This month's major issue was the Bush Administration's new plan for the war in Iraq. For the first time, there is, in this author's opinion, a bona fide strategy to effectively combat the insurgency in Iraq. General David Petraeus, as he has demonstrated so competently in Mosul, is quite easily the best choice to lead the US military campaign in Iraq. In this author's opinion, the troop increase will be a beneficial development that will yield a positive effect in the Baghdad area.

However, will the insurgents, after being ejected from Baghdad, simply relocate their operations elsewhere? More than likely, given their tactics to date, so stability in other areas, into which the insurgents relocate, will rest primarily on the ability of the Iraqi Security Forces to effectively neutralize them.

The main goal of the new plan should not be to simply eliminate all the insurgents encountered, as that may degrade Coalition forces' collaborative relationship with the Iraqi population. Insurgencies are effectively neutralized when the insurgents are left with no safe haven and/or support. The goal of the plan should be to drive the insurgents into unfriendly territory, such as the more peaceful Shi'ite south, or towards Kurdistan.

The author has been studying counter-insurgency doctrine and has recognized the errors the Coalition forces have made in Iraq by not initially devising and implementing a competent and complementary strategy to effectively neutralize the insurgents.

Emphasis to date has been solely focused on killing or capturing insurgents, but the main goal should be focused on engaging the Iraqi population. The primary reason Gen. Petraeus, and other commanders, like Col. McMaster in Tal Afar, along with US Special Forces, have been so successful, is they understand how to effectively neutralize the insurgents by involving the locals.

These commanders had significant numbers of troops to implement Clear, Hold, Build and to protect the civilian population. But more importantly, they knew how to use the troops effectively. A US troop surge will be ineffective unless the forces are deployed correctly. For example:

1) Gen. Petraeus involved the locals, particularly the sheikhs, in nearly every aspect of his counter-insurgency operations.

2) According to Fiasco (an anti-war, and politically biased book, but a good read nonetheless), when there were rumors of prisoner abuse in Mosul, Gen. Petraeus allowed local leaders to interview the detainees to dispel any rumors.

3) He arranged for his forces to live among the native population, rather than in large, insular bases.

4) When looting and violence occurred, he instituted a "neighborhood watch" program, and paid the sheikhs based on their performance in ending the violence.

The list of Gen. Petraeus' innovative tactics is considerable, and indicates his creativity and fundamental understanding of how to combat an insurgency-based conflict. For the first time in nearly three years, the author is optimistic regarding US strategy and possibility of US commanders achieving significant success in neutralizing the insurgency in Iraq.

Updates on Pre-War Intelligence

The author was recently perusing some old notes with previous contacts, and discovered some interesting information not previously published. A Lebanese source contacted the author, and described a meeting he had with a relative, who lived in a small village, near the Syrian border. The source's relative described how in late 2004, and early 2005, "very long trucks" began digging at the bottom of a hill in the Bekaa Valley. The location, the source claimed, was near "an old agricultural lab".

The source provided the author with an overhead photograph of the specific area and indicated that witnesses had described Syrian personnel dressed in Soviet uniforms, and noted that the burial operation took place at night. The source claimed that witnesses would not talk because Palestinian bases were nearby, and that it wasn't too long ago that a mass grave was found several kilometers away. He also described how a Lebanese Army contractor was murdered in 2005 near the village.

Shortly before Syria's withdrawal from the Bekaa Valley, the location was excavated again, according to the source. What was buried there? Those who claim Iraq's WMDs went to Syria say it occurred from summer 2002 to spring 2003. This is likely a mystery not soon for the solving.

The Arab press is reporting that the notebooks Saddam Hussein kept before he died describe how he tried to "Islamize" the Ba'ath Party and move it away from secularism. In his notes, he claims that he even convinced Michel Afflak to convert from Christianity to Islam. ^[1] This, once and for all, should discredit the notion that Saddam Hussein's regime was strictly secular.

  
 Middle East

On the day of Bush's speech, Coalition forces initiated an operation against the Iranian networks in Iraq, specifically Irbil. This development is very encouraging as it confirms that in the past the US has not moved against these networks, but is now. There has been considerable speculation regarding whether or not al-Maliki will allow Coalition forces to pursue Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, but it seems clear that, with the importation of Kurdish fighters into Baghdad, some operation may be in the works.

However, questions remain about this tactic. Will the Shia be more accepting of a Kurdish presence than American? Will the Kurds, who don't speak Arabic, bring additional experience or, are they simply additional combat power? We're confident that al-Maliki will allow Coalition forces to tackle Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army. Over the past few months, there was nearly a political realignment in the Iraqi parliament to depose al-Maliki and isolate al-Sadr from the government. For his own sake, al-Maliki really has no other choice.

However, a Fallujah-style offensive on Sadr City is not an appropriate operation, at this time. The first priority should be an offensive in Anbar Province, via American-Iraqi combat power, or "village militia" backed by the sheikhs the Coalition forces recently won to their side. Why must the Mahdi Army threat be neutralized?

1) Doing so will neutralize the heart of the insurgency, which is the Sunni element.

