conflict that bedevils Iraq is as much about staking a claim to post-coalition power as driving the infidels from the country.

  And just as they watched passively for years while Saddam Hussein’s brutal ultimate in nanny states made every decision for them, so Iraqis are watching and waiting now.19

  As the fledgling democracy of Iraq entered 2004, it was obvious that, far from ebbing, the resistance was becoming a flood that threatened to consume everything in its path. Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkmen, and Islamic terrorists from around the world were overtly or covertly planning ways to achieve their goals. The reaction from the Iraqi tribes and sects was a surprise to Washington. Far from welcoming the Americans as liberators, the Iraqis welcomed the deposing of Saddam Hussein and then quickly wanted the “infidels” out of their country. It was apparent that a Bush strategy to respond unilaterally when threatened, or even preventatively, would not be welcomed with open arms.

  The Bush administration never questioned that it would be able to put together a strike force that would be totally successful against Hussein. The hope that a democratic Iraq would become a certainty was slowly becoming a battered dream. What no one took into account was the ideology behind the Muslim culture. Americans are born with freedom of choice; it is difficult to understand how a person steeped in the tradition and mores of Islam would be reluctant to embrace democracy and freedom of choice. Washington was unprepared to deal with the harsh truth that was found in Iraq. Like a child caught in the throes of the terrible twos, unable to understand the meaning of the word no, the Washington intelligence community forged ahead despite obvious signs that the majority of the Iraqi people were not eager to accept Westernization. Therefore, President Bush was not sufficiently warned about the prospect of failure.

  It is apparent that the Bush administration vastly underestimated the enemy—no, not Saddam Hussein, but the government in Iran. With the challenge of “Bring ’em on” issued by President Bush, the jihads worldwide did just that.

  When the president attempted to negotiate with the Sunni Arabs on controversial issues regarding federalism and the removal of the Baathist influence, he was thanked politely. He was severely handicapped by not having been prepared in advance for the idiosyncrasies of the Muslim ideology. The Bush administration really did not understand the various divisions in the Muslim society and was working at a great disadvantage.

  It was not the president but his ambassador to Iraq, Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, who was responsible for bartering an agreement between the Kurds and Shiites that would prove to be the foundation of Iraq’s new constitution. Khalilzad was immediately faced with the challenge of finding common ground among the Shiites, Kurds, and Sunni Arabs. The Kurds feared losing their independence, the
Shiites wanted a more self-serving constitution, and the Sunnis objected to everything proposed by the Shiites and the Kurds.

  The Sunni delegation had been infiltrated by members of Hussein’s Baath Party, which further complicated matters for Khalilzad. The spokesman for the group, Saleh al-Mutlaq, was the former translator for Saddam Hussein and a Sunni Arab, and, as such, offended the Kurds and Shiites.

  By insisting that this particular group be included in the formulation of the constitution, and although its adherents did not participate in the general election, the Bush administration conferred authenticity upon them.

  The Shiites wanted an Islamic state—Sharia law to replace the secular civil code—that would lead to rule by Shiite ayatollahs recognized by the constitution and a constitutional court based on Islamic law. Such a court would be able with impunity to overrule civil laws enacted by the parliament and government. This was in line with the authority that had been conferred upon Grand Ayatollah Khomeini as the Supreme Leader in Iran. Secular Arabs recognized the path down which such an arrangement would take Iraq; the Bush administration seemed to be in a state of denial.

  According to the resulting constitution, Iraq is a moderate Islamic state. Officially, Islam is the state religion and a basic source of legislation, not the basic source desired by the Shiites.

  To the secular Arabs in Iraq, all the factional divides are incomprehensible. Religion had never before been a big factor in politics in Iraq, and, indeed, that aspect may take a backseat in time. That remains to be seen. I certainly feel that as long as Iran has a direct influence on the Shiites in Iraq, it will continue to stir civil strife between the Shiites and the Sunnis. The drive for a democratic Iraq has released emotions in the nation that had long been suppressed. Only time will tell whether or not the various sectarian groups will be able to hammer out a viable working relationship.

  Not only was President Bush misinformed regarding the ideology of the Muslim culture, he was misinformed about the presence of quantities of WMDs in Iraq. As far back as 1998, a task force comprised of members of the House released a paper, “The Iraqi WMD Challenge: Myths and Reality.” The paper outlined the inequities between the production of and the possession of WMDs. It indicated that Hussein possessed small quantities of WMDs and even had the means to disburse the chemicals. However, it outlined the fact that production had been delegated to Sudan, Libya, and Algeria, a fact that escaped many in the intelligence community in Washington. The evidence that Iraq had the capability to deliver WMDs via unmanned aircraft was the deciding factor for some who voted to pursue Operation Iraqi Freedom.

  The question remains: where are the WMDs, tanks, armored vehicles, jet fighters, and gunships that Saddam was so eager to display in giant parades and was willing to risk his dictatorship to protect? Like the battalions of soldiers that just melted away before the U.S. invasion, so it seems did his armaments. The most logical explanation offered is that they have been secreted below ground in massive bunkers or exported to Syria and Iran. The Bush administration miscalculated the wiliness of Saddam Hussein. Were his delaying tactics simply to insure that his war matériel was moved to safer locations? Perhaps Hussein is the only one with all the pieces to the puzzle, and of course, he’s not sharing that information with anyone now.

