Internet Scofflaw

Reuters reports (video).

Frederick Kagan writes:

The poor Russian general staff officers complain that they cannot even plan properly for the pull-back . . . since the Georgians can’t seem to get their act together despite the assistance of Russian soldiers, tanks, and combat aircraft in their country. The most Orwellian claim of all came today, when the spokesman for the Russian general staff explained that Georgian troops were attempting to reconstitute their combat capabilities and were concentrating around Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital. What an outrage! How dare the Georgians prepare to defend their capital! It is nothing less than an act of provocation, according to the Russians.

Comparing the current Russian rhetoric to the Cold War is, to some degree, unfair — to the Soviet Union. When the U.S.S.R. invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Moscow was meticulous about creating a fictitious Afghan government that “requested” the “fraternal assistance” of its socialist ally to the north, even if the leader of that government, Babrak Karmal, was not in Afghanistan at the time. Soviet operations to crush dissent in Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland also followed “requests” from the leadership of those countries to their “fraternal socialist allies” to the east. Since the Soviets went to great lengths to explain the theory whereby they were always the “peaceloving peoples,” even when they invaded other countries, they also worked hard to preserve a veneer, however thin, to support the theory.

Putin, by contrast, feels no such obligation.

Fox News reports that Russia now pledges to leave Georgia by Friday.  Apparently they think we’re stupid.  I’m afraid they might be right.

Video here.  Unless the barricade was intended to keep Russia from leaving, I think we can safely assume they were not withdrawing.

Russia’s interpretation of the cease-fire agreement seems to be: we go wherever we want, and we don’t shoot you (much).

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Russian troops briefly seized control of the economically vital Georgian port of Poti Tuesday morning, a day after Moscow said it had begun pulling its forces out of Georgia.

Some 70 Russian peacekeeping forces entered the port grounds Tuesday morning on armored personnel carriers, jeeps and an army truck, according to Georgian government and port officials. They detained 20 Georgian soldiers and confiscated their weapons. They left about four hours later for their base near the Georgian town of Senaki, taking the detainees with them. The Georgian soldiers were driven away on top of APCs, handcuffed and blindfolded, and Russian soldiers trained their automatic rifles on them as they rode back to Senaki.

I guess this non-withdrawal stuff isn’t really even news any more.  In a month, Russia will still be in Georgia but the West will have forgotten.  Then Georgia will quietly cease to exist.

The London Times reports:

“The soldiers told us they had an order from Putin – leave or be killed.” Manana Dioshvili showed no emotion as she described how Russian troops forced her to flee her home. Her former neighbours nodded in agreement, huddled together in a kindergarten whose windows had been blown out by a Russian bomb.

“That’s how they explained themselves to us,” she recalled of the moment they fled the ethnic Georgian village of Kurta, near the capital of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali.

“They said, ‘Putin has given us an order that everyone must be either shot or forced to leave’. They told us we should ask the Americans for help now because they would kill us if we stayed.”

Vardo Babutidze, 79, was not lucky enough to be visited by Russian soldiers. Her husband Georgi, 85, was shot twice through the chest by an Ossetian paramilitary who came to their house to demand weapons.

“We didn’t have any guns, so he shot Georgi in front of me without saying a word,” she said. “A neighbour helped me to bury him in our garden and then I just fled.”

Manana Galigashvili, 53, whose husband Andrei stared vacantly from a bed behind her, said that Ossetian soldiers had returned later and torched the house. They, too, had left after a soldier threatened to slit their throats.

Frightened refugees told similar stories all over the city of Gori yesterday as the Russian army extended its reach deep into Georgian territory despite a ceasefire agreement signed by President Medvedev that requires them to withdraw.

(Via Hot Air.)

Why is Russia pretending to withdraw when it isn’t? They can only keep up the facade for so long, so what does it gain them? If they are there to stay, why not admit it? Here’s a theory: perhaps Putin does plan to leave eventually, but he’s buying as much time as he can to weaken Georgia further by killing or scattering its people and by damaging its remaining infrastructure and military.

Surprise, surprise. Russia is not withdrawing from Georgia:

Russia’s deputy chief of staff insisted Monday that Russian troops and tanks have begun to withdraw from the conflict zone with Georgia, but left unclear exactly what Russia thought that zone was. Yet in the key Georgian city of Gori, there were no signs of a Russian pullback.

The statement by Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn came amid uncertainty about whether Russia was fulfilling President Dmitry Medvedev’s promise to begin a troop pullout Monday after signing an EU-backed cease-fire.

Nogovitsyn told a briefing in Moscow that “today, according to the peace plan, the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers and reinforcements has begun” and said forces were leaving Gori.

However in Gori, Russian forces seemed to be solidifying their positions and the only movement seen by Associated Press reporters was in the opposite direction from Russia — toward the Georgian capital of Tbilisi, 55 miles to the east.

The U.S. State Department was also unable to confirm a Russian troop pullout.

Four Russian armored personnel carriers, each carrying about 15 men, rolled Monday afternoon from Gori to Igoeti, a crossroads town even closer to Tbilisi. Passing Georgian soldiers who sat by the roadside, the Russians moved into Igoeti then turned off onto a side road.

Why does Russia bother to pretend it’s withdrawing when it isn’t? All I can think is that they are trying to prolong the diplomacy, which will end once they admit they’re not leaving. But what are they concerned about the West doing that they want to delay?

UPDATE: The BBC secretly filmed Russian troops not pulling out, and damage done by Russian troops to the port of Poti (where Russia claimed not to be).

The Telegraph reports:

Most of the Ossetians, as well as the Chechen irregulars who joined them, were more interested in pillaging, . . . but many, according to witnesses whose accounts have yet to be verified, also went house-to-house in Georgian villages, both in South Ossetia and outside the breakaway province, on raping and murdering sprees.

Last week, until orders came from Moscow to rein them in, the Russian troops occupying Georgian territory either did little to stop the irregulars from looting or committing atrocities or actively encouraged them.

Manning a checkpoint outside the Georgian town of Kaspi, 25 miles southeast of Gori, four young Chechen soldiers admitted that their South Ossetian allies had carried out reprisals against Georgian civilians – but insisted they were justified.

“Do you know what the Georgians did in Tskhinvali,” demanded one fighter, who identified himself as Sulim. “They killed 2,000 people. Georgians were crushing small children with their tanks.”

From the beginning of hostilities, officials in Moscow were quick to declare that “genocide” was taking place and that up to 2,000 people had been killed in attacks deliberately aimed at Tskhinvali’s civilian population.

Vladimir Putin, the prime minister, went on television to claim that Georgian tanks were crushing children and Georgian soldiers were beheading civilians.

