Iraq: what's going on here?

[Adrian II]

On the BBC web site this part about today's bombings in Iraq caught my attention. Is this a freak hit, or does it mean that Bagdad is somehow mined, moled or bugged by agents of insurgent groups?

In Baghdad, Iraqi officials said Wael Rubaie, head of operations at the Ministry for National Security, and his driver were killed on their way to work.

Maj Gen Rubaie was appointed to command a special operations room recently set up to co-ordinate the fight against insurgents across all Iraqi ministries and with the US-led multi-national force.

[Tribesman]

Is this a freak hit
Nope just a usual occurence , how many judges , police chiefs , politicians , army commanders and ministry officials have been assassinated already this year . If they want to stay safe they shouldn't leave the green zone , that way they would only have to dodge the rocket and mortar attacks .
I think it might have something to do with the general lack of law and order in this war zone .

[Adrian II]

Nope just a usual occurence (..)

Somehow I feel you don't get it. General Wael Rubaie was not some nondescript slob standing outside the wrong recruitment center sporting the wrong moustache. This man had just been elevated by the new government to the rank of Iraqi Terrorism Tsar, his command room was about to become operative, and then he got killed in a terror attack...

[Al Khalifah]

It goes to show that in Iraq no one is untouchable.

[Adrian II]

It goes to show that in Iraq no one is untouchable.

It might. But there are other possibilities.

A terrorist attack is a bloody message. We tend to stress its bloody aspect. But there is also a message in it, and messages have senders and (intended) receivers. As you say, in this case it may just have been a general message from an insurgent group to the world: nobody is safe from us.

But is may also be a very specific message from group or person X to group or person Y. In which case Iraqi security forces may have far bigger infiltration or infighting problems than was admitted until now. If this official was specifically targeted, the perpetrators must have access to schedules and procedures of security details within the green zone, government areas and elsewhere.

But yeah, let's just blame the terrorists...

EDIT

Today's The Independent has it that our man wasn't accidentally killed in some bomb attack, but deliberately shot together with his driver and bodyguard. The gunmen were firing from two separate cars, implying they were really out to get him. And it seems al-Zarqawi's group has claimed responsibility for the killing on a web site they normally use.

Iraqi and US forces had launched a major offensive in Baghdad, arresting 285 suspects, in an attempt to counter a new upsurge in violence which has left 400 dead in the past two weeks.

But the killing of Maj-Gen Rubaye, the 17th government official to be assassinated in the past month, and the latest spate of car-bombings, were being highlighted as an example of how little control the Iraqi government and its American sponsor is able to exercise.

The aim of the insurgents was now "to prove that Iraq is ungovernable", a senior British official said. "They've got very good penetration," he said.

[Tribesman]

Somehow I feel you don't get it.
Hey hey Adrian , I get it all right , do you notice that none of the categories of victim I mentioned fit into the "non descript slob in the wrong place at the wrong time " category .
Another example today , an attempt on the leading woman politician in Iraq , luckily she survived but her bodyguards are all critical , its the second assassination attempt on her , last time they killed her son .
So... do you think that the level of attempts on the lives of high profile government and security figures is the result of the terrorists getting lucky or is someone in power passing on information of their movements ?
As it is probably the latter , what can be done about it ? De Baathification , de Iranianification, de Syrianification , De Kurdification , De Shiteification , de Sunnification .
There are a lot of people in power who want the process as it is now to fail . How can they be got rid of ? ...They can't .
Once again the lack of long term planning beyond the "lets invade and kick some butt" comes to the fore . How can you have a secure united country when some of the people in power have the stated aim of breaking the country apart ?

Should they adopt a fortress mentality and stay in the green zone ? It does seem to be the only place where they can be reasonably safe . Though it is a little hard to try and run a country if you cannot venture past the barricades .

[Adrian II]

De Shite-ification (..)

LOL! I still think you should run for President on that programme.

There are a lot of people in power who want the process as it is now to fail . How can they be got rid of ? ...They can't .

I know, and I'm just speculating about the possibility of such leaks because that is all I can do from afar, and not speaking Arab I can't check any sources on this.

How can you have a secure united country when some of the people in power have the stated aim of breaking the country apart ?

Who would that be; I mean is there anyone in Bagdad able and willing to play such risky games at this scale? Dis is no neighborhood brawl, man, dis be high treason.

[Tribesman]

I mean is there anyone in Bagdad able and willing to play such risky games at this scale?
Look at some of the individuals , there is a long history of double dealing , breaking agreements , backing enemies , switching sides .
FFS there are some individuals there who have managed to be backed by Iran , Syria , Israel , Turkey , Russia , America , France and Saddam in the past couple of years .
So yes they are able and I guess they are more than willing to do anything to persue their own agenda .
Though of course that is pure speculation on my part , but hey , everything so far in Iraq has been based on speculation and guesswork .

[Adrian II]

Look at some of the individuals , there is a long history of double dealing , breaking agreements , backing enemies , switching sides .

