DOCSLIB.ORG

Section 9.5 June 2006 to 27 June 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Section 9.5 June 2006 to 27 June 2007 SECTION 9.5 JUNE 2006 TO 27 JUNE 2007 Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 June 2006 ........................................................................................................................ 2 July 2006 ........................................................................................................................ 11 August 2006 ................................................................................................................... 24 September 2006 ............................................................................................................ 30 October 2006 ................................................................................................................. 41 November 2006 ............................................................................................................. 49 December 2006 ............................................................................................................. 60 January 2007 ................................................................................................................. 69 February 2007 ................................................................................................................ 99 March 2007 .................................................................................................................. 120 April 2007 ..................................................................................................................... 134 May 2007 ..................................................................................................................... 144 June 2007 .................................................................................................................... 165 1 The Report of the Iraq Inquiry Introduction 1. This Section covers the year leading up to Mr Blair’s departure from No.10 in June 2007, and addresses: • the development of the Basra Security Plan (including Operation SINBAD) and the Better Basra Plan; • UK planning for withdrawal from Iraq and reinforcement in Afghanistan, and the beginning of transition to Provincial Iraqi Control in the South; • UK responses to the new US strategy of surging forces into Baghdad and their impact on US/UK relations; and • the genesis of negotiations with Jaysh al‑Mahdi in Basra. 2. This Section does not address: • the UK contribution to the reconstruction of Iraq and reform of its security sector, covered in Sections 10 and 12 respectively. 3. The Inquiry’s conclusions in relation to the events described in this Section can be read in Section 9.8. June 2006 4. On 1 June, Major General John Cooper, General Officer Commanding Multi‑National Division (South‑East) (GOC MND(SE)) presented his proposals for the Basra Security Plan to General George Casey, Commander Multi‑National Force – Iraq (MNF‑I).1 5. Maj Gen Cooper wrote that the plan: “… will bring together a number of programmes and include a diplomatic focus from Baghdad .. a MOI [Ministry of the Interior] judicial review/inquiry and support for … search and arrest operations”.2 6. On 2 June, a Cabinet Office official sent Mr Blair an update following his visit to Iraq on 22 May (described in Section 9.4).3 7. In relation to Gen Casey’s plan to address security in Baghdad, it said: “Our initial assessment of the proposals is positive, with the necessary political and military elements woven in.” 8. On Basra, the update said: “The Consul General, Military, DFID … in Basra have made joint proposals on delivering a step‑change in engagement across all lines of operation. We need 1 Minute Cooper, 8 June 2006, ‘GOC MND(SE) – Southern Iraq Update – 8 June 2006’. 2 Minute Cooper, 1 June 2006, ‘GOC MND(SE) – Southern Iraq Update – 1 June 2006’. 3 Minute Cabinet Office [junior official] to Prime Minister, 2 June 2006, ‘Iraq: Follow‑up to Your Visit’. 2 9.5 | June 2006 to 27 June 2007 to clarify some of Maliki’s proposals during his visit earlier this week (the exact role of the five man committee he has appointed, and what the Basra Security plan Casey will offer to Maliki will look like), but the overall impact was very positive and gives us the central government buy‑in that we need. It also gives us the basis for a more confident approach on political outreach to Sadr, combined with a harder line on the Mahdi Army.” 9. In a video conference with President Bush on 6 June, Mr Blair said that he thought that the new government had about three months to show that it could make a difference.4 He suggested that the lack of experience of delivering plans within the government meant that the US and UK should “shepherd” implementation very closely. 10. On 6 June, Mr Blair had a private meeting with Mr Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, on Iraq and Afghanistan.5 11. Sir Nigel Sheinwald, Mr Blair’s Foreign Policy Adviser, reported after the meeting that Mr Blair had asked Mr Browne to focus on the situation in Basra in order to: “… make sure that the political and military strategies were aligned and proceeding together. This required micro‑management. We had been slow to grip the situation there, but now needed: to get on top of the gaps in equipment and training for the Iraqi forces; a plan for getting Iraqi forces on to the streets; and a new political dispensation given the interest now being shown by Iraqi national figures.” 