Yet the first independent human rights activists attempting to calculate the civilian death toll have so far only been able to confirm the deaths of 44 people according to records from Tskhinvali’s only hospital.

According to Human Rights Watch, the respected New York-based body, the Kremlin’s deliberate exaggeration of the civilian death toll was inevitably contributing to the scale of reprisals against Georgians.

Asked whether he had personally seen any children crushed by Georgian tanks, Sulim replied: “No, but I heard Putin say it so it must be true.”

Russian propaganda has been so convincing that not even the few independent media outlets that normally criticise the Kremlin in Russia have spoken out against the Georgia war.

The AP reports:

Russia said its military began to withdraw from the conflict zone in Georgia on Monday, but left unclear exactly where troops and tanks will operate under the cease-fire that ended days of fighting in the former Soviet republic. . .

In Moscow, Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn told a briefing that “today, according to the peace plan, the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers and reinforcements has begun.” He added that forces were leaving Gori, which sits on Georgia’s main east-west highway.

Earlier in the day, Russian forces around Gori appeared to be solidifying their positions, and it was not immediately possible to confirm the withdrawal with AP journalists there.

The cease-fire that Russia and Georgia signed obligates Russia to withdraw completely from Georgia:

According to the European Union-brokered peace plan signed by both Medvedev and Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, both sides are to pull forces back to the positions they held before fighting broke out Aug. 7 in the Russian-backed Georgian separatist region of South Ossetia.

But Russia doesn’t even pretend it will follow the accord:

Nogovitsyn said the Russian troops are pulling back to South Ossetia and a security zone defined by a 1999 agreement of the “joint control commission” that had been nominally in charge of South Ossetia’s status since it split from Georgia in the early 1990s.

Georgian and Russian officials could not immediately clarify the dimensions of the security zone. Nogovitsyn said only that “troops should not be in the territory of Georgia,” but it was unclear if that excluded patrols.

Russia promises to begin troop withdrawal Monday.

Hot Air has the story.

The Washington Post reports:

Poland finally agreed on Thursday to host elements of U.S. global anti-missile system on its territory after Washington improved the terms of the deal amid the Georgia crisis. . .

The signing comes after Prime Minister Donald Tusk had been holding out for enhanced military cooperation with the United States in return for consent to host 10 interceptor rockets at a base in northern Poland.

Washington says the interceptors and a radar in the Czech Republic would form part of a global “missile shield” protecting the United States and its allies from long range missiles that could in the future be fired by Iran or groups such as al-Qaeda.

“We have crossed the Rubicon,” Tusk said just before the deal was signed.

“We have finally got understanding of our point of view that Poland, being a crucial partner in NATO and an important friend and ally of the United States, must also be safe.”

Officials said the deal included a U.S. declaration that it will aid Poland militarily in case of a threat from a third country and that it would establish a permanent U.S. base on Polish soil in a symbolic gesture underlining the alliance. . .

Russia has vehemently opposed placing the shield installations in central Europe, saying they would threaten its security and upset the post-Cold War balance of power in Europe.

Hmm, I wonder what caused the sudden breakthrough?

The Washington Post reports:

Two days after signing a French-brokered ceasefire, Russian troops showed no immediate sign of vacating positions around the central Georgian city of Gori, where they arrived in force a day before. Wire services reported from the area that Georgian police had approached the city for what they expected to be the beginning of a handover, but left after what the Associated Press described as a “confrontation” at a Russian checkpoint.

The status of Russia’s presence in a second strategic town, the port city of Poti, was unclear. Georgian officials said that Russian troops remained in Poti, while a Russian military spokesman denied that was the case. . .

Russia on Tuesday agreed to stop offensive operations and pull its troops out of Georgian territory, but a day later took over the frontline city of Gori, seized munitions at Georgian military bases and set up positions along the country’s main east-west highway. Paramilitary fighters accompanying the troops looted homes and stole cars, witnesses said. . .

Russia denied many claims of violations of the cease-fire pledge. But Lavrov acknowledged the presence of Russian soldiers outside Gori and in the western city of Senaki, the site of another Georgian military base. “We have never concealed this,” he said. “They are there to neutralize a huge arsenal of arms and military hardware which they found there totally abandoned. It was necessary to neutralize them in order not to create a threat for civilians.” He promised that reports of looting would be investigated.

At least it appears that Russia has stopped its advance, but with Tbilisi cut off from the rest of Georgia, Russia doesn’t need to advance any further.

UPDATE: Defense Secretary Gates says Russia now appears to be beginning to withdraw.

ANOTHER UPDATE: On the other hand, Georgia claims that a column of 100 Russian tanks is moving further into Georgia.

I don’t really buy them, but for what it’s worth, a couple of respectable sources have somewhat optimistic accounts of the Russo-Georgian war. The Belmost Club (two days ago) thinks it’s not over, that the Georgian army is intact and has fallen back to a defensible position. Classical Values (yesterday) thinks that Georgia is okay and overall this is actually a win for the United States.

I’d like to believe this, but it’s hard to reconcile with the reality of advancing Russian tank columns.

UPDATE: Here’s another.

ABC reports.  (Via Instapundit.)

(Previous post.)

Despite its “ceasefire”:

Georgia’s Security Council chief says Russians have bombed and looted the city of Gori outside the breakaway province of South Ossetia in violation of the truce.

Alexander Lomaia says that the Russian military bombed Gori Wednesday morning and entered the city. The Russian military then let paramilitaries into Gori who started massive looting.

An AP reporter outside the city of Gori saw the convoy speeding past and heading south.

The fighting isn’t over yet, but under the safe assumption that Russia prevails, National Review has some suggestions.  One of them, that Georgia immediately be admitted into NATO, requires the optimistic assumption that there is still a Georgia to admit.  The rest seem sound though.

It’s clear now that Russia will not accept Georgia’s capitulation in South Ossetia, that it has additional territorial aims in Georgia. That’s about all that’s clear, though. Richard Ferdandez tries to make sense of things. His bottom line is that it appears Russia is trying to split Georgia in two, taking Georgia’s Black Sea ports and leaving a rump Georgia landlocked and isolated.

Ralph Peters observes additionally that this was clearly a planned effort, not the emergency reponse that the Kremlin claims:

How do I know that the Russians set a trap? Simple: Given the wretched state of Russian military readiness, that brigade could never have shot out of its motor pool on short notice. The Russians obviously “task-organized” the force in advance to make sure it would have working tanks with competent crews.

Otherwise, broken-down vehicles would’ve lined those mountain roads.

The Russians planned it. And they hope to push it to the limit.

Peter Mansoor (formerly XO to Gen. Petraeus in Iraq) explains.  (Via Instapundit.)

Russia has launched its first war of aggression since the end of the Cold War. I wish more people were paying attention. (Via Instapundit.) Reuters story here.