I don't know. If this is an inside job, somebody is taking a major risk. You can bet your Guinness there will be a rather intense investigation into this incident...

[Tribesman]

Yeah , meanwhile the AMS is blaming SCIRI and Badr , the Turkomen are blaming the Kurdish alliance , Al-Sadr is blaming the Americans .
You can bet your Guinness there will be a rather intense investigation into this incident...
Would that be an intense investigation like the one to find out who killed Harriri in the Leb ?
There are just too many of these assasinations being carried out against all factions and parties involved for there to be anything like an intense investigation for the next 20 years .
If I recall correctly the US State Dept. country report from last year blamed all sides for settling old scores and using extra-judicial killings in their struggle for ascendancy in the political mess that is Iraq .
If the head of anti-terrorism isn't safe then who is ?

[Adrian II]

If the head of anti-terrorism isn't safe then who is ?

I'll tell you who is: Iranian foreign minister Kamal Kharazi.

You will remember Condoleezza Rice's pit-stop in Bagdad last week, when she shook hands with some Iraqi's who were visibly at a loss who this creature beneath the helmet, bullet-proof burka and triple layer of bodyguards might be. Mr Khazari, on the other hand, paid Iraq a three-day visit during which he was taken to various cities, inside and outside security zones and perimeters, etcetera, with no helmet or Kevlar and without a vast security detail clearing the way wherever he went.

Amazing, isn't it? Either Mr Kharazi is a very courageous and obstinate man, or the fact that his visit was the responsibility of the Iraqi government made all the difference, or Mr Khazari knows something essential about the inner workings of Iraqi security that we don't.

I'm open to suggestion.

But imagine what a tempting target Mr Khazari must have been for Sunni insurgents. I mean, there he was, negotiating terms of friendship for three whole days with the new Shiite government of Iraq and declaring, in a joint statement with Bagdad, that Iraq was responsible for starting of the 1980-88 war!

I'm not suggesting huge conspiracies here. Let's just say I am seized of the matter.

[Franconicus]

You think Iran is supporting or controlling the terrorists?

Pro: Iran has no interest inending the terror in Iraq. It keeps the US troops busy. Furthermore the Iran hates the US and the presence of the US troops there. And they would be pleased to create a religious system in Iraq.

Con: They know that their situation is dangerous. Every contact with terrorists will be a reason for the US to attack.

Resume: I do not think that the Iranian government supports the terror in Iraq. However, Iran society is very inhomogeneus. There are probably groups that are willing and able to deal with terrorists.

What about the other groups:
AQ, fundametalistic moslems, Saddam followers, Iraqi patriots ...?
Which groups are currently operating in Iraq? Is there a common comand or coordination. Or are these groups independently? What is the US strategy? How can other nations help?

[Adrian II]

You think Iran is supporting or controlling the terrorists?

Neither. And I just don't know.

Often when you ask a question, people suppose you have a ready-made answer you're trying to push. Not so. But I have a hunch we're missing something important.

The head of counter-insurgency is shot dead on his way to work whilst the Iranian foreign minister is traipsing around the country with flowers in his hair. What is wrong in this picture?

[Franconicus]

Neither. And I just don't know.

Often when you ask a question, people suppose you have a ready-made answer you're trying to push. Not so. But I have a hunch we're missing something important.

The head of counter-insurgency is shot dead on his way to work whilst the Iranian foreign minister is traipsing around the country with flowers in his hair. What is wrong in this picture?

Sorry! I misunderstood

[Adrian II]

Sorry! I misunderstood

Not at all, my friend! It's just that I can't answer your question. Your line-up of considerations is fine and I'm happy I'm not the only one who is wondering about this.

[Tribesman]

link
Further talk on assasinations .
So the long term problem , what can you do ?
You have political parties with armed supporters . Some of these militias are integrated into the security forces , some are kept intact outside of the security forces . Both sorts are being used as "political" tools .
So how can you fight the terrorism and get political progress when the terrorists are in the police and politics ?
It makes the problems concerning de commissioning and de militarisation in the 6 counties with the good Friday Agreement look like a kiddies tea party in comparison .

[Adrian II]

link
Further talk on assasinations .

Speaking to the Guardian, General Hassan al-Sade said half of his 13,750-strong force was secretly working for political parties in Iraq's second city and that some officers were involved in ambushes.

I read that article too. Yes, it occurred to me that the gentleman might be exaggerating for political effect. And no, on second thought I believe that he didn't, and that his statement goes a long way toward explaining some situations. However, this is Basra, not Bagdad with its central bureaucratic position and its intense social and religious divisions.

[Tribesman]

However, this is Basra, not Bagdad with its central bureaucratic position and its intense social and religious divisions.
Yes , but the assassinations are countrywide and affecting politicians and officials of all persuations , it seems to me that all the parties are aiming for power through the barrel of a gun .
It does look a little like civil war .