Attacks strike at the heart of the Shia faith

This article appeared on MSNBC.com


Attacks strike at the heart of the Shia faith
Francona: Jihadists could succeed in igniting civil war with attack


COMMENTARY
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
Military analyst - MSNBC

If you’re a Sunni jihadist in Iraq, such as a member of al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) organization of the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, things are not going well for you of late. The Iraqi Sunnis, once your ally in the fight against the Americans, have turned on you. Many of the Iraqi groups that once were your allies are now hunting you down. Your major success over the last 15 months, one of your stated goals, was plunging the Arab portions of the country into a sectarian civil war – Sunni against Shia.

Since the American and Iraqi forces’ “surge” operations began earlier this year, the Shia have mostly stayed out of the fight, allowing the coalition forces to concentrate on you. The Shia leadership, be it Addul Aziz al-Hakim, Ayatollah al-Sistani or even Muqtada al-Sadr, inspires great moral discipline among the Shia. To reignite the civil war, it is necessary to goad the Shia to reengage the battle. Up until now, you have been unsuccessful.

Ah, so you take a look at what has worked in the past. You have to hit the Shia hard enough to make them react. Pick a target that will generate retaliation no matter what the calls for calm from the Shia leadership. Your memory turns to the Golden Mosque in Samarra. In February 2006, AQI thugs attacked the mosque and severely damaged the 100-year old gold-plated dome. The twin minarets were left standing.

Samarra is an excellent choice of target for the Sunni jihadists. It sits in the middle of the “Sunni triangle” about 75 miles north of Baghdad, making it easy for you to attack. The Golden Mosque is revered among the Shia as probably the fourth holiest site for the sect. The shrine is also known as the Imam ‘Ali al-Hadi and Imam Hasan Al-‘Askari mosque, named for the 10th and 11th imams of Shi’a Islam and two of the “14 Infallibles.” The two ninth-century imams, father and son, are buried in the mosque.

Samarra is also the birthplace of the twelfth imam, Imam Muhammad Al-Mahdi (and son of 11th Imam Hasan Al-‘Askari). His shrine - not his tomb - is adjacent to the Golden Mosque. It is not his tomb, because in “Twelver” Shi’a, so named for the 12th imam, it is believed that he is still alive but in hiding (“occultation”) and will return prior to the Day of Judgment to establish justice on earth. Twelver Shi’a are dominant in Iraq, Iran, and Lebanon. It is the main sect of Shia Islam.

Although the initial reaction has been somewhat muted, the jihadists just may get the reaction they seek. This strikes right at the heart of the Shia faith. To Christians, this is akin to blowing up the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

© 2007 MSNBC Interactive

In Iraq, sometimes death is the only justice

This article appeared on MSNBC.com

In Iraq, sometimes death is the only justice
'Chemical Ali,' others face death penalty for chemical attacks against Kurds

COMMENTARY
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
Military analyst - MSNBC

In a continuation of the series of trials that saw Saddam Hussein and some of his closest circle hanged in December 2006 and January 2007, it appears that the gallows at the former Directorate of Military Intelligence compound in the Khazimiyah section of Baghdad may have new victims.

The most famous of the accused is Ali Hassan al-Majid, more commonly known as “Chemical Ali” and the “Butcher of Kurdistan.” Al-Majid (Saddam’s cousin) is charged with a variety of war crimes, including genocide for his role in the Anfal campaign against the Kurds. It was during this campaign that 5,000 Kurds were killed in the village of Halabjah in March 1988.

Also in the dock with al-Majid is former defense minister Sultan Hashim Ahmad al-Jabburi al-Tay and Sabr Abd Al-Aziz al-Duri, former director of military intelligence. The Associated Press reported the verdict will be announced on June 24.

I have met both of these officers personally, and served with one professionally.

'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'
In 1988, during the last year of the Iran-Iraq War, I was sent to Baghdad as a liaison officer to the Iraqi Directorate of Military Intelligence. Gen. Sabr (al-Duri) was that organization’s director. I was in Baghdad working with Sabr when the Iraqis conducted their chemical attacks on Halabjah. It is doubtful the attacks on the Kurds could have been conducted without Sabr’s knowledge; someone had to develop the targeting information for the Iraqi pilots.