UPDATE AND BUMP: John McCain has issued a statement:

Today news reports indicate that Russian military forces crossed an internationally-recognized border into the sovereign territory of Georgia. Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory. What is most critical now is to avoid further confrontation between Russian and Georgian military forces. The consequences for Euro-Atlantic stability and security are grave.

The government of Georgia has called for a cease-fire and for a resumption of direct talks on South Ossetia with international mediators. The U.S. should immediately convene an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to call on Russia to reverse course. The US should immediately work with the EU and the OSCE to put diplomatic pressure on Russia to reverse this perilous course it has chosen. We should immediately call a meeting of the North Atlantic Council to assess Georgia’s security and review measures NATO can take to contribute to stabilizing this very dangerous situation. Finally, the international community needs to establish a truly independent and neutral peacekeeping force in South Ossetia.

Also, a few hours later, the press has started paying attention. This is the top story at the Washington Post and Fox News, the number two story at the New York Times and MSNBC, and number three at CNN.

Wow. This puts an exclamation point on the failure of British policy in Basra:

A secret deal between Britain and the notorious al-Mahdi militia prevented British Forces from coming to the aid of their US and Iraqi allies for nearly a week during the battle for Basra this year, The Times has learnt.

Four thousand British troops – including elements of the SAS and an entire mechanised brigade – watched from the sidelines for six days because of an “accommodation” with the Iranian-backed group, according to American and Iraqi officers who took part in the assault.

US Marines and soldiers had to be rushed in to fill the void, fighting bitter street battles and facing mortar fire, rockets and roadside bombs with their Iraqi counterparts. . .

US advisers who accompanied the Iraqi forces into the fight were shocked to learn of the accommodation made last summer by British Intelligence and elements of al-Mahdi Army. . . The deal, which aimed to encourage the Shia movement back into the political process and marginalise extremist factions, has dealt a huge blow to Britain’s reputation in Iraq.

Under its terms, no British soldier could enter Basra without the permission of Des Browne, the Defence Secretary. By the time he gave his approval, most of the fighting was over and the damage to Britain’s reputation had already been done.

The British would have done better to focus less on not being American, and focus more on not sucking. Churchill must be rolling in his grave.

POSTSCRIPT: Mudville Gazette spotted this, and makes it the conclusion of a long post tracking the British failure in Basra, but I think he buries the lede. (Via Instapundit.)

According to Fred Kaplan, the Army promotion board, now chaired by General Petraeus, is finally promoting asymmetric warfare experts to General:

Any officer looking at the names on this panel—and the ones I’ve listed aren’t the only ones—would very clearly get the message: The Cold War is over, and so, finally, is the Cold War Army.

(Via Instapundit.)

The New York Sun reports.  (Via the Corner.)

It didn’t work out so well the last time they tried it, and we have much more power in the region now.  For a less crazy regime, I would call this an empty threat.  With those guys, who knows.

According to this LA Times report, a key member of Al Qaeda’s WMD effort, now captured, had problems with the glass ceiling:

One of the more elusive and mysterious figures linked to Al Qaeda — a Pakistani mother of three who studied biology at MIT and who authorities say spent years in the United States as a sleeper agent — was flown to New York on Monday night to face charges of attempting to kill U.S. military and FBI personnel in Afghanistan. The Justice Department, FBI and U.S. military in Afghanistan said that Aafia Siddiqui, 36, was arrested in Ghazni province three weeks ago. . .

For years, the FBI and the CIA have been desperately trying to find Siddiqui, who they say spent several years in Boston as a “fixer” for admitted Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, providing haven and logistical support for terrorist operatives that he sent to the United States to launch attacks. . .

One former CIA weapons of mass destruction analyst who tracked Siddiqui said that she became extremely frustrated years ago, however, when she was told by senior Al Qaeda leaders to help their cause by getting pregnant.

“They told her that the best thing she could do for Al Qaeda was to start popping out little jihadists,” said the former CIA officer, who left the agency in 2006. “She was furious; she knows more about this stuff than pretty much anyone in the organization.”

Siddiqui never gave up her desire to launch attacks against the United States and its allies, according to FBI and Justice Department records made public Monday night.

According to court papers, Afghan national police officers in Ghazni province, south of Kabul, the capital, observed Siddiqui acting suspiciously near the provincial governor’s compound July 17.

When they searched her handbag, they found documents relating to explosives, chemical weapons and weapons involving biological materials and radiological agents, along with descriptions of landmarks in New York City and elsewhere in the United States, and liquid and gel substances sealed in bottles and jars.

I guess it’s a good thing Al Qaeda is sexist.

(Via Instapundit.)

Hugo Chavez says two dozen Russian fighters can defeat the US Navy:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says 24 Sukhoi fighter jets have been delivered to Venezuela — and are ready to defend his country from “imperialist” aggressions.

Chavez claims the U.S. Navy’s Fourth Fleet poses a threat to Venezuela, and he’s vowing to push forward with a multibillion-dollar arms buildup aimed at dissuading a possible U.S. military strike. . .

U.S. officials deny Washington has designs on Venezuela.

The article doesn’t say what model the planes are, but Wikipedia says they’re Su-30MK2s.  I understand it’s a decent plane (by non-Western standards), but not something that could go toe-to-toe with the US Navy in the unlikely event of a military showdown, particularly in such small numbers.

Fox News reports.

Bill Roggio reports:

Coalition special operations forces captured two members of the Iranian-supported Hezbollah Brigades during a raid in eastern Baghdad on early Thursday morning. The intelligence-driven raid targeted the home of a propaganda cell member, Multinational Forces Iraq reported. The cell member was responsible for videotaping Hezbollah Brigades attacks on US and Iraqi forces in Baghdad.

“This propaganda cell is suspected of making, videos of attacks on Coalition and Iraqi forces, which are then used to raise funds and resources for additional attacks against Coalition forces and Iraqis,” the US military stated in a press release. The cell member was responsible for videotaping Hezbollah Brigades attacks on US and Iraqi forces in Baghdad.

While the exact neighborhood in Baghdad was not identified, Multinational Forces Iraq often referred to the New Baghdad district as east Baghdad. On July 21, Coalition forces captured a member of a Hezbollah Brigades propaganda cell who was responsible for uploading attack videos to the Internet in New Baghdad.

The handover makes 10 of 18 provinces.  (Via Confederate Yankee, via Instapundit.)

Courtesy of the AP is a story that’s both optimistic and a little sad:

Quiet Iraq streets leave soldiers yearning for Afghanistan

Spc. Grover Gebhart has spent nine months at a small post on a Sunni-Shiite fault line in western Baghdad. But the 21-year-old soldier on his first tour in Iraq feels he’s missing the real war — in Afghanistan, where his brother is fighting the Taliban.

