DOCSLIB.ORG

Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: a Dynamic Net Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: a Dynamic Net Assessment CSIS_______________________________ Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006 (202) 775-3270 (To comment: [email protected] For Updates see CSIS.ORG, “Military Balance”) Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: A Dynamic Net Assessment Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair for Strategy Center for Strategic and International Studies Revised July 21, 2002 Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page ii Introduction This document is an expanded version of a report originally prepared for a conference at the Naval War College in July 2002. The author would like to thank his colleagues at that conference for many suggestions and corrections. He would also like to thank the Smith-Richardson Foundation for some of the funding for the project. Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page iii Table of Contents INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 IRAQ’S CURRENT MILITARY FORCES....................................................................................................................................... 1 The Iraqi Army and Key Security Elements......................................................................................................................1 The Deployment of Army and Security Elements .............................................................................................................. 2 The Iraqi Air Force...............................................................................................................................................................5 The Iraqi Navy.......................................................................................................................................................................6 Iraqi Operational Capabilities...........................................................................................................................................7 The Problem of Sanctions and Equipment Modernization............................................................................................7 THE PROBLEM OF DYNAMIC NET ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................................... 8 Uncertainties and Intangibles.............................................................................................................................................9 Defining the Key Contingencies.......................................................................................................................................11 IRAQ FACES CONTINUED CONTAINMENT WITHOUT EFFECTIVE INSPECTION.................................................................. 12 IRAQ FACES CONTINUED CONTAINMENT WITH “EFFECTIVE” INSPECTION. .................................................................... 13 THE CONTINUING LOW-LEVEL AIR WAR OVER THE “NO FLY ZONES”........................................................................... 15 IRAQ BECOMES MORE CONFIDENT OVER TIME................................................................................................................... 16 UNFORESEEN EVENTS THRUST IRAQ INTO ANOTHER CONFRONTATION WITH THE KURDS IN THE NORTH AND/OR THE SHI’ITES IN THE SOUTH..................................................................................................................................................... 16 Kurdish Contingencies.......................................................................................................................................................16 Shi’ite Contingencies..........................................................................................................................................................17 Reaction to a US-led Coalition.........................................................................................................................................18 IRAQ VERSUS IRAN.................................................................................................................................................................... 19 IRAQ RISKS A DESPERATE ATTACK ON KUWAIT................................................................................................................. 21 Iraq’s Offensive Capabilities in Other Contingencies..................................................................................................24 IRAQ AND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION...................................................................................................................... 25 Iraqi Missile Developments and Possible Capabilities................................................................................................26 Iraqi CBRN Developments and Possible Capabilities..................................................................................................29 Current Warfighting Capability A“Guesstimate” and Possible US Response.......................................................33 A Current Warfighting Capability “Guesstimate:” Israeli Response .......................................................................37 A Current Warfighting Capability “Guesstimate:” Turkish and Southern Gulf Response....................................40 Future Risks and Breakout Problems..............................................................................................................................40 IRAQ CARRIES OUT MAJOR ATTACKS AGAINST THE US, BRITAIN, ISRAEL, OR A GULF STATE USING COVERT ACTION OR A TERRORIST/EXTREMIST PROXY...................................................................................................................... 41 IRAQ VERSUS THE UNITED STATES AND A US-LED COALITION......................................................................................... 43 US Forces and Allied Capabilities...................................................................................................................................44 The Total Pool of US Forces.............................................................................................................................................44 The Uncertain Role of Allied and Neighboring States..................................................................................................45 Current US Land Warfare Capabilities in the Gulf......................................................................................................48 Current US Air and Missile Warfare Capabilities in the Gulf....................................................................................51 Table One ............................................................................................................................................... 