Battle for Baghdad and beyond

General Mirza Aslam Beg,

            The war on Iraq, provides an interesting study for military analysts, political scientists and watchers of global order, to discern the objectives of war and the strategies of the opposing forces, now manifesting so vividly. It is indeed very rare for a war of this dimension, to be fought, in such a friendly manner, with all the “friendly fire” around. While addressing the senior army officers some four weeks before the war, Saddam Hussein said “the enemy will land in remote regions, and its media will then start saying, they are at some distance from Ramadi (west of Baghdad) and now on their way to invade our fortified cities. They will not enter Baghdad, because they know they will die. Even if they send a million soldiers, our boys will kill them, I say this on television, knowing the Americans are listening. Any one seeking to occupy land, must deploy troops on ground.” Obligingly, the coalition forces, did unfold their invasion plan, exactly, the way the defenders had laid-out their net of defenses, and the two plans got “embedded”, so perfectly. For Saddam, the battle has yet to begin, just waiting for the attackers, to enter the Cauldron of Baghdad, which is Saddam’s killing ground.

            The Coalition forces, do not have “a million men to break the siege of Baghdad.” What would they do? Use the air power, like they did on previous occasions. In 1991, they bombarded Iraq for almost 39 days, till Saddam was forced out of Kuwait and was caught in the open on the road to Basra. In Kossovo in 1999, they bombarded the Yugoslav army for 77 days, till they succumbed. In Afghanistan, in 2001, the aerial blitzkrieg lasted for 35 days, to cause Taliban break-up and retreat. They have taken Baghdad airport, which can be used as the support base, and having invested Baghdad, will try to take-over the town, one bite at a time. How many days will they take to break the will of the Iraqis and the siege of Baghdad, is any body’s guess. Break, they will, because, France, Germany, Russia and China, who opposed the war, now have conceded and want USA to finish the war on its own terms - a war which has no legal or moral justification. No doubt, discretion is the better part of valour.

            USA’s objectives of war are very noble. “Operation Iraqi Freedom” is the catch word, 24 hours a day on the electronic media, despite the fact that the people to be freed do not cherish freedom so cheaply, and they have decided to stand-up and fight, killing all rumours and expectations of mutiny in the army, and public revolt. The American soldiers were told that the whole affair will be easy and enjoyable like a partridge shoot, but turned out to be nightmare. Hence, the alternate route to freedom has been found, by “freeing the souls from Iraqi bodies” using massive air power and starvation.

            Democracy through military power, ala Pakistan, is a new experiment to be introduced in Iraq. As a psychological reaction, the people have done the opposite, by rallying round the dictator - Saddam Hussein. Democracy, therefore, has to wait till Saddam is netted, dead or alive, like Osama and Mullah Omar, who are causing such an unnecessary delay for democracy in Afghanistan. United Nations Inspection team searched for Weapons of Mass Destruction but could find nothing, and were pushed aside, to start a massive missile propelled, land and air search, causing colossal human tragedy, ironically, in the name of global security.

            The war zone (Iraq and the adjoining region) is considered to be the “hot-bed of radical Islam, which produced the nineteen suicide bombers for 9/11 act of terror.” Iraq therefore, is to be occupied, to act as the spring board for suppressing the radical Islam, according to the plan presented to the Pentagon Advisory Group, last month: “Iraq is the tactical pivot - Saudi Arabia, the strategic pivot and Egypt the prize.” Oil, of-course, is the hottest item on the shopping list and come what may, complete control over oil, is to be gained, on the logic: “blood is renewable, oil is not”, and therefore, no sacrifice is too great to achieve this objective. The success story of 1991 Gulf war, serves as the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).

            The Gulf war of 1991 was fought “to provide security to Israel.” This war is no different, because on the first day of the war, the American troops, stationed in Saudi Arabia, moved “quickly, seizing parts of Western Iraq pushing Saddam’s skuds and Al-samood missiles out of range of Tel Aviv”, and a dole of US$ 10 billion was granted to Israel, for showing compassion in war against Iraq. The 2001 war on Afghanistan, was the “war on terror” and the next war shall be the “war on nukes and missiles” possessed by Pakistan, Iran and North Korea. India, as the strategic pivot of USA, shall be the first to join this war and as a prelude, is already talking of ‘pre-emptive strike’ against Pakistan, to ensure the hegemony of India and Israel, as surrogates and sub-leased power wielders of the unipolar power.

            For the defence of Iraq, Saddam has established four Combat Zones: Basra, Karbala, Mousel and Baghdad. Baghdad combat zone extends to Al-Haditha in the west, Tikrit in the north, Al-Kut in the south (Map attached) - and is defended by a hard-core of over 300,000 troops. Baghdad Cauldron, with a population of about 4.5 million, is defended by about 60,000 Republican Guards, 50,000 Fidaeen-e-Saddam and 40,000 foot soldiers of infantry divisions. Against this force, the coalition forces have a strength of about 90,000 US and 20,000 British fighting men, stretched from Umm-e-Qasar to Baghdad, investing cities and guarding the Main Supply Route (MSR), leaving not more than 70,000 of fighting men, for the battle of Baghdad. Possibly, they cannot break the siege of Baghdad, defended by 150,000 fighting soldiers. Another 100,000 reinforcement, for the Coalition forces is on the way, of which only 60,000 would be the fighting men, who can join the battle at Baghdad, by end of April.

            If Pentagon has its way, they will conquer Iraq city by city and Baghdad, by starving the people and killing them through aerial bombardment, imposing an indefinite military rule. France, Germany, Russia and China are now “contending with American power, which they believe, is more important than dealing with Iraq”, - a policy which will determine the shape of new world order. NATO, where “Russia gradually supplants France, would emerge as the guarantor of western-oriented world order. China will look for “institutional mechanism for developing relationship with United States, in managing global affairs.”

            The global sensibility against USA’s formidable killing power has induced the new paradigm of interest-based orientation to cope with the ferocity with which the ‘New World Order’ is being restructured. A sense of powerlessness pervades amongst the global community, in face of powerful George Bush, who has emerged as Caesar to pronounce; “I came, I saw, and I conquered”, to protect the western civilization - the bastion of democratic norms and values and custodian of human rights and sovereignty of nations. What a world we are in!