With violence in Iraq at its lowest level in four years and the war in Afghanistan at a peak, the soldiers serving at patrol station Maverick say Gebhart’s view is increasingly common, especially among younger soldiers looking to prove themselves in battle. . .

Soldiers who have experienced combat stress note that it is usually young soldiers on their first tour who most want to get on the battlefield. They say it is hard to communicate the horrors of war to those who have not actually experienced it.

“These kids are just being young,” said Sgt. Christopher Janis, who is only 23 but is on his third tour in Iraq. “They say they want to get into battle until they do, and then they won’t want it anymore.”

That soldiers are looking elsewhere for a battle is a testament to how much Iraq has changed from a year ago, when violence was at its height. Now it’s the lowest in four years, thanks to the U.S. troop surge, the turn by former Sunni insurgents against al-Qaeda in Iraq, and Iraqi government crackdowns on Shiite militias.

(Via LGF.)

Earlier Michael Yon declared that the war in Iraq is over.  Now, Michael Totten asks the question. Totten is evidently more wary of being a hostage to fortune, but here’s his bottom line:

What most of us still think of as “war” in Iraq is, at this point, a rough and unfinished peacekeeping mission. Whether it is officially over or not, it has certainly been downgraded to something else, and it’s about time more analysts and observers are willing to say so.

(Via Instapundit.)

Good news, but no triumphalism this time, please, particularly with how things are going in Afghanistan.

Iowahawk has uncovered Al Qaeda’s new business plan. (Via Transterrestrial Musings.)

What an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities might look like.  (Via Instapundit.)

The Sunday Times reports, “Al-Qaeda is driven from Mosul bastion after bloody last stand.” The overall story is similar to other parts of Iraq:

In Mosul, Al-Qaeda’s last redoubt, the group still held sway as recently as Easter. Now it lacks the strength to fight the army face to face and has lost the sympathy of most of the ordinary citizens who once admired its stand against the occupying forces and their allies in the Iraqi army. . .

Al-Qaeda was also bleeding support as allied Iraqi insurgents accepted an amnesty. It did not apply to Al-Qaeda. “If you are fighting to install sharia [Islamic law] on this country, you are going to have to be killed,” said Colonel David Brown, an American adviser to 2nd Division.

Mosul is significant, however, because it was Al Qaeda’s last bastion. Now they are on the run throughout Iraq.

(ASIDE: Over a month ago, the Iraqi Interior Ministry prematurely declared that Al Qaeda was cleared from Mosul (or at least the AFP reported they did), but that was contradicted by the US Army. This report, on the other hand, sounds credible to me.)

By the way, this is an unusually good article. It contains some interesting operational details, and is written by an actual war correspondent on the scene:

Marie Colvin has been a Sunday Times foreign correspondent since 1986 when she witnessed the US bombing of Tripoli. She has covered the Middle East throughout that time and in 1991 remained in Baghdad during the bombing of the first Gulf war.

She has won a string of awards for her reporting from other troublespots, including Chechnya, Zimbabwe and East Timor.

In 1999 she chose to stay on in a besieged United Nations compound in Dili, East Timor, when her male colleagues left. “They don’t make men like they used to,” [she said.]

I wish there were more like her.

(Via Instapundit.)

This is awesome: the Colombian commandos who freed the FARC hostages by pretending to be FARC terrorists themselves were wearing “Che” T-shirts.

(Previous post.)

The Long War Journal reports:

Over the space of several days in early June, Muqtada al Sadr has issued two consequential orders that will affect the future of his movement and that of Iraq. Sadr has ordered the reorganization of his infamous Mahdi Army and has forbidden the Sadrist movement from participating in the upcoming provincial elections.

Sadr’s first declaration addressed the organization and operations of the Mahdi Army, the military arm of the Sadrist movement. Sadr ordered his militiamen to halt the fighting and announced that a small, specialized unit will have the exclusive right to fight the “occupier.” The unit, ironically called the “special groups,” is forbidden to attack Iraqi security forces or government officials.

Sadr’s second declaration addressed how the Sadrist movement would participate in the upcoming provincial elections, tentatively scheduled for October of this year. In the second order, Sadr told his followers not compete directly in elections that take place under “occupation” but said the movement would support “technocrat and independent politicians” to prevent rival Shiite parties from dominating provincial governments.

The two orders show that Sadr is being forced to scale down both his political and military ambitions as the Iraqi government and Iraqi security forces continue to pacify Mahdi Army strongholds during a series of offensives that started in Basrah at the end of March, and moved through Sadr City and the wider Shia South. Operations in Maysan, a Mahdi Army bastion, are currently in progress.

(Via Instapundit.)

Jonathan Winer has some details on the Colombian rescue operation. (Via Instapundit.)

Fox News has a nice piece on the US-funded rebuilding effort in Sadr City. If you’ve been following Iraq closely, you’ll note that this same plan has been very effective elsewhere in Iraq.

The DoD’s quarterly assessment (big, slow pdf) is out:

The security environment in Iraq continues to improve, with all major violence indicators reduced between 40 to 80% from pre-surge levels. Total security incidents have fallen to their lowest level in over four years. Coalition and Iraqi forces’ operations against al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) have degraded its ability to attack and terrorize the population. Although AQI remains a major threat and is still capable of high-profile attacks, the lack of violence linked to AQI in recent weeks demonstrates the effect these operations have had on its network.

Equally important, the government’s success in Basrah and Baghdad’s Sadr City against militias, particularly Jaysh al-Mahdi (JAM) and the Iranian-supported Special Groups, has reinforced a greater public rejection of militias. . . Overall, the communal struggle for power and resources is becoming less violent. Many Iraqis are now settling their differences through debate and the political process rather than open conflict. Other factors that have contributed to a reduction in violence include the revitalization of sectors of the Iraqi economy and local reconciliation measures.

Although the number of civilian deaths in April 2008 increased slightly from February and March 2008, in May 2008 civilian deaths declined to levels not seen since January 2006, when the Coalition began tracking this data. Both Iraqi and Coalition forces reported that civilian deaths are 75% lower than July 2007 levels and 82% lower than the peak number of monthly deaths that occurred in November of 2006 at the height of sectarian violence.

(Via Commentary, via Instapundit.)

Reuters reports:

The U.S. military will transfer control of security in Iraq’s Anbar province to Iraqi forces this week, a remarkable turnaround given the vast western region was considered lost to insurgents less than two years ago.

Anbar will be the 10th of Iraq’s 18 provinces returned to Iraqi security control since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, but it will be the first Sunni Arab region handed back.

(Via Mudville Gazette, via Instapundit.)

Bill Roggio reports.

And other problems that are good to have.  (Via Instapundit.)