52 US Airpower in Recent Regional Conflicts ........................................................................................... 52 COVERT OVERTHROW .............................................................................................................................................................. 55 Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page iv OPPOSITION GROUND FORCES AND US AIRPOWER: “AFGHAN OPTION”......................................................................... 57 The Use of Opposition Ground Forces ...........................................................................................................................57 The Limits to the Afghan Lesson.......................................................................................................................................58 How Much US Airpower is Enough? The Iraqi SEAD Challenge..............................................................................59 How Much US Support is Enough? The Strengths of US Strike/Attack Air and Missile Power...........................60 How Much US Support is Enough? The Limits to US Strike/Attack Air and Missile Power and Key Uncertainties Affecting the Iraqi Response....................................................................................................................61 The High Cost of Failure...................................................................................................................................................63 “ATTACK FROM THE NORTH OPTION”................................................................................................................................... 64 US OPERATIONS IN A MAJOR US-LED COALITION MILITARY EFFORT ............................................................................ 65 A “Coalition Heavy” Strategy..........................................................................................................................................65 A “Coalition Light” Strategy............................................................................................................................................67 Amphibious and Vertical Envelopment Operations......................................................................................................68 The Value of Strong Coalition Military Support............................................................................................................69 How Much US Force is Enough?.....................................................................................................................................69
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iran Vies for More Influence in Iraq at a Budget Price by Farzin Nadimi
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 3405 Iran Vies for More Influence in Iraq at a Budget Price by Farzin Nadimi Dec 3, 2020 Also available in Arabic / Farsi ABOUT THE AUTHORS Farzin Nadimi Farzin Nadimi, an associate fellow with The Washington Institute, is a Washington-based analyst specializing in the security and defense affairs of Iran and the Persian Gulf region. Brief Analysis Tehran aims to earn hard currency for its relatively cheap military hardware, ideally boosting its leverage in Baghdad at a fraction of the cost that the United States has been spending there. n November 14, a large Iraqi defense delegation began a four-day visit to Tehran as a follow-up to previous O exchanges with Iranian officials. The trip was led by Sunni defense minister Juma Saadoun al-Jubouri and included the commanders of each Iraqi military branch. According to Jubouri, its main goal was to “deepen” bilateral military and security cooperation. Three days later, the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF), Brig. Gen. Esmail Qaani, reportedly paid a secret visit to Baghdad. These exchanges are all the more notable because they came after the UN ban on arms deals with Iran expired in October. Tehran is now free to market and sell its weapons abroad, and several potential customers have already shown interest—not just Iraq, but also Syria, Venezuela, and other players. To be sure, all of these governments are financially constrained, and the United States will likely continue disrupting such deals via existing secondary sanctions, most of them based on UN Security Council resolutions adopted between 2006 and 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Military Operations
    Order Code RL31701 Iraq: U.S. Military Operations Updated July 15, 2007 Steve Bowman Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Iraq: U.S. Military Operations Summary Iraq’s chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs, together with Iraqi long-range missile development and support for Al Qaeda terrorism, were the primary justifications put forward for military action. On March 17, 2003, President Bush issued an ultimatum demanding that Saddam Hussein and his sons depart from Iraq within 48 hours. On March 19, offensive operations began with air strikes against Iraqi leadership positions. By April 15, after 27 days of operations, coalition forces were in relative control of all major Iraqi cities and Iraqi political and military leadership had disintegrated. On May 1, 2003, President Bush declared an end to major combat operations. There was no use of chemical or biological (CB) weapons, and no CB or nuclear weapons stockpiles or production facilities have been found. The major challenges to coalition forces are now quelling a persistent Iraqi resistance movement and training/retaining sufficient Iraqi security forces to assume responsibility for the nations domestic security. Though initially denying that there was an organized resistance movement, DOD officials have now acknowledged there is regional/local organization, with apparently ample supplies of arms and funding. CENTCOM has characterized the Iraqi resistance as “a classical guerrilla-type campaign.” DOD initially believed the resistance to consist primarily of former regime supporters and foreign fighters; however, it has now acknowledged that growing resentment of coalition forces and an increase in sectarian conflicts, independent of connections with the earlier regime, are contributing to the insurgency.
