But first, the Post makes up for yesterday’s snoozer with the day’s best read in Sudarsan Raghavan's dispatch from Sadr City.
Sudarsan Raghavan ventures out to Sadr City to check in on the development of the area and samples the political tastes of the locals. Some of it you already know (In Sadr City, the residents really, really, really like Muqtada al-Sadr.) Most interesting in Raghavan’s report, however, is his attention to the administrative and social service activities of the Sadrist organization, which is essentially the de facto government of the district. Muqtada’s “representatives run the hospitals, the Islamic courts, the police, the municipal offices and the mosques. He pays for funerals and school books. He builds houses and controls inflation. He punishes the corrupt and those whose activities taint Islam or his privileged name.” The loyalty that locals give to the Sadr organization is rewarded in kind; the Sadrists provide relative stability, social services, electricity that stays on far longer than in other parts of the city, and relative progress in economic development. Missing from Raghavan’s report, however, is the role of the by now well-acknowledged political struggle inside the Mahdi Army. For example, Raghavan quotes Rahim al-Darraji, a mayor of the area, but doesn’t mention that the man was nearly killed last week, very presumably by breakway Mahdi Army members who were opposed to Darraji’s relationship with the Americans. Raghavan’s description of Sadr City is even more striking if read next to Alissa Rubin's account of life in Baghdad's Sunni areas in yesterday's NYT. Even in light of its missing pieces, well worth a full read.
Un-de-Ba'thification?
The Iraqi government plans to introduce legislation that would reinstate most former members of the Ba'th Party into public life, Karin Brulliard reports for the Post. Brulliard’s description of the law is slightly different than that reported by the Associated Press earlier in the day. According to Brulliard, the law would allow all but the “three highest levels” of party members return to work. Brulliard’s account agrees with the AP’s that all Ba'thists who are not able to return to their jobs would be placed on state pensions. The big discrepancy between the two accounts: The AP reports that the draft law provides for a three-month period during which Iraqis could make criminal complaints against Ba'thists, to be judged by a special binding tribunal. After the three-month period, all Ba'th party members not found guilty by the tribunals would receive an amnesty, the AP reported. It seems unlikely that Brulliard would leave out such a key detail, so it might be the case that there are competing versions of the draft law circulating. The AP obtained its description of the draft law from an MP. The Post got its copy from the US embassy, which released a copy on Tuesday. (By the way, what’s the US embassy doing with a copy of a draft Iraqi law?)
The Iran file
In July 2005, the US sent Iran a diplomatic letter of protest informing it of its belief that Iran was supplying Iraqi militias with what have now been dubbed EFPs, and that one such device had killed a British soldier in Maysan Province, Michael Gordon and Scott Shane report for the Times. The letter also expressed concern about alleged connections between the Revolutionary Guards in Iran, the Iranian-allied Lebanese Hizbullah, and Iraqi Shi'a militias. Iran denied the charges in a response the next month. The Times reviewed the Iran dossier and found that the US intelligence has been concerned about a possible relationship between the Iranian security apparatus and Shi'a militias for at least two years. The two Times reporters present the history of US allegations and findings over the EFP issue. Gordon and Shane also offer an informative discussion of the EFPs themselves and their effectiveness in the battlefield. This lengthy article will be an important read in the continuing debates over US Iran policy.
Sarah Lyall reports in the Times that the standoff continues between the UK and Iran over the 15 captured British sailors. Iran has said that the 15 are healthy, but has not disclosed their location. The UK seemed keen not to escalate the situation, but did say that Lord Triesman of the Foreign Office had “frank and brisk” comments for the Iranian ambassador in London earlier, and that a spokesperson for PM Blair had repeated the assertion that the sailors were entirely in Iraqi waters before they were captured. Lyall notes that it was reported in the AP that Iraqi FM Hoshyar Zebari told the Iranians that the UK sailors were in Iraqi waters.
On the Hill
Sen. Mark Pryor, Arkansas Democrat, has suggested an unusual twist on the debate about an Iraq withdrawal timetable: Hide the date. Elizabeth Williamson reports that Pryor suggests an amendment to the Senate appropriations bill that would require the creation of a fixed timetable and exit strategy, but one which would be developed under classification and shared only with Congress. Some voiced skepticism that the plan could remain secret if distributed to Congress. A defense analyst wondered if classifying a major aspect of the biggest policy debate of our time is “really workable or politically satisfying for anyone.”
In a strategic change, Senate Republicans have signaled that they will not go to the mat to prevent the appropriations bill, passed in the House, from passing the Senate. Instead, Minority Leader McConnell has signaled that his party will oppose the measure (even Sen. McCain will fly back for the vote), but will force the president to use a veto rather than using parliamentary tactics to block the legislation in the Senate, Shailagh Murray and Jonathan Weisman report in the Post. GOP Sen. Cochran will introduce an amendment to strike the timetable for withdrawal, but if the amendment fails, the Republicans will not force the Dems to find 60 votes to move the bill to a vote. Cochran said he hoped the strategy would induce both parties to negotiate more flexibly in conference, as many members of both parties are keen to avoid the major showdown that a veto would provoke. In the background to the Senate GOP decision not to block the legislation lies a growing dissatisfaction with the president’s leadership and an unwillingness to take risks that may be compromising in the future on his behalf.
Jeff Zeleney files a similar report on Senate Republican strategy for the Times.
In other coverage:
NEW YORK TIMES
Hillary Clinton has worked to shed her doveish image, Patrick Healy writes. This strategy has included building relationships with military brass such as Petraeus, Fallon and others. Healy points out that the senator is distancing herself from Sen. Obama's less experienced public image in military affairs -- she is also working to shed what her campaign might see as baggage from her husband's presidency.
WASHINGTON POST
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
Sam Dagher interviews several soldiers of the 1st Battalion, 28th Infantry Regiment, known as the Black Lions, built from scratch and sent out to Iraq as a part of the Bush plan. Some members are fresh recruits, others are on repeat Iraq tours. Dagher finds mixed feelings of pride and apprehension, concern for safety and the safety of one’s comrades, and pining for loved ones back home.
The standoff over the Iraq war has contributed to a general political gridlock in Washington, Monitor editors write: “The politics of war, of congressional oversight, and of a premature presidential campaign will make it very difficult for this Congress and White House to move ahead on substantial issues – perhaps more difficult than in past presidencies facing an opposition Congress in the lame-duck years. Add to this an almost evenly divided Senate, and the stage is set for inaction.”
USA TODAY
No Iraq coverage today.
WALL STREET JOURNAL
No Iraq coverage today.