An alarming report from ABC News says yes.  Officials are downplaying the report, but the report does seem to have several sources.  (Via the Corner.)

The AP reports:

Iraqi troops fanned out and gunmen tossed weapons on the streets or in canals with the official launch of the military crackdown in Amarah, a stronghold of al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia and the purported center of weapons smuggling from neighboring Iran.

The military action came a day after the expiration of a four-day deadline for militants in Amarah to surrender their arms or face arrest.

It’s the fourth such U.S.-backed Iraqi military operation launched against Shiite and Sunni extremists in recent months as Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki seeks to assert government control over the country ahead of provincial elections to be held in the fall.

Hopefully this will help stem the flow of weapons from Iran.

ASIDE: The AP article focuses on the arrest of the top official in Amarah, a Sadrist. The usual people are outraged, but there’s not enough information yet to know what the arrest was about.

(Via the Corner.)

UPDATE: More here.  Amarah is now in government hands without a shot being fired.

(Important update appended.)

AP reports:

Hundreds of Taliban fighters took over several villages in southern Afghanistan on Monday just outside the region’s largest city, and NATO and Afghan forces were redeploying to meet the threat, officials said.

Mohammad Farooq, the government leader in the Arghandab district of Kandahar province, said around 500 Taliban fighters moved into his district and took over several villages. . .

The push into Arghandab comes three days after a sophisticated Taliban attack on Kandahar’s prison that freed hundreds of insurgent fighters being held there.

Every year there’s a lot of talk about the Taliban’s spring offensive, but this is the first time I remember it amounting to anything.

UPDATE: Never mind. It appears this one hasn’t yet amounted to anything either. (Also, I corrected the origin of the story to AP.)

Terrorist recruiting, that is:

The United States is seeing a sharp drop in the number of foreigners entering Iraq to become al Qaeda suicide bombers, according to intelligence and Bush administration sources.

An administration official and a military adviser to Iraqi commanders attribute the decline to a fairly new phenomenon: Al Qaeda’s call for mass killings in the name of Islam is losing some of its appeal with young Arabs in North Africa and Saudi Arabia, where most of the bombers originate.

The decline also parallels the battlefield losses al Qaeda has suffered in the past 12 months in Iraq’s Anbar province and the greater Baghdad region. This has made it more difficult for al Qaeda in Iraq to facilitate the secret movement of foreigners from the Syrian border to safe houses where they are trained and assigned a target.

“There has been a sharp decline in the amount of suicide bombers coming into Iraq,” said a senior intelligence official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It’s harder for suicide bombers to get into the country. The al Qaeda in Iraq is a shadow of what it once was. And Iraq is a more hostile area for suicide bombers to operate.”

(Via Instapundit.)

As the situation has improved in Iraq, there have been worries that the situation in Afghanistan is worsening. It’s even harder to know what’s going on in Afghanistan than Iraq, since Afghanistan faces the same neglect from the media, but doesn’t have the interest from independents that Iraq has. We’re mostly left with official reports from the military. So, for what it’s worth, it’s nice to hear that the commander of British forces in Afghanistan says the Taliban insurgency is at the “brink of defeat.” (Via the Corner.)

In an editorial today, they write:

The Iraqi Upturn
Don’t look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war.

There’s been a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks — which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington’s attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have “never been closer to defeat than they are now.” . . .

It is — of course — too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments — and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the “this-war-is-lost” caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). . .

If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. That will mean tying withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government, rather than an arbitrary timetable; Iraq’s 2009 elections will be crucial. It also should mean providing enough troops and air power to continue backing up Iraqi army operations such as those in Basra and Sadr City. When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.

(Via Instapundit.)

The Washington Post is unquestionably liberal, but they often have much more of a clue than most of the other major media outlets, and they show it here. (ASIDE: I’m amused by the editorial’s reference to the “odd” lull in news coverage just when we’re clearly winning. I think they know why, but can’t quite bring themselves to say it.)

The Post is also running a very good photo essay on the return of life to Basra. This is old news, but the photos tell a nice story of their own. (Via Instapundit.)

The past week has seen an amazing flood of good news from Iraq. It’s worth a review:

• The Iraqi Army takes control of Sadr City.
• British troops return to Basra.
• Attacks in Mosul drop 85% and organized resistance ceases.
• Iraq reports that Al Qaeda has been cleared from Mosul.
• Security incidents have hit a four-year low.
• The Iraqi army captures several major weapons caches.
• Life resumes in Sadr City.
• Iraqis lose patience with Sadrists.

Just as those Iraqis who lived under the rule of Al Qaeda learned to hate them, so too are Iraqis learning to hate Sadr’s Mahdi Army, reports the LA Times.  (Via the Weekly Standard.)

The avalanche of good news in Iraq continues with this ABC report:

In Baghdad’s Sadr City today, once again, street vendors line the sidewalk with colorful shirts and shoes. Vegetable markets, once again, have fresh limes and produce. Family stores, once again, are back in business.

And in the local Ibn al Balad hospital, no more war wounds.

“There are no injured people in this hospital,” says Jabber Shanshal, an Iraqi nurse, drawing a stark contrast with the situation more than two months ago, when heavy fighting took place in the Shiite suburb of almost three million people.

The residents of Sadr City have been longtime followers of the firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr and his 60,000-strong Mahdi militia. . . But all that has changed. Last week, al Sadr’s representatives and the main Shiite political party here signed a cease-fire agreement.

And at sunrise on May 20, a legion of Iraqi soldiers cautiously marched into Sadr City. Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki had ordered the thousands of soldiers into the Shiite enclave as part of “Operation Peace.” They were greeted with open arms.

(Via Hot Air.)

The article also reviews the history of the operations in Basra and Sadr City. Widely derided as they were when they began, it’s now clear that they were a masterstroke.

ASIDE: Do you think Time and the NYT have figured out who won yet? Here’s a hint for them:

Sadr is trying to grasp on to a sliver of political leverage, claiming to have struck the deal which brought his people their livelihoods back. While Maliki is lauding the latest in a series of successes to ensure security and a regained national unity to his country.

Certainly, it seems as though there is little Maliki can do wrong these days. With provincial elections around the corner, an Iraqi future without Maliki is almost impossible to imagine.

The last week’s avalanche of good news from Iraq continues.  The Iraqi army has captured several large weapons caches in Sadr City, including poison gas stored in a school.  (Via Instapundit.)

The Sadrists responded by complaining that the Iraqi Army was violating the cease fire, which is pretty rich.

General Petraeus reports:

In Iraq, Iraqi and Coalition forces continue to build on the security gains of the past 15 months as we also continue to reduce US forces and transition responsibility to Iraqi Security Forces, strive to maintain the conditions necessary for political progress, help build governmental capacity, and seek to foster economic development.