12. Mr Browne agreed to take on that role, and also to continue to co‑ordinate media activity on Iraq, which Mr Blair said needed to be reinvigorated. Mr Blair said that he intended to use the next meeting of the Defence and Overseas Policy Committee’s Sub‑Committee on Iraq (DOP(I)) to “divvy up Ministerial responsibility for different parts of the Iraq strategy”. The death of Abu Musab al‑Zarqawi On 7 June, the leader of Al‑Qaida in Iraq (AQ‑I), Abu Musab al‑Zarqawi, was killed by US forces in an airstrike on a house 8km north of Baquba.6 Mr Blair relayed reports of his death at the Cabinet meeting the following day.7 Briefing supplied to Mr Blair’s Private Secretary suggested that the UK “played a leading part in highlighting significant contacts around Zarqawi”.8 4 Letter Banner to Hayes, 6 June 2006, ‘Prime Minister’s VTC with President Bush, 16 May[sic]: Middle East issues’. 5 Minute Sheinwald to Banner, 8 June 2006, ‘Iraq and Afghanistan’. 6 BBC News, 8 June 2006, Zarqawi killed in Iraq air raid. 7 Cabinet Conclusions, 8 June 2006. 8 Letter to Banner, 8 June 2006, ‘Death of Zarqawi: […]’. 3 The Report of the Iraq Inquiry An initial assessment of the impact of al‑Zarqawi’s death made shortly after he was killed said that it would bolster the image of the Iraqi Government and have a short term disruptive effect on AQ‑I.9 But his death was also likely to enhance his iconic status and inspire other extremists. In a telephone conversation with Prime Minister Maliki on 8 June, Mr Blair described the operation as “a very important moment for Iraq”.10 Over the weeks that followed, AQ‑I suffered further losses with the capture of several other senior leaders.11 Documents and IT equipment found after the 7 June airstrike provided key information about AQ‑I.12 Mr Mowaffak al‑Rubaie, Iraq’s National Security Adviser, was reported to have told a news conference in Baghdad “now we have the upper hand”. General Stanley McChrystal, the US officer who led the operation against al‑Zarqawi, wrote in his memoir: “His death was more than symbolically important. It was a trite reaction among some to point out that there were thousands of men ready to replace Zarqawi – or any leader we removed. It was of course true that the organisation regained a leader … And yet there were not, in fact, thousands of ‘Zarqawis’. He was a peculiar leader. His mix of charisma, brutality, and clear‑eyed persistence was never matched by al‑Masri or al‑Masri’s successor.”13 13. On 8 June, Prime Minister Maliki appointed the final members of his Cabinet: the Ministers for the Interior, Security and Defence.14 Each had been subject to approval by majority vote in the Council of Representatives. Other ministers had been appointed on 20 May (see Section 9.4). 14. Mr William Patey, the British Ambassador to Iraq, reported that “it is of course good news that the Government has been finalised but the outcome is far from our ideal”, with some appointments unlikely to command the broad support for which the UK would have wished. 15. Mr Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defense Secretary, observed that it was “fitting that the completion of the new Iraqi government coincided with his [al‑Zarqawi’s] death”.15 16. The new government broadly reflected the ethno‑sectarian balance of Iraq.16 It included four women. They were appointed to the Ministries for Housing and 9 Minute Dowse to Banner, 8 June 2006, ‘Impact of Zarqawi’s death’. 10 Letter Banner to Siddiq, 8 June 2006, ‘Iraq: Maliki’. 11 JIC Assessment, 19 July 2006, ‘Iraq: Insurgency, Sectarianism and Violence’. 12 BBC News, 15 June 2006, Al‑Qaeda ‘coming to end in Iraq’. 13 McChrystal S. My Share of the Task. Portfolio/Penguin, 2013. 14 eGram 22963/06 Baghdad to FCO London, 8 June 2006, ‘Iraq: Ministers of Interior, Defence and National Security Appointed’. 15 DoD News Briefing with Secretary Rumsfeld and Gen Casey from the Pentagon, 22 June 2006. 16 eGram 19337/06 22 May 2006, ‘Iraq: The New Government’. 4 9.5 | June 2006 to 27 June 2007 Construction, the Environment, Women’s Affairs and Human Rights.17 Six ministers were considered
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UK Land Operations in Iraq 2007
    House of Commons Defence Committee UK land operations in Iraq 2007 First Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 20 November 2007 HC 110 [Incorporating HC 727-i & ii, Session 2006–07] Published on 3 December 2007 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £15.50 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon James Arbuthnot MP (Conservative, North East Hampshire) (Chairman) Mr David S Borrow MP (Labour, South Ribble) Mr David Crausby MP (Labour, Bolton North East) Linda Gilroy MP (Labour, Plymouth Sutton) Mr David Hamilton MP (Labour, Midlothian) Mr Mike Hancock MP (Liberal Democrat, Portsmouth South) Mr Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Mr Adam Holloway MP (Conservative, Gravesham) Mr Bernard Jenkin MP (Conservative, North Essex) Mr Brian Jenkins MP (Labour, Tamworth) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, Durham North) Robert Key MP (Conservative, Salisbury) Willie Rennie MP (Liberal Democrat, Dunfermline and West Fife) John Smith MP (Labour, Vale of Glamorgan) The following Members were also Members of the Committee during the Parliament. Mr Colin Breed MP (Liberal Democrat, South East Cornwall) Derek Conway MP (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup) Mr Mark Lancaster MP (Conservative, North East Milton Keynes) Mr Desmond Swayne MP (Conservative, New Forest West) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Sunset for the Royal Marines? the Royal Marines and UK Amphibious Capability