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting-For-Kurdistan.Pdf
    Fighting for Kurdistan? Assessing the nature and functions of the Peshmerga in Iraq CRU Report Feike Fliervoet Fighting for Kurdistan? Assessing the nature and functions of the Peshmerga in Iraq Feike Fliervoet CRU Report March 2018 March 2018 © Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’. Cover photo: Peshmerga, Kurdish Army © Flickr / Kurdishstruggle Unauthorized use of any materials violates copyright, trademark and / or other laws. Should a user download material from the website or any other source related to the Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’, or the Clingendael Institute, for personal or non-commercial use, the user must retain all copyright, trademark or other similar notices contained in the original material or on any copies of this material. Material on the website of the Clingendael Institute may be reproduced or publicly displayed, distributed or used for any public and non-commercial purposes, but only by mentioning the Clingendael Institute as its source. Permission is required to use the logo of the Clingendael Institute. This can be obtained by contacting the Communication desk of the Clingendael Institute ([email protected]). The following web link activities are prohibited by the Clingendael Institute and may present trademark and copyright infringement issues: links that involve unauthorized use of our logo, framing, inline links, or metatags, as well as hyperlinks or a form of link disguising the URL. About the author Feike Fliervoet is a Visiting Research Fellow at Clingendael’s Conflict Research Unit where she contributes to the Levant research programme, a three year long project that seeks to identify the origins and functions of hybrid security arrangements and their influence on state performance and development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq
    The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq By Anthony H. Cordesman, Peter Alsis, Adam Mausner, and Charles Loi Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Revised: December 20, 2011 Note: This draft is being circulated for comments and suggestions. Please provide them to [email protected] Chapter 6: US Strategic Competition with Iran: Competition in Iraq 2 Executive Summary "Americans planted a tree in Iraq. They watered that tree, pruned it, and cared for it. Ask your American friends why they're leaving now before the tree bears fruit." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.1 Iraq has become a key focus of the strategic competition between the United States and Iran. The history of this competition has been shaped by the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the 1991 Gulf War, and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since the 2003 war, both the US and Iran have competed to shape the structure of Post-Saddam Iraq’s politics, governance, economics, and security. The US has gone to great lengths to counter Iranian influence in Iraq, including using its status as an occupying power and Iraq’s main source of aid, as well as through information operations and more traditional press statements highlighting Iranian meddling. However, containing Iranian influence, while important, is not America’s main goal in Iraq. It is rather to create a stable democratic Iraq that can defeat the remaining extremist and insurgent elements, defend against foreign threats, sustain an able civil society, and emerge as a stable power friendly to the US and its Gulf allies.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated May 16, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom accomplished a long-standing U.S. objective, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but replacing his regime with a stable, moderate, democratic political structure has been complicated by a persistent Sunni Arab-led insurgency. The Bush Administration asserts that establishing democracy in Iraq will catalyze the promotion of democracy throughout the Middle East. The desired outcome would also likely prevent Iraq from becoming a sanctuary for terrorists, a key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission report. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is now showing substantial success, demonstrated by January 30, 2005 elections that chose a National Assembly, and progress in building Iraq’s various security forces. The Administration says it expects that the current transition roadmap — including votes on a permanent constitution by October 31, 2005 and for a permanent government by December 15, 2005 — are being implemented. Others believe the insurgency is widespread, as shown by its recent attacks, and that the Iraqi government could not stand on its own were U.S. and allied international forces to withdraw from Iraq. Some U.S. commanders and senior intelligence officials say that some Islamic militants have entered Iraq since Saddam Hussein fell, to fight what they see as a new “jihad” (Islamic war) against the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated November 21, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom succeeded in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, but Iraq remains violent and unstable because of Sunni Arab resentment and a related insurgency. The Bush Administration says that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq until the country is a stable democracy that will not host radical Islamist forces. The Administration has held out Iraq as a potential model for reform throughout the Middle East. However, mounting casualties and costs have intensified a debate within the United States over the wisdom of the invasion and whether or not to wind down U.S. involvement without completely accomplishing those goals. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is showing important successes, demonstrated by elections that chose a National Assembly (January 30, 2005), a referendum that adopted a permanent constitution (October 15, 2005), progress in building Iraq’s security forces, and economic growth. The next major milestone will be the holding of elections for a permanent government by December 15, 2005. While continuing to build, equip, and train Iraqi security units, the Administration has been working with the new Iraqi government to include more Sunni Arabs in the power structure; Sunnis, many of whom are mobilizing to vote against the draft constitution, were dominant during the regime of Saddam Hussein and now feel marginalized by the newly dominant Shiite Arabs and Kurds.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2003 Iraq War: Operations, Causes, and Consequences
    IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (JHSS) ISSN: 2279-0837, ISBN: 2279-0845. Volume 4, Issue 5 (Nov. - Dec. 2012), PP 29-47 www.Iosrjournals.Org The 2003 Iraq War: Operations, Causes, and Consequences Youssef Bassil LACSC – Lebanese Association for Computational Sciences Registered under No. 957, 2011, Beirut, Lebanon Abstract: The Iraq war is the Third Gulf War that was initiated with the military invasion of Iraq on March 2003 by the United States of American and its allies to put an end to the Baath Party of Saddam Hussein, the fifth President of Iraq and a prominent leader of the Baath party in the Iraqi region. The chief cause of this war was the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) that George W. Bush declared in response to the attacks of September 11. The events of this war were both brutal and severe on both parties as it resulted in the defeat of the Iraqi army and the depose and execution of Saddam Hussein, in addition to thousands of causalities and billionsof dollars expenses.This paperdiscusses the overt as well as the covert reasons behind the Iraqi war, in addition to its different objectives. It alsodiscusses the course of the war and its aftermath. This would shed the light on the consequences of the war on the political, economic, social, and humanitarian levels. Finally, the true intentions of the war are speculated. Keywords –Political Science, Warfare, Iraq War 2003, Global War on Terrorism I. INTRODUCTION The Iraq war, sometimes known as the Third Gulf War, began on March 20, 2003 with the invasion of Iraq known as "Iraqi Freedom Operation" by the alliance led by the United States against the Baath Party of Saddam Hussein.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearings to Examine Threats, Responses, and Regional Considerations Surrounding Iraq
    S. HRG. 107–658 HEARINGS TO EXAMINE THREATS, RESPONSES, AND REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SURROUNDING IRAQ HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 31 AND AUGUST 1, 2002 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 81–697 PDF WASHINGTON : 2002 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland JESSE HELMS, North Carolina CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota BILL FRIST, Tennessee BARBARA BOXER, California LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia BILL NELSON, Florida SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Staff Director PATRICIA A. MCNERNEY, Republican Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 CONTENTS WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 2002 Page Ajami, Prof. Fouad, Majid Khadduri professor and director of Middle East Studies, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins Univer- sity, Washington, DC ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DISBANDING and REBUILDING the IRAQI ARMY: the HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Ibrahim Al-Marashi*
    DISBANDING AND REBUILDING THE IRAQI ARMY: THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Ibrahim Al-Marashi* In 1921, the Iraqi Army was established in the British mandate, which had weak democratic institutions at the time of the first insurgency. The Iraqi public saw that its destiny was controlled by the British, whom it believed sought to exploit the country’s natural resources. In a backlash of nationalism, the public projected its aspirations for complete independence on the growing army. After 2003, the Americans reestablished an army in a state with weak democratic institutions during a period of civil internal conflict, and 82 years after the British mandate, the United States controlled Iraq’s destiny. Both the United Kingdom and the United States faced the same difficulties and produced the same reactions among the Iraqi public as they tried to create an Iraqi Army from “scratch.” “I am a Muslim and Islamic law lays down different weapons.”3 Al-Sabbagh‟s vision of a that no infidel shall rule over me… and new Crusade resonates with the neo-Crusader because I am an Arab and Arabism forbids a themes that proliferate the discourse of al- foreign army to corrupt my country.”1 Qa‟ida in Iraq, as well as with a variety of Iraqi nationalist groups in opposition to the While this statement sounds as if it were U.S. role in their country.4 Finally, the colonel taken from an Iraqi insurgent‟s communiqué was a proud solider who had served in the after the 2003 Iraq War, the quote actually Ottoman military fighting the British and their belongs to an Arab nationalist colonel, Salah allies.