I should note here that the number of security incidents in Iraq last week was the lowest in over four years and it appears that the week that ends tomorrow will see an even lower number of incidents.

This has been achieved despite having now withdrawn 3 of the 5 Brigade Combat Teams that will have redeployed without replacement by the end of July.

Follow the link for a chart.  (Full speech here.)

AFP reports:

A 10-day operation by Iraqi troops in Mosul has succeeded in dismantling Al-Qaeda’s network in Iraq’s main northern city, regarded by US commanders as the jihadists’ last urban bastion, the interior ministry said on Saturday.

“Operation ‘Mother of Two Springs’ has enabled us to dismantle and weaken the Al-Qaeda network in Nineveh province,” ministry spokesman Abdel Karim Khalaf told AFP. . .

The US military has provided support for the operation in Mosul but it has been conducted and led by Iraqi troops.

(Via Hot Air.)

I would caution, however, that this account is somewhat at odds with the US Army’s assessment, which is that there may be some heavy fighting in Mosul remaining.

According to the Colombian government, reports the AP.

Completing today’s hat trick of good Iraq news, the Mosul operation is succeeding:

The number of daily attacks in Mosul has dropped at least 85 percent since U.S.-Iraqi forces began an offensive against Sunni insurgents in the city earlier this month, the top U.S. commander in northern Iraq said Wednesday.

Maj. Gen. Mark Hertling said U.S. and Iraqi forces have not met fierce resistance since the operation began on May 10. He attributed this mostly to the large numbers of troops on the streets, an initial curfew, extensive preparations and construction of new checkpoints.

The American media has been almost silent on the Mosul operation, presumably since it’s going well. But the Army cautions that there may be some tough fighting ahead:

Iraqi commanders have said some al-Qaida fighters fled in advance of the operation, meaning they would be able to fight another day.

But Hertling said he did not believe many had escaped and that some who had been in regions outside Mosul before the crackdown were moving toward the city to take up the battle. He said intelligence indicates “many of their leaders have been pushing fighters to Mosul because they see it as a critical fight as well.”

“We anticipate there will be some attacks by the enemy once they come out of this initial phase of being surprised within the city,” he told reporters during a news conference in Baghdad. “We anticipate that there might be car bombs, suicide vests or things like that.”

I’m sure the media will rediscover Mosul if that happens.

(Via Max Boot, via Power Line.)

The British have emerged from their compound and are patrolling Basra again.  Good for them.  I wonder about the politics of this though.  Gordon Brown has shown no enthusiasm for carrying through on the British commitment in Iraq, so why do this now?  Is this a response to his drubbing at the polls by the Tories?  Or is it just a result of the success of Iraq’s Basra operation?

(Via Max Boot, via Power Line.)

The NYT reports:

Iraqi troops pushed deep into Sadr City on Tuesday as the Iraqi government sought to establish control over the district, a densely populated Shiite enclave in the Iraqi capital.

The long-awaited military operation, which took place without the involvement of American ground forces, was the first determined effort by the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki to assert control over the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood, which has been a bastion of support for Moktada al-Sadr, the rebel cleric.

The operation comes in the wake of the government’s offensive in Basra, in southern Iraq, which for the time being seems to have pacified that city and restored government control.

The Iraqi forces met no significant resistance. By midday, they had driven to a key thoroughfare that bisects Sadr City and taken up positions near hospitals and police stations, institutions that the Iraqi government is seeking to put under its control. . .

The soldiers were also deployed near the political headquarters of Mr. Sadr. There were no visible signs of the Mahdi Army, the militia controlled by Mr. Sadr, although many walls bore posters of him that seemed to have been put up in the last few days.

(Via Power Line.)

It’s good to see the Iraqis take charge.  Question 1: How galling must it be to the NYT to have to write a comes-at-time sentence that correlates Sadr City to other good news in Basra?  Question 2: How is Time going to portray this as a victory for Sadr?  (I’m guessing the posters.  If Sadr has posters up, he must be winning.)

The article also gives an interesting account of how the operation took place.

Mohammed Fadhil reports at Pajamas Media.  Not a lot of news, but what there is, is generally good. (Via Instapundit.) I suspected things must be going well, since we haven’t been hearing the Basra narrative.

Quite a coup for Uribe.  (Via the Corner.)  It will be very interesting to hear what she has to say.

The AP reports that Chavez is threatening war if Colombia allows the US to build a base on its border with Venezuela.  Such a base has been floated as a possibility to replace the US base in Ecuador, which is scheduled to close next year.

Alas, I can’t find any evidence that this is a serious plan; every google hit is about people (mostly Chavez) complaining about the idea.  Too bad, it sounds like a great idea.

I suppose this is how Chavez looks strong; force Uribe to “back down” over something he never planned to do anyway.

Michael Totten has a Commentary piece on the state of affairs in Lebanon.  It’s not good, but not hopeless yet.  (Via Instapundit.)

The long-awaited battle for Mosul has begun:

In the northern city of Mosul, an Iraqi army commander announced the start of a long anticipated offensive against Al Qaeda in Iraq’s last urban stronghold. . . Maj. Gen. Riyadh Jalal Tawfiq, the commander of military operations in the northern city of Mosul, issued a statement on Saturday announcing Operation Lion’s Roar and Righteousness Battle against Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Mosul was considered the last important urban staging ground for Al Qaeda in Iraqi and allied groups after losing strongholds in Baghdad and other areas during the U.S. troop “surge” last year.

Provincial forces are “undertaking a new phase of operations in Mosul to counter the terrorist threat there,” said Maj. John C. Hall, a military spokesman in Baghdad. “These operations build on operations that have been under way for the past several weeks, targeting Al Qaeda in Iraq cells.” . . .

In January, Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki promised his military was preparing for a “decisive” showdown with insurgents in Mosul, about 225 miles northwest of Baghdad. But no major offensives were mounted, even as Al Qaeda in Iraq tried to exert its influence in Iraq’s third-largest city through attacks and intimidation until now.

McClatchy reports:

Followers of rebel cleric Muqtada al Sadr agreed late Friday to allow Iraqi security forces to enter all of Baghdad’s Sadr City and to arrest anyone found with heavy weapons in a surprising capitulation that seemed likely to be hailed as a major victory for Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki.

In return, Sadr’s Mahdi Army supporters won the Iraqi government’s agreement not to arrest Mahdi Army members without warrants, unless they were in possession of “medium and heavy weaponry.”

The agreement would end six weeks of fighting in the vast Shiite Muslim area that’s home to more than 2 million residents and would mark the first time that the area would be under government control since Saddam Hussein was toppled in 2003. . . It also would be a startling turnaround in fortunes for Maliki, who’d been widely criticized for picking a fight with Sadr’s forces, first in the southern port city of Basra and then in Sadr City.