    House of Commons Defence Committee Sunset for the Royal Marines? The Royal Marines and UK amphibious capability Third Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 30 January 2018 HC 622 Published on 4 February 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Dr Julian Lewis MP (Conservative, New Forest East) (Chair) Leo Docherty MP (Conservative, Aldershot) Martin Docherty-Hughes MP (Scottish National Party, West Dunbartonshire) Rt Hon Mark Francois MP (Conservative, Rayleigh and Wickford) Graham P Jones MP (Labour, Hyndburn) Johnny Mercer MP (Conservative, Plymouth, Moor View) Mrs Madeleine Moon MP (Labour, Bridgend) Gavin Robinson MP (Democratic Unionist Party, Belfast East) Ruth Smeeth MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent North) Rt Hon John Spellar MP (Labour, Warley) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/defcom and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff Mark Etherton (Clerk), Dr Adam Evans (Second Clerk), Martin Chong, David Nicholas, Eleanor Scarnell, and Ian Thomson (Committee Specialists), Sarah Williams (Senior Committee Assistant), and Carolyn Bowes and Arvind Gunnoo (Committee Assistants).
    [Show full text]
  • The British Army, 'Understanding', and the Illusion of Control
    King’s Research Portal DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2016.1196359 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Tripodi, C. (2016). The British Army, 'Understanding', and the Illusion of Control. Journal of Strategic Studies, 1- 27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2016.1196359 Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. •Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. •You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • The General As Statesman?
    CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY Richard B Lovelock The General as Statesman? Exploring the professional need for commanders to support viable political outcomes in peace and stability operations as typified by the UK military approach DEFENCE ACADEMY COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE, SECURITY AND RESILIENCE PhD THESIS CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DEFENCE ACADEMY COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE, SECURITY AND RESILIENCE PhD THESIS Academic Year 2009-2010 Richard B Lovelock The General as Statesman? Exploring the professional need for commanders to support viable political outcomes in peace and stability operations as typified by the UK military approach Supervisor: Professor C D Bellamy August 2010 © Cranfield University 2010. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner i Abstract The problem of theatre level politico-military arrangements during peace and stability operations is important because the intervening actors, working in complex and often ambiguous circumstances, need to calibrate the application of military and political means as a coherent interdependent whole. This is necessary in order to build peace, secure viable political outcomes and hence strategic successes; however it is not easy in practice. This thesis examines the hypothesis that, beyond their security-related tasks, military commanders should provide direct support to civilian interlocutors in order to facilitate and sustain the local political process. This requires military co- operation with other relevant actors, responsiveness to political direction and the specific shaping of military operations to impact decisively on political outcomes. This work establishes that Western and United Nations doctrinal guidance extols political primacy and civil-military cooperation but does not fully explain the central importance of the political process, nor does it capture the potential peace building role of the military component.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraqi Force Development and the Challenge of Civil War
    Center for Strategic and International Studies Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy 1800 K Street, N.W. • Suite 400 • Washington, DC 20006 Phone: 1 (202) 775-3270 • Fax: 1 (202) 457-8746 Web: http://www.csis.org/burke Iraqi Force Development and the Challenge of Civil War: The Critical Problems The US Must Address if Iraqi Forces Are to Do the Job Anthony Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy With the Assistance of Adam Mausner Revised, May 10, 2007 Cordesman: Iraqi Force Development 5/10/07 Page ii Executive Summary Iraq has moved far beyond a Sunni Islamist or Ba’ath-driven insurgency. It is already in a state of limited civil war, and may well be escalating to the level of a major civil conflict. What began as a small resistance movement centered on loyalists to the Ba’ath and Saddam Hussein has expanded to include neo-Salafi Sunni terrorism, a broadly based Sunni insurgency, and now a series of broader sectarian and ethnic conflicts. The current combination of Sunni Neo-Salafi extremist insurgency, Sunni Arab versus Shi’ite Arab sectarian conflict, Shi’ite versus Shi’ite power struggles, and Arab versus Kurdish ethnic conflict could easily cause the collapse of the current political structure. In the best case, it could lead to a Shi’ite or Shi’ite-Kurdish dominated government, with strong local centers of power, and an ongoing fight with Iraq’s Sunnis. In the worst case, it could escalate to the break up of the country, far more serious ethnic and sectarian conflict, or violent paralysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Where Is Iraq Heading? Lessons from Basra
