With a few carefully worded phrases, the United States military is apparently stepping back from its strict demands on ending the siege of Fallujah, creating an opening for an Iraqi force to take control of the city from 1 000 or more guerrilla holdouts.
Army General John Abizaid, who heads US military operations in the Middle East, said the United States was sticking by the objectives it outlined when the Marines stormed the city west of Baghdad on April 5. But he softened demands that insurgents hand over heavy weapons and foreign fighters, saying only that guerrillas needed to keep the weapons ”off the streets” and the United States ”will not tolerate” foreign fighters in the city.
Military leaders acknowledge the situation remains delicate as local leaders in Fallujah try different ways to resolve the insurgency. The situation has commanded the daily — sometimes hourly — attention of President George Bush, a senior administration official with knowledge of the inner workings of the White House said on Friday on condition of anonymity.
US military commanders won’t wait forever for local political efforts to quell the insurgency in Fallujah, a US official said, laying out in greater detail the Bush administration’s evolving strategy to deal with one of the trickiest standoffs of the war.
Their words foreshadow the possibility of a ”strong fight” to gain control of the city, if joint Iraqi-American efforts fail to halt the violence.
”The question is how long do we wait … to see if these will produce a positive outcome,” the administration official said, describing the internal deliberations aimed at ending the standoff between soldiers and insurgents inside the city.
”The answer is, we’re trying to wait as long as we can, but the answer is, not forever,” the official said.
The process may have taught the US military and the Bush administration the limits of using the military to solve Iraq’s instability.
”The whole thing has been very embarrassing for the United States,” said Jeremy Binnie, a Middle East military analyst with the London defence consultancy Jane’s. ”I don’t think they’ve achieved anything important, and they’ve learned a few key lessons.”
Administration officials and military commanders see the shift of security responsibilities to Iraqis — action that reduces the American profile in Fallujah — as a move toward ending the intense fighting that has brought strong international criticism.
”We’re making progress, you bet,” President Bush insisted on Friday during an appearance in the Rose Garden. Part of the strategy in Iraq, he said, is to deal with those who are trying to stop the Iraqi people from realising their ambitions of a free society. ”Whether it be in Fallujah, or elsewhere, we will deal with them,” Bush said.
Abizaid said the United States still wants to seize the men who killed and mutilated four American security contractors on March 30. But the general conceded that the killers had probably already fled Fallujah.
Foreign fighters, too, may have fled the city, a top US military official in Baghdad said on Thursday. Others question whether many foreign fighters had ever joined the battle in Fallujah, characterising it instead as a homegrown uprising against US occupation.
Abizaid did not repeat Iraq-based commanders’ warnings that the US military was losing patience with Iraqi guerrillas still controlling the western city, nor did he suggest a US assault was imminent.
”Clearly we will not tolerate the presence of foreign fighters,” Abizaid said. ”We will insist on the heavy weapons coming off the streets. We want the Marines to have freedom of manoeuvre along with the Iraqi security forces.”
Analysts say Abizaid’s positions, if they can be followed by an agreement on the ground, will allow the United States a face-saving way to prevent a bloody endgame in Fallujah that could easily turn opinions of Iraqis, US allies and Americans against the American occupation.
”We’re better off not making this into some test of wills. The likely result of that is a big urban battle that will do us more strategic harm in the eyes of Iraqis than tactical good,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a military analyst with the Brookings Institution in Washington. ”Any solution is preferable that allows us to claim
some measure of success and not have to take down the entire city.”
Jim Krane has reported from Baghdad for The Associated Press since November. – Sapa-AP