(Via Instapundit.)

It looks like this may be over before the media can employ their defeat narrative.

Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the latest head of Al Qaeda in Iraq, has been captured in Mosul. (Via Instapundit.)

UPDATE: US officials aren’t so sure.

Ed Morrissey notes an AP article that reports that the Iraqi army is preparing for an offensive in Sadr City:

Iraqi soldiers for the first time warned residents in the embattled Sadr City district to leave their houses Thursday, signaling a new push by the U.S.-backed forces against Shiite extremist who have been waging street battles for seven weeks. Iraqi soldiers, using loudspeakers, told residents in some virtually abandoned areas of southeastern Sadr City to go to nearby soccer stadiums, residents said.

This would make a lot of sense, as finishing the cleanup of Sadr City is the obvious next step in Maliki’s crackdown on the militias.  However, the AP article has since been changed to withdraw that reporting:

Some residents of Sadr City claimed Thursday that Iraqi soldiers warned them to leave their houses and go to nearby soccer stadiums for security reasons. The U.S. military denied the claim and called it as a “rumor.”

So what’s happening?  We’ll have to wait and see.

UPDATE: Based on an NPR report (no link, sorry), this is for real. It sounds like the rumor part was the stadium refuge.

According to Al-Arabiya television, Iraqi police have identified “Abu Omar al-Baghdadi”, the fictional leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, as one Hamid Dawoud al-Zawi, originally from Haditha.

Michael Yon reports on the next stage of the war in Iraq. These concluding paragraphs summarize what’s happening:

The militias, unlike Al Qaeda, are not insane; we can negotiate with them. But we and the Iraqi government can only capitalize on the shifting sentiments of the Shia neighborhoods if we first demonstrate that we and the government – not the gangs – control the streets.

That means, for the next few months, expect more blood, casualties and grim images of war. This may lead to a shift in the political debate inside the United States and more calls for rapid withdrawal. But on the ground in Iraq, it’s a sign of progress.

(Via Instapundit.)

The London Times has an interesting piece on how the Iraqi Army won in Basra. It claims that the key factor was Iran cutting off support for Sadr:

Once the British withdrew from the city centre to Basra airport last summer, the situation changed. Suddenly it was Moqtadr al-Sadr and his rag-tag fighters who were the dominant force in the Basra region. The Iranian backed Badr Organisation, which is well represented in Iraq’s police and military, was sidelined. There were real fears that the Sadrists could consolidate their gains on the ground in local elections planned for October and eclipse the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, Badr’s political wing.

For once the interests of America, Britain, Iran and the Iraqi government coincided with disastrous results for Mr al-Sadr and his fighters. Isolated and abandoned they fled, were captured or killed from what were once their impregnable fiefdoms in Basra. Mr al-Sadr was left to lick his wounds and complain that the Government had forgotten that they were all “brothers”.

(Via Ace, via Instapundit.)

This is at odds with much of the other reporting, so I’m not sure I buy it, but it’s food for thought.

What this does illustrate is that the media was grossly premature in declaring defeat.  In fact, the Basra operation has proven to be a total victory for the Iraqi government.  (It reminds me of the week during the invasion that we were supposedly losing.  Heaven knows how they would have reported the Battle of the Bulge!)

Fox News reports.  We should skip the warning shots next time.

The Syrian facility bombed by Israel last September was almost certainly a nuclear reactor of North Korean design, reports the Washington Post:

A video taken inside a secret Syrian facility last summer convinced the Israeli government and the Bush administration that North Korea was helping to construct a reactor similar to one that produces plutonium for North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, according to senior U.S. officials who said it would be shared with lawmakers today.

The officials said the video of the remote site, code-named Al Kibar by the Syrians, shows North Koreans inside. It played a pivotal role in Israel’s decision to bomb the facility late at night last Sept. 6. . .

Sources familiar with the video say it also shows that the Syrian reactor core’s design is the same as that of the North Korean reactor at Yongbyon, including a virtually identical configuration and number of holes for fuel rods. It shows “remarkable resemblances inside and out to Yongbyon,” a U.S. intelligence official said. A nuclear weapons specialist called the video “very, very damning.”

(Via Instapundit.)

This tidbit is also interesting:

Nuclear weapons analysts and U.S. officials predicted that CIA Director Michael V. Hayden’s planned disclosures to Capitol Hill could complicate U.S. efforts to improve relations with North Korea as a way to stop its nuclear weapons program. . .

The timing of the congressional briefing is nonetheless awkward for the Bush administration’s diplomatic initiative to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear program and permanently disable the reactor at Yongbyon. The CIA’s hand was forced, officials said, because influential lawmakers had threatened to cut off funding for the U.S. diplomatic effort unless they received a full account of what the administration knew.

Thanks Congress!

UPDATE: The Washington Times has more:

The Bush administration will tell Congress tomorrow that a nuclear facility in Syria built with North Korean help was nearly complete when Israel bombed it in September, and that Pyongyang has not provided any further nuclear assistance to the hard-line Arab nation, at least at that site, U.S. officials said.

(Via LGF.)

Bill Roggio reports the Iraqi Army has issued an ultimatum to al-Sadr’s Mahdi army to surrender or face the consequences:

The senior-most Iraqi general in charge of the security operation in Basrah has issued an ultimatum for wanted Mahdi Army leaders and fighters to surrender in the next 24 hours as the Iraqi and US military ignore Muqtada al Sadr’s threat to conduct a third uprising. US troops killed 15 Mahdi Army fighters in Baghdad yesterday and have killed 56 fighters since Sadr issued his threat last weekend.

In Basrah, General Mohan al Freiji, the chief of the Basrah Operational Commander and leader of the security operation in the province, has given issued warrants “for 81 people, including senior leaders of the Mahdi militia, and they have 24 hours to give up,” The Associated Press reported.

It will be interesting to watch how this goes.  The Iraqi Army no doubt is eager not to be embarrassed again, and there’s no reason they would kick this off early (if indeed that’s what happened last time).  I expect they’ll make a better showing this time.  The most important thing, though, is to go through with it.  Idle threats won’t help their reputation any.

This bit is also interesting:

The assassination of Riyad al Nouri, Sadr’s brother-in-law and a senior aide in Najaf, continues to spark reports that his death was carried out from within the Sadrist movement. On April 17, The Long War Journal reported that Nouri was pushing for the Sadrist movement to disband the Mahdi Army lest the party be shut out from the political process, and US military officers believe he was killed because of this.

The Iraqi press has also reported Nouri was killed after he suggested disarming the Mahdi Army. Nouri “was assassinated after he wrote Muqtada a letter asking him to dissolve the Mahdi Army,” Al Rafidain reported.

