ShareThis Page

Iraq army cowers from fight as radical Islamists push toward Baghdad

| Friday, June 13, 2014, 12:01 a.m.

The long-predicted dissolution of a centrally controlled Iraq ruled from Baghdad appeared closer to reality on Thursday as radical Islamist fighters advanced through the country with little interference from what remained of Iraq's disintegrating security forces.

Only militias tied to Iraq's feuding religious and ethnic groups mounted serious resistance to the southward push by fighters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, who appear to be supported by an ad hoc coalition of Sunni Muslim tribes and terrorist groups opposed to the Shiite-dominated central government.

With the lone exception of a helicopter assault on a terrorist position north of Tikrit, Iraqi army and security forces continued to abandon their posts whenever confronted by ISIS.

The collapse of central authority was evident in Baghdad, where the Iraqi parliament failed to muster a quorum to consider a request from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for a declaration of a state of emergency.

Al-Maliki responded in a statement read on state television by accusing Sunni political parties of conspiring to destroy the state. In recent days, al-Maliki, who serves as defense minister, has blamed the same parties for the army's desertion in the face of the ISIS offensive.

“Iraq's future at this point is being shaped by conflict rather than by a viable political system. No one really knows where it's going,” Salman Sheikh, director of the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar, said in a telephone interview from Beirut. “The long-term impact could be quite cataclysmic, not just for Iraq, but for the entire region.”

The prediction that Iraq would one day descend into an ungovernable space of feuding ethnic and religious groups was first made when U.S. forces toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003. Now that it seems to be happening, many are finding it hard to grasp the unfolding reality.

“It's important to keep in mind that a major source of Iraq's problems has been the refusal of the Maliki government, despite persistent U.S. encouragement, to reach out to its Sunni citizens to forge a unified and inclusive Iraq. No action on our part can resolve that disunity,” Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that warned against a positive U.S. response to an Iraqi request for airstrikes.

Across Iraq were scenes that seemed unreal to those who have closely followed the ins and outs of that country's byzantine politics.

The Kurdish Regional Government in Irbil announced that its highly trained militia, the peshmerga, had taken complete control of the city of Kirkuk, which has long been a point of competition between its Arab and Kurdish residents, since the mostly Arab government security forces had fled. The move makes the Kurds' long-sought goal of control over the city a reality.

“The whole of Kirkuk has fallen into the hands of peshmerga,” Kurdish spokesman Jabbar Yawar said. “No Iraqi army remains in Kirkuk now.”

In Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city, whose fall late Monday was the start of ISIS' rapid march, fighters held a parade to show off the military equipment they had seized when they captured military bases and weapons storehouses, according to residents who spoke with Reuters.

In the majority Sunni Muslim town of Samara, where the bombing of a Shiite shrine in 2006 triggered a bloodletting that killed thousands, the timely arrival of Shiite militia fighters from Baghdad, 70 miles away, appeared to have stopped a major push by ISIS fighters to capture the town, according to Iraqi television reports.

There was speculation that an ISIS capture of Samara and a threat to the al-Askari mosque, one of Shiite Islam's most sacred shrines, would prompt Iran, which has been an ally of the al-Maliki government, to send troops. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, in a nationally televised speech on the situation in Iraq, raised the possibility of intervention to defend the Iraqi government.

“For our part, as the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, we will combat violence, extremism and terrorism in the region and the world,” he said. “(ISIS) is an extremist, terrorist group that is acting savagely.”

There were no confirmed sightings of Iranian troops, despite widespread reports that they had arrived in the country and had helped Iraqi security forces recapture Tikrit, which fell to ISIS on Wednesday.

With the U.S.-funded and -trained security forces in collapse, Iraqi leaders called for citizens to take up arms to defend their neighborhoods — an invitation, many believe, that will result in the kind of bloodshed that dominated Iraq during a bitter Sunni-Shiite conflict that reigned there from 2006 to 2008.

Powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose Mahdi Army militia vexed American troops for years, said he would order his mostly disbanded fighters into battle only to defend Shiite holy sites and not the government. But a slew of other Shiite militias loyal to the government are stepping into the fray.

Asaib al-Haq, or the League of Righteousness, deployed its fighters, trained and equipped by Iran and their Lebanese allies Hezbollah, into key areas around Samara and Baghdad in an effort to halt the advance, while the Badr Brigades, a militia commanded by the mainstream Badr Organization political party of Hadi al-Amiri, sent fighters to Shiite areas in preparation for any ISIS push into Baghdad or key population centers.

Security experts said they expected those efforts to prevent ISIS from capturing Baghdad.

“The retreat is not likely to spread to predominantly Shiite areas such as Baghdad,” said John Drake of the British AKE security firm, which has long operated in Iraq. “This is where the security forces will muster. Local residents are taking up arms to join militia groups to defend the city.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.