Once we learned of the attacks, we immediately halted the flow of American intelligence information. The halt was short-lived. After a series of meetings in Washington, it was decided that it was more important to ensure that Iran did not emerge victorious than to refuse to assist the Iraqis for their chemical attacks on the Kurds. This decision defines the Middle East adage:“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

In the ensuing months, Iraq continued to use chemical weapons against Iranian troops in a series of offensives beginning in April 1988 and lasting until the Iranians gave up later that summer. I was aware of Iraqi use of chemical weapons; I had gathered the evidence while on tours of the battlefields. There was no doubt Gen. Sabr was an integral part of the military decision-making process. Ironically, Sabr will be hanged in the same compound that housed his intelligence directorate.

The U.S.-Iraqi relationship was based on political reality. The Iraqis were astute enough to realize our efforts were about containing Iran, not supporting Iraq. That’s why it ended almost immediately after the end of the war.

Weighing the death penalty
Sultan Hashim Ahmad, then a lieutenant general and Iraq’s military operations chief, was the senior Iraqi officer present at the military-to-military talks at Safwan on March 3, 1991. I was the interpreter for General Norman Schwarzkopf for those talks and was the one who introduced the two generals to each other.

My initial meeting with Sultan Hashim was a bit contentious. I had gone over to his vehicle to escort him to meet General Schwarzkopf. As I introduced myself (in Arabic), he glared at me, prompting my use of some Iraqi slang that caught his attention. It seemed to amuse him. After I told him we were going to search him before admitting him to the meeting tent, he again glared. After he realized he was going to be treated as a professional, he acted the same in return.

As the invasion of Iraq began in 2003, I was on set at CNBC and who was giving a televised briefing to Saddam Hussein? None other than Defense Minister Sultan Hashim Ahmad.More than most, I am acutely aware of the seriousness of the charges against these two officers. I had the opportunity to visit Halabjah in 1995 while serving in northern Iraq. It was a visit I will never forget. These two officers were a part of that operation.

I am not a proponent of the death penalty, but in this case, it may be the appropriate punishment. For the Kurds, it may be the only punishment.

© 2007 MSNBC Interactive

New Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has announced that he will nominate the current Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Mike Mullen (left), to succeed General Peter Pace as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when Pace's term expires in September.

A few thoughts.

While many news organizations have portrayed this as Gates firing Pace, that's really unfair. Pace has served in the Joint Chiefs for six years, four (two terms) as the Vice Chairman and two as the Chairman. Although a waiver to the three-term limit can be done with the stroke of a pen, the general would still have to be confirmed once again by the Senate.

Secretary Gates was (rightfully) concerned that a confirmation hearing in the Democrat-controlled Senate would be a circus of grandstanding, posturing and recriminations about the past rather than where we are headed. To spare General Pace (and no doubt the administration) that ordeal, he opted to select a new candidate for the position - Admiral Mullen.

Mullen has been the chief of naval operations for almost two years now, so might face some questions about current administration policies, but won't have to endure the WMD debate, the decision to invade, intelligence issues, etc. He technically has not been in the chain of command for operations in the Middle East (or anywhere else for that matter) - the title "Chief of Naval Operations" is a throwback to the days when the different Navy fleets conducted their own operations.

With the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, the service chiefs (Chief of Staff of the Army, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Chief of Naval Operations) were removed from the operational chain of command. Orders now flow from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commander (Central Command, Pacific Command, etc.). The service chiefs provide trained and equipped forces to these commanders, but do not exercise operational control over them. Note also that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is not in the chain of command - "the Chairman" is the principal military advisor to the President, Secretary of Defense and the National Security Council; he commands no forces.

General Pace is the first Marine Corps officer to hold the position of chairman. Prior to Pace, there were eight Army officers, four Navy officers and four Air Force officers in the position. Given the world political situation and American strategic interests, the appointment of a Navy officer is a good choice. Oil moves on the world's oceans, we move our forces by sea, trade moves via the world's waterways, and the United States traditionally has been a maritime power.

The founding fathers recognized this when they framed the Constitution, addressing the fact that the new nation had no Navy - the Continental Navy extant at the time of the Revolutionary War had disappeared. Article I of the Constitution includes this passage: "The Congress shall have power...to provide and maintain a navy....

