Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Share

I am sorry to see the three bombings that killed at least 29 people in Baqubah today, but I am not using the "unraveling" title on this because I think the current bombings in Iraq are simply an attempt to scare people before this Sunday's election. They may get media attention but don't seem to me necessarily to represent any long-term trend.

The big question in my mind is what happens in the three months after the election. How long will it take to form a government? And will that process exacerbate ethnic and sectarian tensions? If we don't see an Iraqi government by June 1, I will be very concerned.

It isn't a "dark victory," either. For fun, read aloud this Newsweek piece and substitute "Vietnam" and "Saigon" for Iraq and Baghdad. Reads like a Luce product circa 1967. Or maybe China 1946, for that matter. Funny how a Western symphony orchestra and a store selling Johnny Walker are such perennial signs of a breakthrough in a land war in Asia. All we need is a scholarly Asian president who enjoys reading Shakespeare in his rare moments of relaxation. Speaking of the Lucites, Time magazine does a much better job of describing the outlines of post-occupation Iraq. And the AP reports that a new warrant for the arrest of Mookie has been issued. Interesting timing. 

And Karl Rove has written a book that says, kind of, that they might have handled this whole Iraq thing badly. You think? 

(HTs to Steve Coll for the Howard Hart blog, and to Juan Cole for the Sadr warrant.)

AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:MIDDLE EAST, IRAQ
 

TYRTAIOS

2:16 PM ET

March 3, 2010

Mookie?

Mookie? How appropriately politically incorrect. We should have disposed of this guy from day one. By all accounts he's probably been studing in Qom, Iran and is on his way to becoming a grand ayatollah.

In fact, maybe Iran might just speed that up, considering Muqtada, err I mean Mookie, comes from a well respected and powerful clerical heritage, which I'm sure should he return to Iraq, he would be more than willing to show his appreciation toward Iran for the favor.

At that point in time, good luck on the serving the arrest warrant on this twelver at that point.

 

JWING

5:32 PM ET

March 3, 2010

Iran doesn't trust Sadr

They actually think that he's a wildcard and have been trying to divide up his followers and militias for years now. He talks about Iraqi nationalism which would oppose some of Iran's designs on Iraq, and he goes back and forth between being a militia leader and a politician. The Special Groups for example were a way for Iran to gain direct control over his militia. At the same time, Sadr ended up going right into their clutches because he was afraid of being arrested or killed when the Surge started and scooted off to Iran for protection. Interestingly before he left he had a meeting with Sistani who told him he had to either face the people or fade from the public view, and he did the latter. There are also plenty of stories of Iran restricting his movement and visitors since he's been there.

 

TYRTAIOS

5:49 PM ET

March 3, 2010

More Mookie

I wonder about what you've said. I hope you are correct that he has been marginalized not temporarily but for good. Because. I’ve heard he is working very hard on his religious credentials.

 

WALKING WOUNDED

10:44 PM ET

March 3, 2010

Keeping the heir/pretender across the border

is how it's always been done, by brits, turks, whoever. The warrant thing sounds like a ploy to publicly place sayyid Muqtada over in Iran, clouding whatever call to vote his proxies may issue on Friday. Maliki, Hakims, Jaafari, all the Shiite pols claim the mantle of 'Sadrist'.

Anything we didn't want to look closely at was labelled fringe AlQ or JAM for half a decade. I suspect that any number of criminal and political misdeeds got blamed on young Sadr's competitor-infiltrated formations, and his loyalists were pretty badly attrited on several occasions.

 

BLUE13326

3:53 PM ET

March 3, 2010

A flippant Vietnam comparison

A flippant Vietnam comparison is the best you can do in response to Newsweek?

That's pretty pathetic.

 

THIRDWATCH

5:09 PM ET

March 3, 2010

Political Party Gain/Loss Scenarios

It might be a less charged analysis to layout the potential range of seats won/lost by political party and the ramifications for forming a government under each of those scenarios.

Can one make the case that fraud is a greater destabilizing force than whatever might be the legitimate impact of elections on the power structures?

Also, elections in the absence of a functioning judiciary are also potentially destabilizing. Put simply, the change in power becomes simply a means to throw your opposition into jail. How much is that seriously on the table in Iraq?

 

THIRDWATCH

5:12 PM ET

March 3, 2010

..by fraud I mean

...real or perceived. Are there outcomes that many in the country would simply reject as "fraud" or "false" on face value, as happened recently in Iran. The fraud in Afghanistan created arguably a more dangerous instability than a change in leadership might have, yes?

 

CRESTONEHIGH

1:24 AM ET

March 4, 2010

elections....

We still have to weather the elections......and for those of us here... Sigh....gulp!

 

WALKING WOUNDED

2:55 AM ET

March 4, 2010

Rove's 'admission' is like a skunk's stripes

"The former White House political adviser blames himself for not pushing back against claims that President George W. Bush had taken the country to war under false pretenses".

That's the same rhetorical dodge that Feith, Wolfowitz, Bush and Rice used; they admit they was remiss over not 'splainin things so we could understand.

The huge 2002 US intel budget, energized after 9/11, was equal to the rest of the world combined. Britain's intel budget is about as robust as their army. Listen to the deniability built into the famous 16 words, and tell me that it doesn't smack of Rove-speak's deceptive intent:

["The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."]

Later:
["These sixteen words should never have been included."]

Tell us Karl, master-debater that you are, what a damnable lie it is that Irv Libby took the 'obstruction of justice' bullet for you?

 

CHMIKE

6:09 AM ET

March 4, 2010

What's with the link?

Why does the hyperlink on the word "Newsweek" in this article link to a picture of a pot plant on wikipedia?

 

SF RETIRED

7:18 PM ET

March 4, 2010

Food for thought

I could spend all week with this topic but will only say this. For now everyone has their own opinion concerning removing Saddam. I am sure that the Iraqi people that were abused and slaughtered under his reign would have more to say on the subject than any American college educated infidel. Time will tell and evidence will surface giving everyone the full information about WMD’s and reason’s for and against the invasion. Because of the division of Sunni, Shiite and Kurd there will be conflict within the country as they vey for power. The only reason the country of Iraq was stable in our eyes was the fact that a dictator ruled with an iron fist as did Stalin, and Hitler. Everyone seems to forget that after WWII the US and its allies remained in Germany and Japan to re-build those governments and infrastructure which are now two of the most economically powerful nations in the world that have maintained their cultural identity. Bad American’s, Bad.

 

Thomas E. Ricks covered the U.S. military for the Washington Post from 2000 through 2008.

Read More