    WHERE IS IRAQ HEADING? LESSONS FROM BASRA Middle East Report N°67 – 25 June 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... i I. CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................... 1 A. DIVERSITY ............................................................................................................................1 B. “SOUTHERNISM”...................................................................................................................4 C. FOREIGN INTERFERENCE ........................................................................................................7 II. OIL, MILITIAS AND THE SCRAMBLE FOR RESOURCES ................................ 9 A. SUBVERTING THE STATE .....................................................................................................11 B. CIRCUMVENTING THE STATE...............................................................................................14 III. OPERATION SINBAD ................................................................................................ 16 IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 18 APPENDICES A. MAP OF IRAQ ......................................................................................................................19 B. ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP .......................................................................20
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq Situation Report
    Iraq Situation Report Kimberly Kagan, Marisa Cochrane, Eric Hamilton, Farook Ahmed, Andrea So, Wesley Morgan February 7, 2008 1 Executive Summary Operations by Coalition and Iraqi Forces throughout 2007 have transformed the security situation in Iraq. Violence decreased dramatically in the second half of 2007. The number of enemy attacks in Iraq, the number of attacks against Iraqi civilians, and the number of murders in Baghdad, dropped to levels last seen in early 2006.1 The mission shift to an aggressive counterinsurgency strategy, with an emphasis on population security, which occurred in January 2007, solidified these gains more quickly than many had predicted. Unexpected developments, like the emergence of Awakening movements and the unilateral Sadrist ceasefire, further helped to accelerate the ground level improvements in security. By late 2007, Al-Qaeda in Iraq had been defeated in Anbar, and its network and safe havens in Baghdad and the belts were largely disrupted. Al-Qaeda in Iraq has been steadily pushed north, into isolated pockets, often far from population centers. Coalition Forces have also aggressively targeted Shi’a militia extremists and Iranian-backed Special Groups, with encouraging results. The Institute for the Study of War has created this situation report to document the dramatic changes from January 2007 to December 2007. This report details the organization of Coalition and Iraqi Forces, the various enemy groups in Iraq, and operations across Iraq over the last year to defeat these enemy actors and improve security throughout the country. Key Points: • In 2007, the enemy groups in Iraq were al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), Sunni rejectionists, Ansar al- Sunna, the Kurdish Workers Party, Shi’a extremists, and Iranian-backed Special Groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Missing Link
    THE MISSING LINK CIVIL-MILITARY ASPECTS OF EFFECTIVENESS IN COMPLEX IRREGULAR WARFARE Claes Robert Egnell Word count: 99,889 Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the PhD King’s College London September 2007 1 ABSTRACT Traditional analyses of operational effectiveness and combat power often lack consideration of civil-military aspects. However, in operations with complex and ambitious political aims, such as democratization, economic development and respect for human rights, the co-ordination of military, diplomatic and economic means is essential. These are issues that have increasingly become obvious since the end of the Cold War, and even more so during the operations in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq in the new millennium. The aim of the thesis is to increase the understanding of how different patterns of civil-military relations affect the way operations are conducted. In general terms the impact is twofold: a direct impact by providing the highest levels in the chain of command – the level where strategic aims are set and operational plans made, and an indirect impact by being the arena in which decisions regarding size, culture, equipment and doctrine of the armed forces are made. Without properly functioning civil-military relations, structurally as well as culturally, effectiveness in complex irregular warfare is therefore unlikely. More specifically, the thesis compares the divided, radical civil-military approach, as promoted by Samuel Huntington and his followers, and the integrated, pragmatic approach, as advocated by the Janowitzean, sociological school. In practical terms, this involves a comparative study of US and British patterns of civil-military relations, their strategic cultures, as well as their operations in Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • The Trade-Off Between Force and Casualties in Democracies at War a Study of the American, British and Israeli Militaries