Britannia no longer rules the waves, nor do we aspire to. That said, when there is a crisis somewhere in the world and Americans or American interests are at risk, the first question asked is, "Where are the carriers?" Having the officer responsible for training and equipping the United States Navy for the past two years is not a bad idea.

Is Gaza this summer's Lebanon?

This article appeared on MSNBC.com

Is Gaza this summer's Lebanon?
Gaza situation has been deteriorating steadily since the 2006 elections

COMMENTARY
By Lt. Col. Rick Francona
Military analyst - MSNBC

Last summer’s war between Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia and Israeli military forces was triggered by the ambush of an Israeli army patrol along the Lebanese border. That ambush resulted in the deaths of eight Israeli soldiers and the kidnapping of two others. That Hezbollah operation came just a few weeks after an attack in Gaza by Hamas’s Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades in which two Israeli soldiers were killed and one taken hostage. All three Israeli soldiers remain in the hands of their respective captors.

As the summer of 2007 approaches, it appears another war may be brewing in the region, this time in the Gaza Strip. The situation in Gaza has been deteriorating steadily since the 2006 elections in which Hamas – considered a terrorist organization by the United States government – soundly defeated (76 seats to 43) the Fatah party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmud Abbas.

The bad blood between Hamas and Fatah has erupted into a virtual civil war. Despite the hostilities between the two groups, Hamas has been launching Qassam rockets into Israel, at times averaging 30 attacks a day on the Israeli city of Sderot, located just inside the border fence and mortar attacks on Israeli army border posts.

Israel thus far has responded with air strikes, but will likely escalate that response if the attacks do not stop. Just when Hamas has indicated it may accept a one-year ceasefire with the Israelis, Islamic Jihad has begun launching rockets into Sderot. The proposed Hamas ceasefire would include the West Bank as well as Gaza, something the Israelis will probably not accept. It is not clear if Islamic Jihad would abide by the Hamas agreement. Thus far, neither the former Fatah-led government of Muhmud Abbas nor the current Hamas-led government of Ismail Haniyah has been able to stop attacks on Israeli forces and towns, nor stem the internal violence in Gaza that has plagued the Palestinians for years.

Israel reportedly decided that it would augment its air strikes on Hamas and Islamic Jihad targets in Gaza with increased commando raids and “targeted assassinations” of the two groups’ political and military leadership. Israel’s public security minister stated that Israel would attempt to kill “at the first opportunity” Hamas’s political chief Khalid Mashal, who is currently resident in Damascus, where he runs the organization’s political offices. The minister also said that Israel might consider an attempt on the life of the Palestinian prime minister. In the past, attempts on high-level Palestinian officials have gotten some senior leaders, to be sure, but at the cost of numerous civilian casualties – which does not help their cause.

At some point, the Israeli people are going to demand the government take action against these groups in Gaza. Hamas and Islamic Jihad, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, are supported by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which provides money, weapons and training to all three groups. Israeli military intelligence officers claim that Iran has provided sophisticated anti-tank weapons – missiles and later-generation rocket propelled grenades – to both Palestinian organizations via tunnels from Egypt. Even leaders of the Fatah-affiliated al-Aqsa Brigades claim they are creating a “south Lebanon” in Gaza in case of an Israeli assault, admitting they are receiving rockets from outside the territory.

Hamas, Islamic Jihad and even the al-Aqsa Brigades might think they can fight a successful Hezbollah-style guerrilla campaign against the Israel Defense Forces, but Gaza is not Lebanon. It is flat, not mountainous like Lebanon, much smaller and bordered on two sides by Israel. Its Mediterranean coast is less than 25 miles long and could be blockaded by the Israeli navy, much more easily than controlling Lebanon’s 120-mile coast. Will the three Palestinian groups put aside their differences with each other and coordinate their operations against the Israelis?

More importantly, though, is the attitude of the Israeli leadership. Given the criticism that the Olmert government received for its poor performance in Lebanon last summer, they won’t make the same mistakes twice. Any military action against Gaza will likely by swift, violent and decisive.

© 2007 MSNBC Interactive