2) Some Shia are concerned that Coalition forces may team up with the Sunnis to permit them extended influence, or even complete control, over the Iraqi government, for the sake of peace.

3) The militia's popularity stems from protecting the population from Sunni terrorist attacks, and then avenging them. Coalition forces could undercut al-Sadr's popularity. In the mean time, Coalition forces should launch a PR offensive with prominent leaders calling for disarmament and publically releasing information demonstrating that al-Sadr is simply a puppet of Iran, and is behind the murder of non-combatant Iraqis.

At the same time that Coalition forces are engaged in Anbar, they must also contain the five mixed neighborhoods in Baghdad that have been the focus of most of the recent violence. As Coalition forces combat the Sunni insurgents, they must likewise ensure that the Shiite death squads don't take advantage of the situation, otherwise the locals will turn to the insurgents for protection and support. Coalition forces must keep al-Sadr's forces, as well as the Iranian-backed death squads, as far away from the Sunni territory as possible. Relevantly, the Saudi National Security Assessment Project has assessed that Iran has at least 5,000 agents backing the Shiite death squads, and estimates the Mahdi Army's strength to be at 10,000 and the Badr Brigade's to be at 5,000. ^[2]

Luckily, it seems the Mahdi Army is under pressure to cave. The mayor of Sadr City has been negotiating, and has been making major progress. A peace deal has been floated and is being worked out. Under the deal, no one in Sadr City is allowed to carry arms in public, it disarms (in theory) all militias in the city and Coalition weapons searches won't be resisted. However, the US must bring security to the area, end raids in Sadr City, release some detainees, bring in new construction projects, and triple the number of police stations while recruiting new police officers locally in order to reduce unemployment. ^[3] Certainly there's some problems with the offer, but negotiations mixed with physical pressure may work these out. A possible compromise measure would be stopping American raids, but allowing Iraqi government raids with Coalition back up, and some sort of system where we're allowed to go after death squad leaders. Perhaps a "neighborhood watch program" where local leaders get paid in proportion to the amount of violence that occurs is workable.

The Iranian network, that this author is confident forms the backbone of the insurgency in Iraq, is beginning to be exposed. Secret Iranian documents that US forces captured in Iraq, which have been authenticated, clearly indicate that Iran has been sponsoring both Shiite and Sunni insurgents - but not the Ba'athists. The Revolutionary Guards' al-Quds Force does work with individuals affiliated with Al-Qaeda in Iraq and its ally, Ansar al-Sunna.

Plans for attacks and phone numbers of Sunni terrorists were included in the captured documents. One document reportedly states that Iran must double its efforts to retain its influence among Sunni terrorists since the Gulf nations are expected to increase their own support for the Sunnis.

The captured documents also indicate that there is evidence of Al-Quds operatives secretly cooperating with the Sunni insurgents who attacked the Golden Mosque, in Samarra, in February 2006, which provoked the sectarian violence. ^[4] If this is true, this document should be published immediately to destroy any sympathy Iraqi Shia may have for Iran, and to discredit insurgents' claims of fighting for the good of the all Iraqis.

The Iranian opposition has released new details regarding Iran's extensive network in Iraq. According to their information, the al-Quds Force collects money in Ahwaz, and then escorts its operatives by Iranian security to the Shalamche border crossing to steal into Iraq and make their way into Najaf. Iran then utilizes the currency exchange centers to redirect the funds to their numerous front groups and charities, one of which is named "The Headquarters for the Reconstruction of Iraq's Holy Sites." These front groups then smuggle the weapons to the operatives who foment the violence. The advanced IEDs that are responsible for causing so many US casualties are reportedly produced in the neighborhood of Lavizan, in northern Tehran. ^[5]

The Administration is finally fighting back. According to The Washington Post, Bush has authorized our military to capture or kill Iranian operatives in Iraq. Previously, we just detained them for a few days in a "catch and release program" that wouldn't escalate tension with Iran. Officials told the Post that over 150 Revolutionary Guards officers are believed to be in Iraq at any one time. The new plan will also be applied to Afghanistan, authorizes more aggressive operations against Hezbollah, movement towards international sanctions against Iran for harboring several dozen Al-Qaeda, more aggressive moves to cut Iranian funding off to Hamas, and to undermine Iranian interests among the Shiites in Afghanistan. ^[6]

One Iranian captured so far is the director of operations for the Revolutionary Guards. Ambassador Khalizad said it's part of a new strategy to "go after the networks here [Iraq]." ^[7] This admission, meant to inspire optimism, should anger every American. It is an admission that we have tolerated the Iranian terror networks in Iraq that have killed so many American soldiers, and so many Iraqis.

