Walling off vulnerable Baghdad neighborhoods is critical to breaking the cycle of revenge killings in Iraq, according to U.S. Army General David Petraeus’ counter-insurgency advisor.
Portable barriers installed between neighborhoods enable U.S. and Iraqi forces to limit the nighttime movements of death squads and insurgents, says Dr. David Kilcullen, a lieutenant colonel in the Australian army reserve who has spent years studying terror groups and methods for defeating them.
“What we’ve tried to do is put in a series of blocks to stop that cycle [of violence] from running, and if it does run, to reduce the number of people killed in attacks” by limiting the scale and frequency of attacks, Kilcullen explains.
He uses the term “gated community” to describe the walled-off neighborhoods. The first to be enclosed was Sunni community of Adhamiyah in April. The decision to wall of a particular area is made by the U.S. battalions on the ground.
Not everyone was thrilled by the Adhamiyah barrier. “This will deepen the sectarian strife and only serve to abort efforts aimed at reconciliation,” a Sunni shop owner told The New York Times.
Noting such objections, Kilcullen stresses that the walls are temporary. He compares them to tourniquets. “It’s something you do when patient is bleeding to death. But you don’t leave it there forever or it causes damage.”
“We had 130 bodies turning up per day in Baghdad due to sectarian violence last year. Now it’s around 20,” he says, adding that the negative psychological effects of the barriers are outweighed by “the negative effects of people getting killed.”
Barriers are only one tactic of the new U.S. approach in Iraq, Kilcullen says. He also cites smaller, dispersed patrol bases, a renewed reconstruction effort and stepped-up air patrols, all intended to “reduce feelings of intimidation” among everyday Iraqis and therefore “create more space for compromise and political reconciliation.”
“It’s a multi-year activity that we’re talking about,” he cautions. “We are going to get there, but it’s not going to look like the United States.”
One of the major remaining obstacles is creating a “single narrative” for Iraq that is embraced by the Iraqi government and its international partners. “We are still in the process of changing form one way of doing business to another. The single narrative the Americans used to pursue was ‘they stand up as we stand down.’ That was not terribly comforting to Iraqis.”
Now the message is that the coalition is focused on creating security, according to Kilcullen. And sometimes, he says, that means building a wall.
– David Axe
This idea of building walls round the worst affected neighbourhoods would be quite effctive if it were truely temporary, but look at our track record on Iraq so far. The presence of coalition forces in the country was only supposed to be temporary and now a further twenty one thousand US troops are on their way, and a “second surge” supposedly in the making which would bring totle troop numbers (combat and support) to over 200,000. If this barrier policy is to be anything like those of troop numbers, then I don’t think we’ll be seeing the back of them any time soon, and it’s at that point that baghdad starts to mirror the west bank.
alas, the tactical purpose of the walls is overshadowed by its’ strategic message.
The U.S. comes off looking to much like historic forces that walled off a Warsaw ghetto, or those that threw up a wall to divide a German city.…
It is a poor practice, one of many other futile tactical efforts used by well meaning ground forces in support of a failed (political) strategy.
I still believe there’s still something in the phrase “Good fences make good neighbors”.
The wall on the West Bank is emblematic of a long standing conflict. Wall or no wall the conflict remains. And frankly I think the wall has been successful in reducing suicide attacks which had had the follow on of reducing Israeli responses to such attacks. This has saved Israeli and Palestinian lives.
Yeah walls in Baghdad may look ugly but folks there don’t need a wall to know it’s an ugly situation already — it’s worth a try.
There is a huge difference between a wall put up with the agreement of the local community, or by their request, and one put up by foreign security forces for their own reasons against the wishes of the locals.
Iraqis might well be asking themselves who is running Iraq — and for whose benefit? The walls might seem benign from our perspective, but ours is not the one that counts.