(Via Instapundit.)

Fox News reports. Although I’m sure Gen. Petraeus will do a good job at CENTCOM, this strikes me as bad news. We need him where he is, winning the war in Iraq.

UPDATE: Secretary Gates says that Petraeus won’t be leaving until late summer or early fall. Also, Frederick and Kimberly Kagan say that Gen. Odierno, who will be taking over in Iraq, deserves a lot of the credit for putting Petraeus’s strategy into effect. (Via Hot Air.) This makes me feel a little better.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Rich Lowry thinks this is good news too.

At Abu Muqawama, an interesting account of how the Basra operation (Sawlat al-Fursan) came to pass in the way that it did. (Via Instapundit.) It’s anonymously sourced, so grains of salt are required. If it’s true, the operation was planned very differently, but they had to start early and improvise due to a counter-intelligence failure. The green units that deserted weren’t supposed to be involved much at all. Interesting.

The IA mops up in Basra:

Iraqi soldiers swooped on the Basra stronghold of Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on Saturday, saying they had seized control of his militia bastion where they suffered an embarrassing setback in late March.

The dawn raid by government troops on the Hayaniya district of the southern oil city was backed by a thunderous bombardment by U.S. warplanes and British artillery.

(Via Hot Air.)

Note to the media: a setback is not the same thing as a defeat.

UPDATE: At the NYT, Iraqi Forces Take Last Basra Areas From Sadr Force.

Iraqi soldiers took control of the last bastions of the cleric Moktada al-Sadr’s militia in Basra on Saturday, and Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad strongly endorsed the Iraqi government’s monthlong military operation against the fighters.

By Saturday evening, Basra was calm, but only after air and artillery strikes by American and British forces cleared the way for Iraqi troops to move into the Hayaniya district and other remaining Mahdi Army militia strongholds and begin house-to house searches, Iraqi officials said. Iraqi troops were meeting little resistance, said Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, the spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry in Baghdad.

Despite the apparent concession of Basra, Mr. Sadr issued defiant words on Saturday night.

You know Sadr is at the end of his rope when both the NYT and Iran throw in the towel.  Defiant words are about all he has left.

Rusty Shackleford thinks that we should speak of two wars in Iraq:

There was a war in Iraq and there is a war in Iraq. In fact, we’ve had two wars in Iraq: Iraq War I & Iraq War II. The war now is not the same as that war. The first war in Iraq was against Saddam Hussein, the second war is against Islamists of various stripes, but mainly al Qaeda.

All would agree that the invasion liberated Iraqis from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. That was the First Iraq War.** It ended the day Saddam Hussein was captured. . . The vacuum left by the Baathist police state was filled by yet another tyranny: the tyranny of Sunni Islamists, like al Qaeda; and the tyranny of Shia Islamists, like those following Muqtada al Sadr. This is when the Second Iraq War started.

The first war was against Iraq, a nation-state. The second war is against terrorists and Islamist rebels.

Then he makes his point:

Failing to see the two war distinction is critical. From Obama we hear that he was “against the war” from the beginning. From Clinton we hear that she “changed her mind on the war sometime after she realized that the war was a mistake.”

Continuing to allow politicians to criticize the war in Iraq by criticizing the decision to topple the Hussein regime is to allow them to conflate two very separate issues: 1) should we have invaded Iraq? 2) should we now give up fighting al Qaeda and anti-government Islamist elements in Iraq?

Answering no to question number one says nothing about how question two should be answered. Nothing.

The Second Iraq War may have been of our own making, but it is the very war the Democrats say they want to fight: a war against terrorists.

(Via Instapundit.)

I appreciate his point, but I see things a little differently. What we are looking at is two campaigns in one theater, as part of a larger war. During World War 2, after Pearl Harbor was attacked, the US immediately entered the Pacific theater. After a year’s delay, the US Army landed in the North African theater. Their first campaign was against (Vichy) French forces in Morocco and Algeria. France folded quickly, and a second campaign against Germany and Italy began.

In the Global War on Terror, the US (almost) immediately entered the Afghan theater. After a year-and-a-half delay, the US entered the Iraqi theater, where we fought our first campaign against Saddam, and our second campaign against Al Qaeda et al.

The two wars (WW2 and the GWOT) are not very similar. WW2 was primarily a conventional war, while the GWOT has focused more on counter-insurgency. In Iraq we expected a difficult fight against Saddam and followed by an easy terrorist mop-up. In North Africa we expected a tough fight against Germany, but didn’t expect to have to fight France first at all. Moreover, the Axis and the Islamists are very different enemies.

Still, there are some similarities. Expectations aside, what we actually encountered in both North Africa and Iraq was an easy initial invasion followed by a long, brutal conflict against our primary enemy. Moreover, both theaters — North Africa and Iraq — were seen by many as a distraction.

In WW2, American generals favored an immediate invasion of Europe, while Churchill favored fighting in North Africa first. Roosevelt sided with Churchill, and it proved to be the correct decision. We faced some serious reverses, but ultimately prevailed. Even in the darkest days — much less when we closed in on Tunis — no one said we should pull out of Africa and abandon our allies. That would have stupid. Of course, in WW2 everyone wanted to win.

AFP reports:

Three weeks after Iraqi troops swarmed into the southern city of Basra to take on armed militiamen who had overrun the streets, many residents say they feel safer and that their lives have improved.

The fierce fighting which marked the first week of Operation Sawlat al-Fursan (Charge of the Knights) has given way to slower, more focused house-by-house searches by Iraqi troops, which led on Monday to the freeing of an abducted British journalist.

Residents say the streets have been cleared of gunmen, markets have reopened, basic services have been resumed and a measure of normality has returned to the oil-rich city.

The port of Umm Qasr is in the hands of the Iraqi forces who wrested control of the facility from Shiite militiamen, and according to the British military it is operational once again. . .

An AFP correspondent said three northwestern neighbourhoods once under the firm control of the Mahdi Army militia of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr — Al-Hayaniyah, Khamsamile and Garma — are now encircled by Iraqi troops who are carrying out door-to-door searches. . .

Taxi driver Samir Hashim, 35, said he now felt safer driving through the city’s streets and was willing to put up with the traffic jams caused by the many security checkpoints.

“We feel secure. Assassinations have ended, organised crime is finished and armed groups are no longer on the streets,” said Hashim.

“I think Basra will be the best city in Iraq,” he added optimistically. “We are finally beginning to feel there is law in Basra.”

I was worried that Maliki wouldn’t carry through with the Basra mission, so this is very encouraging.

Bill Roggio reports. Well, I hope so. Finishing the job would be against the usual practice of the Iraqi government, though.

(Via Instapundit.)