    [Show full text]
  • Assyrian Universal Alliance
    ASSYRIAN UNIVERSAL ALLIANCE Member, Unrepresented Nations & Peoples Organization (UNPO) United Nations Forum on Minority Issues November 27-28, 2012 Alen Mirza Committee on International Organizations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities: identifying positive practices and opportunities. Challenges and problems encountered in the practical implementation of the Declaration Implementing the Positive Obligations of the Declaration in Post-Conflict Reconstruction Madam President, distinguished delegates: The Assyrian Universal Alliance would like to bring attention to the importance of implementing the Declaration on the Rights of Minorities in post-conflict and peace-building situations. Specifically, we ask the Forum to recognize the necessity of applying the positive obligations contained in the Declaration immediately following periods of conflict. In doing so, national governments and United Nations institutions will be better able to offset the human rights violations disproportionately affecting minorities during such times. The current situation of Assyrians in Iraq is evidence of the need for applying affirmative measures in securing the rights of minorities under the Declaration, promoting genuine equality and ensuring that minorities play an integral role in State-building processes. Iraq’s reconstruction following the 2003 war has left Assyrians and other minorities to suffer unevenly, particularly with respect to issues of security and displacement. Assyrians continue to remain underrepresented in government security forces, especially in leadership positions and in regions with significant minority populations. This disparity exists despite constitutional guarantees requiring equitable representation in Iraqi armed forces and security services. Furthermore, while constituting less than 10% of Iraq’s prewar population, Assyrians represent upwards of 30% of UNHCR-registered Iraqi refugees.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq Index Tracking Variables of Reconstruction & Security in Post-Saddam Iraq
    Iraq Index Tracking Variables of Reconstruction & Security in Post-Saddam Iraq http://www.brookings.edu/iraqindex December 18, 2008 Michael E. O’Hanlon Jason H. Campbell For more information please contact Jason Campbell at [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS Tracking the Aftermath of the Surge Page Estimated Number of Iraqi Civilian Fatalities by Month, May 2003-Present…………………………………………………………………………………4 Detailed Explanation of Iraqi Civilian Fatality Estimates by Time Period…………………………………………………………………………………….5 Enemy-Initiated Attacks Against the Coalition and Its Partners, by Week..…………………………………………………………………....………….....6 Iraqi Military and Police Killed since January 2005……………………………………………………………………………………………..………...……6 Current Disposition of U.S./Coalition Forces in Iraq, by Multi-National Division (MND)………………………………………………..………………….7 Weapons Caches Found and Cleared in Iraq, January 2004-Present……………………………………………NEW..………………………………….....7 Number of Patrols Carried Out by U.S. and Iraqi Forces (Per Week)…………………………………………………………………………………………8 Number of Joint Security Stations Established by U.S. and Iraqi Forces in Baghdad………………………………………………………………………..8 Multiple Fatality Bombings in Iraq………………………………………………..………..…………………………………..……………..……..…….9 Killed and Wounded in Multiple Fatality Bombings………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………...9 Multiple Fatality Bombings by Type Since January 2007…………………………………………………….………………………………………………..10 Detailed Breakdown of Deaths Associated with Multiple Fatality Bombings in Iraq……………………….…………………………………………..…...10
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq's New Security Forces
    Order Code RS22093 Updated January 12, 2006 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq’s New Security Forces: The Challenge of Sectarian and Ethnic Influences Jeremy M. Sharp Middle East Policy Analyst Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary This report analyzes the prospects for rebuilding an inclusive Iraqi security force that transcends Iraq’s various ethnic and sectarian communities. U.S. policy makers and Iraqi officials aim to create a unified Iraqi security force; however, the predominately Sunni Arab insurgency has hampered this effort, and many believe that the new Iraqi security agencies will ultimately be composed of mostly Shiite and Kurdish recruits with both communities separately maintaining their own militias. As Iraqi officials attempt to build a pluralistic political system, an important challenge will be rebuilding an inclusive Iraqi security force that does not exacerbate relations between Iraq’s ethnic/religious communities and increase the likelihood of civil war. For more information on Iraq, see CRS Report RL31339, Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance, by Kenneth Katzman and CRS Report RS22323, Iran’s Influence in Iraq, by Jeremy M. Sharp. This report will be updated periodically. Introduction The Bush Administration has deemed the rapid creation of an effective Iraqi fighting force as key to stabilizing Iraq and expediting the eventual withdrawal of U.S. forces. The rationale for this effort is that a well-trained, well-equipped Iraqi army can be effective in quelling the insurgency and can help smooth the process of restoring full sovereignty to a new Iraqi government.
    [Show full text]