    The Trade-off between Force and Casualties in Democracies at War A Study of the American, British and Israeli Militaries By Yonatan Freeman & Yagil Levy The United States, United Kingdom and Israel in recent years have been involved in military campaigns in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq and Gaza. At the same time, sensitivity to casualties has remained paramount to liberal worldviews. This outlook has led to the use of aggressive force to shift the mission risk from a nation’s soldier to the enemy civilian, possibly leading to an increase in collateral damage. The result has been the development 1 of a force/ casualty trade-off (FCT) – the use of operational methods to reduce risks to soldiers, under specific conditions of legitimacy for using force, at the expense of inflicting more damage on the enemy civilians. Thus, the aversion to exposing soldiers to greater risk has challenged the sensitivity to enemy civilian casualties. This article seeks to evaluate how FCT has been legitimized through the legitimization of aggressiveness. Certainly, as will be shown below, legitimacy was not just about the use of force, but about backing for the operation. At times, by using greater force, leaders chose to risk enemy civilians to satisfy public desires for the protection their soldiers. The structure of this article is as follows. First, the study will be situated within the current literature, and the latter’s gap identified. Next, the main line of argument and methodology will be presented. This will be followed by a section detailing the empirical analysis offered to back it. Lastly, conclusions will duly be provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraqi Force Development and the Challenge of Civil War
    Center for Strategic and International Studies Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy 1800 K Street, N.W. • Suite 400 • Washington, DC 20006 Phone: 1 (202) 775-3270 • Fax: 1 (202) 457-8746 Web: http://www.csis.org/burke Email: [email protected] Iraqi Force Development and the Challenge of Civil War: The Critical Problems and Failures the US Must Address if Iraqi Forces Are to Eventually Do the Job Anthony Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy With the Assistance of: Brian Burton George Sullivan Iskandar Jahja William D. Sullivan Revised, November 28, 2006 Cordesman: Iraqi Force Development 11/28/06 Page ii Executive Summary Iraq is already in a state of at least limited civil war, and may well be escalating to the level of a major civil conflict. What began as a small resistance movement centered on loyalists to the Ba’ath and Saddam Hussein has expanded to include neo-Salafi Sunni terrorism, become a broadly based Sunni insurgency, and now a broader sectarian and ethnic conflict. The current combination of insurgency, Sunni Arab versus Shi’ite Arab sectarian conflict, and Arab versus Kurdish ethnic conflict could easily cause the collapse of the current political structure, leading to a Shi’ite or Shi’ite-Kurdish dominated government, with strong local centers of power, and an ongoing fight with Iraq’s Sunnis. It could escalate to the break up of the country, far more serious ethnic and sectarian conflict, or violent paralysis. It has already led to widespread ethnic cleansing in urban areas by militias and death squads of all three major ethnic and religious groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
    Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 6 July 2016 for The Report of the Iraq Inquiry Report of a Committee of Privy Counsellors Volume VIII Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 6 July 2016 HC 265-VIII 46561_29b Viking_Volume VIII Title Page.indd 1 17/06/2016 13:20 © Crown copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identifi ed any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected] Print ISBN 9781474110136 Web ISBN 9781474110143 ID 23051601 46561 07/16 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fi bre content minimum Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Offi ce 46561_29b Viking_Volume VIII Title Page.indd 2 17/06/2016 13:20 Volume VIII CONTENTS 9.5 June 2006 to 27 June 2007 1 9.6 27 June 2007 to April 2008 181 9.7 May 2008 to October 2009 381 9.8 Conclusions: The post-conflict period 469 46561_29b Viking_Volume VIII Title Page.indd 3 17/06/2016 13:20 46561_29b Viking_Volume VIII Title Page.indd 4 17/06/2016 13:20 SECTION 9.5 JUNE 2006 TO 27 JUNE 2007 Contents Introduction .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Where Is Iraq Heading? Lessons from Basra
    WHERE IS IRAQ HEADING? LESSONS FROM BASRA Middle East Report N°67 – 25 June 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... i I. CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................... 1 A. DIVERSITY ............................................................................................................................1 B. “SOUTHERNISM”...................................................................................................................4 C. FOREIGN INTERFERENCE ........................................................................................................7 II. OIL, MILITIAS AND THE SCRAMBLE FOR RESOURCES ................................ 9 A. SUBVERTING THE STATE .....................................................................................................11 B. CIRCUMVENTING THE STATE...............................................................................................14 III. OPERATION SINBAD ................................................................................................ 16 IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 18 APPENDICES A. MAP OF IRAQ ......................................................................................................................19 B. ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP .......................................................................20
    [Show full text]