« Shutting Down Debate | Main | At Last, True Bipartisanship »

February 07, 2007

The Tipping Point?

Successful insurgencies eventually move away from terrorism to full participation on the battlefield. Are we beginning to see that in Iraq?

Maintaining an insurgency is child's play. If you can detonate a car bomb a day somewhere in Iraq, the insurgency goes on, and that requires only 365 bombs. Even a relatively small group can maintain the illusion of general discontent without a great deal of effort, particularly given the amount of ordnance floating around Iraq. But while those actions can disrupt the country's stability, they are insufficient to actually turn the country in the insurgency's favor.

So, sooner or later, insurgencies turn to conventional military action or they fail. In recent weeks, the military has lost five helicopters, all apparently to enemy action. The last four months have been the deadliest period yet in Iraq for American troops. Last week the U.S. and Iraqi governments claimed to win a battle in which approximately 300 insurgents were killed, a claim which, if true, indicates the insurgency moving towards larger formations which are better suited to direct confrontation with government troops than insurgency. Put that all together and it's hard not to wonder if the situation on the ground in Iraq isn't a lot worse than we might think.

I don't know what the facts in Iraq are. It's possible the casualties and helicopters are just cyclical and the '300 militants' was a major exaggeration intended to buff the credentials of the Iraqi Army. But it is also possible we are seeing a turning point in the fight for Iraq as both the U.S. and some members of the insurgency move to try and tip the balance in their favor. The events of the next few weeks should be watched very closely, as they may indicate the ultimate fate of Iraq and our battle there.

Posted at February 7, 2007 08:17 AM

Andrew Olmsted

Comment policy

I apologize for only allowing authenticated commenters, but comment spam overwhelms the site if I don't use those measures to prevent it. I reserve the right to delete any comment, although generally comments will only be deleted due to use of profanity or personal attacks on people. I have no objection to vigorous argument, but when name-calling begins, I'm putting a stop to it. In the immortal words of Eugene Levy, "People, people, let's stop this before somebody says something untrue!" If you want to call people names, I recommend you get your own blog.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://andrewolmsted.com/mt/pings.cgi/1655

Comments

Another key is just how are these helicopters being shot down, and if its new weaponry, where did it come from. I assume that its Sunnis doing it, but what if its a Shia faction?

I would also question the utility of measuring the progress in the war by noting the relative success of just the Sunni insurgents. Yglesias makes this point. If Kirkuk blows up in the next 6 to 9 months because Shia are fighting Kurds for control, what does that say about how the insurgency is doing?

Posted by: dmbeaster [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 7, 2007 03:55 PM

Um...if the insurgency wins, I think that's a pretty good metric for determining the progress of the war. Your mileage may vary.

If the insurgency is truly powerful enough to start fighting the Iraqi Army toe-to-toe, Kirkuk isn't going to matter a great deal, because we'll have bigger problems on our hands. Yes, Kirkuk may well become a significant problem for us, but the point I am trying to make with this post is that we may already have a significantly larger problem on our hands than we realize.

Posted by: Andrew [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 7, 2007 04:10 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?