Iran's terrorist activity is increasing in the Gulf, as reported by Saudi security. The Saudis intend to respond by supporting Sunni insurgents in Iraq, to counter the influence of Iranian Shiites. Such a proxy war will escalate, and in fact is already doing so. Several reports from Gulf media sources have described that Saudi intelligence, and an Iraqi parliament member, have reported that Iran is forming a 10,000-strong "Brigade of Mecca" force, in southern Iraq, near the Saudi border. The Saudis are concerned that this force will be used to cause disturbances during the pilgrimage and festivities. ^[8]

Jamestown's Global Terrorism Analysis released a significant new report regarding Iranian activity in Afghanistan. Among the interesting items in the report is that, in March 2006, the official Afghan media reported that, during the first quarter of 2006 alone, the province of Herat arrested at least ten Iranian officials involved in "illegal activity." The report also describes Iranian efforts to build popular support in the country and increase intelligence activity. ^[9]

Instability continues in Lebanon as Hezbollah threatens to collapse the government. Some observers believe that Hezbollah acts in the best interest of the Lebanese Shia, but they must confront new evidence. The former secretary-general of Hezbollah, Sheikh Subhi al-Tufeili has criticized Hezbollah for being part of Iranian intelligence. He criticized them for taking orders from outside of Lebanon, and becoming a "tool" of external powers. ^[10]

The regional arms race resulting from Iran's belligerent nuclear program is escalating. King Abdullah II has publicly stated that Jordan will begin developing nuclear power for "peaceful purposes." ^[11]  Iran is also discussing nuclear cooperation with Indonesia. ^[12]

The nuclear issue recently escalated, as Iran has banned IAEA inspectors in retaliation for the very limited sanctions the UN imposed.   ^[13]A report in the British press claims that North Korea has agreed to share all its data from its nuclear test in the fall with Iran, possibly to help Iran with its own nuclear test as early as the end of 2007. Such cooperation has gone on a long time and this report is highly likely to be accurate. ^[14]

Iran also announced plans to launch a satellite, which is a widely-known way of simulating a test for a long-range ballistic missile, as the satellite launcher can be adapted to a missile. Sean Osborne of the Northeast Intelligence Network (HomelandSecurityUS.com) has warned that this may be a test of the Iranian version of North Korea's Tae'Po-Dong 2 ICBM that they shot near Hawaii. If he's right, then that means Iran's missile program is eight years ahead of our intelligence estimates.

Despite Iran's stridency, the regime's power continues to fracture. There are rumors that Iranian parliament members may move to impeach Ahmadinejad. Additionally, Grand Ayatollah Hussein Ali Montazeri, an extremely senior cleric once slated to replace Khomeini until he criticized the power of the clerics who are not elected, has been coming out more forcefully lately in opposition to Ahmadinejad.

His opposition to Ahmadinejad however, should not lead anyone to conclude that Montazeri is becoming, in any manner, pro-American. He is merely positing that Ahmadinejad is handling "the enemy" (the West) incorrectly, and is causing unnecessary hardships for ordinary Iranians, pointing to the increase in food prices, due to UN sanctions. Economic problems are causing a lot of anger and frustration among ordinary Iranians towards the government. ^[15]

While it appears that Iran is taking the lead role in actively sponsoring the insurgency in Iraq, Syria's role in the situation seems primarily for safe haven and safe passage. This is likely because of the success of the sectarian campaign for which Iran has more assets to deploy than Syria. Nonetheless, Syria's involvement must be documented. In Fiasco, on page 409, Colonel Derek Harbey, a military-intelligence expert in Iraq, states that there are four tracks for financing from Damascus that lead to Ramadi. Syrian funding to the insurgents there amounts to $1.2 million per month.

The capture of some Syrians has reportedly led to new details regarding their efforts to foment turmoil in Iraq. The detainees reported that Ba'athist insurgents and Al-Qaeda operatives pay Syrian authorities for safe harbor, and that the Syrian embassy in Baghdad is used to supply insurgents and to coordinate their activities. The Al-Qaeda logistical effort in Syria is led by Mohammed Nassif, director of State Security, and Ali Yunis, chief of staff of General Assaf Shawkat, who heads Syrian intelligence. ^[16]

Iraqi president Jalal Talabani has advised Iraqis that the government is well aware that Syria is harboring senior Saddam regime officials, who are aiding the insurgents. He argued against the notion that Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, though, is in Damascus as widely reported. He stated that al-Douri is in Yemen, and that the Iraqis are tracking his movements. ^[17]

Although indications of civil unrest in Syria are not nearly as elevated as they were last year, instability in the Assad regime continues. Iran is reportedly coming to Syria's rescue, utilizing their own successful model, which Venezuela has also expressed interest in copying. Iran is helping form and finance an Alawite militia loyal to Bashar Assad that he will directly control. ^[18] The Alawite militia is similar to the Basij force in Iran, or the Fedayeen under Saddam's regime.

The intense political debate over a troop surge is creating some tension between Iraq and the US. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has criticized the Bush Administration claiming that the US could dramatically cut back its forces in Iraq within 3-6 months if commanders would accelerate the pace of arming the Iraqi Security Forces. The US is reluctant to do so out of concerns that the equipment will fall into the hands of the insurgents, who have infiltrated the security forces.

Asia

The spokesperson for Mullah Omar was captured this month. He reportedly confessed that Mullah Omar is hiding in Quetta, Pakistan under the protection of ISI operatives. Pakistan, meanwhile, continues to claim that Omar is operating from southern Afghanistan.

China made the news this month with its successful anti-satellite missile test. ^[19] This should serve as a major warning to the US military that its technological advantages may be jeopardized in the near future.