  Chapter Six

  THE WORLD WAR AGAINST TERRORISM

  I see the threat posed to the United States and Israel as the beginning of a one-hundred-year war. You can call it World War III. You can call it the beginning of a new type of warfare…. I would rather not use analogies to World War I and World War II and just think of this as a new kind of warfare that the West is clearly disadvantaged by. The asymmetry of morality makes it very hard for us to fight groups that have no morality.1

  —ALAN DERSHOWITZ

  We are in dire need of you…. The field of jihad can satisfy your scientific ambitions, and the large American bases [in Iraq] are good places to test your unconventional weapons, whether biological or dirty, as they call them.2

  —ABU AYYUB AL-MASRI,

  leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq,

  in a call for experts in the fields of

  “chemistry, physics, electronics, media and all other

  sciences—especially nuclear scientists and explosives experts”

  to join the terror group’s holy war against the West

  Near the beginning of 2006, in addition to targeting coalition and, in particular, American troops, the tactics again seemed to take a new direction. A new level of violence began arising between the Shiites and the Sunnis. On February 22, 2006, two bombs exploded in the Shiite Al Askari mosque, severely damaging its golden dome and interior. The mosque is powerfully significant to Shiite Muslims because it is the burial place of Ali Al-Hadi and his son, Hassan Al-Askari, the Tenth and Eleventh Imams. They are the immediate predecessors of the Twelfth, or Hidden, Imam, Muhammad Al-Mahdi, the one known as the Mahdi for whom al-Sadr’s Mahdi army is named, who disappeared down a well in Iran in the tenth century and would one day return to triumphantly spread Islam to the world. It is believed his apocalyptic return from a well in Jamkaran, Iran, will bring the world under control of a new Muslim caliphate that will lead Islam to world supremacy.

  One of those responsible for this bombing had been wearing an Iraqi military uniform. Shiites responded by attacking and destroying Sunni mosques. Several Sunni imams were summarily executed by al-Sadr’s Shiite militia. Shiite mobs in other Iraq cities stormed jails and executed inmates. In retaliation, groups of Sunnis attacked Shiites, dragging them from vehicles to be murdered. As many of the U.S.-trained and armed Iraqi police force looked on in fear, others simply joined the assailants. Not even a curfew imposed on Baghdad could stop the slaughter. Bodies were dumped on Baghdad streets, handcuffed, and shot execution-style. In all, 184 Sunni mosques either lay in rubble or were vandalized, and more than one thousand Shiites and Sunnis were murdered.

  In the ensuing months, sectarian death squads roamed the streets killing thousands. Someone was trying to sow the seeds of ethnic violence in the hope of starting a civil war.

  DESCENT INTO ANARCHY

  With cries that the resistance would not end until the infidels were driven from Iraq, new recruits joined daily. Intelligence sources indicate a new cooperation among heretofore antagonistic factions. Some Shiite groups are consorting with Sunni groups; Baathist brigades work alongside the fedayeen (Arab commandos) to take out coalition troops and bring down American aircraft. The United States is caught in the crosshairs of every terrorist organization in operation in Iran, Iraq, and Syria and can do little to stop the resulting bloodshed. The disorganized Baathist forces that fell so rapidly under the initial assault are regrouping as guerrilla warriors with only one intention: to strike the coalition forces at every turn.

  The Muslim world did not see this as a war to curb Saddam Hussein’s terror activities, but rather as another attack by “Crusaders” against Islam. One of the most respected analysts in the Arab world, Abdul Bari al-Atwan, made a further comparison:

  The U.S. forces have not liberated Iraq; they have humiliated it, occupied it, torn it apart, and subjugated its sons. The United States is now preparing to subjugate the rest of the Arabs in the same way and by the same destructive operation; therefore, it will not meet with anything except resistance and hatred…. This means that the aggression will not stop at the borders of Iraq, exactly the same as when Hulagu [a Mongol leader] occupied Baghdad, looted it, enslaved its inhabitants, and destroyed it as a springboard to occupy the entire region.3

  To a seriously affronted Muslim world, the infidels—this time American soldiers rather than Mongols—had again ridden into Baghdad to pillage and humiliate the Iraqi people. Osama bin Laden issued the call to jihad against the invaders. And now, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has donned the mantle of Ayatollah Khomeini, taken up bin Laden’s call, and is fostering an Islamic revolution that is aimed at the bloodiest clash of religious ideologies the world has ever seen betw
een Islam, Judaism, and Christianity.

  In the rush to prepare for certain invasion by American and coalition troops, Saddam Hussein set out to cover his tracks and eliminate all threats. In a move designed to prevent the coalition forces from interrogating one of the world’s most brutal and prolific terrorists, Hussein’s elite troops entered an Iraqi upper-class stronghold in Baghdad and assassinated Abu Nidal along with four of his henchmen. Nidal was responsible for the deaths of hundreds in terror attacks worldwide. Although Hussein had ordered the murder of Nidal, he was reacting to pressure from Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Yasser Arafat, who did not want Nidal’s secrets exposed to Western scrutiny. With intelligence supplied to Hussein by Russian leader Vladimir Putin, Nidal had received overtures from the CIA and was considering disclosing confidential information in exchange for asylum. Hussein made sure that didn’t happen.4

  Perhaps the biggest challenge for the United States is the renewed battle against Saddam’s secret weapon: the parallel underground force trained by North Korea in the art of carrying out a prolonged guerrilla war. To provide further safeguards for himself, Hussein established a parallel government with outposts around Iraq as a firewall against a U.S. invasion. The warriors inside this parallel Saddam Hussein–induced network were trained to create civil upheaval and insurrection against invading forces. To facilitate the fighters, Hussein engaged China and North Korea to build a series of underground bunkers almost completely undetectable from the air. These bunkers were thought to house his stockpile of weapons, including the elusive WMDs.