I’m an ex English squaddie and I need to say that since Op Granby (Desert Shield, Storm & Spear) we have placed too much reliance on air power and not enough focus on boots on the ground. Aeroplanes can rule the skys, but cannot take & hold the ground, they are a useful support. I would question the value of their use in built up areas populated by civilians. This is counter insurgency, which requires winning the hearts and minds — bomb my pub and you’ve just lost my good grace, bomb my family and now I’m angry. Also Co-In ops take time — years in fact, look at Malaya!
I believe that history will one day show that democracy always demands sacrifice and a price. The Iraqi people have lived under that curtain of fear in a dictatorship. It is not an easy transition. If these barriers save lives, that is all that matters. There government has to lean to govern without cleric interference. We need resolve to see it through. Radical Islam is an ideology that needs to be neutralized and eliminated to protect all peoples of this world.
WITH RESPECT TO THOSE TACTICIANS TRYING TO WIN THIS WAR I WOULD ASK IF THE ENEMY IS SO DUMB AS TO STAY IN A WALLED COMPOUND ALLOWING THEMSELVES TO BE SURROUNDED OR WOULD THEY MOVE OPERATIONS TO ANOTHER LOCATION. I WOULD ALSO MENTION HOW THEY EXPECT TO DEFEAT AN ENEMY WITH UNLIMITED MANPOWER WITH UNLIMITED LOGISTICS BEING FURNISHED BY FOREIGN NATIONS WHICH ENJOY IMMUNITY FROM ATTACK AND DESTRUCTION OF SUCH SOURCES OF LOGISTICS. I KNOW JUST ENOUGH ABOUT WAR TO KNOW YOU BRING THE ENEMY TO HIS KNEES BY WHATEVER FORCE IS NEED AND WHERE IT IS NEEDED. THEN THERE IS NO NEED FOR NEGOTIANS, YOU TELL THE ENEMY HOW IT WILL BE. NEGOTIANS ARE FOR THE WEAK TO HOPE FOR AN EASY OUT.
BOB I.
As a former Security Manager in Baghdad & Fallujah, I say keep putting them up. A 2,000 lb. Jersey barrier standing 16 ft. high & tied in with a series of the same barriers via cable is unmoveable. Walling, containment, channelization is all part of the process of weeding out & curtailing the terrorist’s agenda. If the locals have to suffer, ask them if they would rather be dead instead. It is war, NOT landscaping a new neighborhood…lets start treating it in that manner.
Wembley: Don’t you think that those citizens who don’t want the temporary walls just might be members of the death squads whose nightly travels have been hampered by the walls? In Georgia, we rednecks have a saying: “A hit dog will holler”. Wake up and smell the gunpowder, Wembley.
It appears that most of the commentees are sitting in their safe home in whatever country they live. If the MNFI can clear a neighborhood and place a wall with access limited to the residents, the result is the reduction of violence against the residents of the neighborhood. Limited access means that the ISF can manage a checkpoint at the entry and prevent the insurgents from returning to the area. Slowly as areas are secured the MNFI is accomplishing its goal of force the insurgency out of the neighbor where the MNFI/ISF don’t want to fight the insurgency to prevent death or destruction of civilian areas. Slowly the insurgents are being pushed into the less populated areas of the country where the MNFI/ISF can eliminate them.
All this takes time, men and materials. But the MNFI, ISF, & IP are committed to accomplishing the goal of making Iraq more secure for its citizens. One final note there are very few Iraqis who want the MNFI troops to leave the country, they understand the danger of such a departure and can not understand why people in the US are calling for the US government to abandon them before they can get their country secured and a strong security force in place.
If you don’t understand the problem take a job in Iraq for a short time and believe you’ll understand the frustration of those who are here to help Iraq become a free country with a strong central government of the people of Iraqs choosing.
Walls are just fine. Whatever it takes to stop folks from moving place to place without fear of being trapped. However, what is really needed is a public relations plan to the common man and woman in the streets that these insurgents represent a “real threat” to them and their respective families. In Texas, we as citizens would recognize a gang as a threat to everyone, then we would appropriately station sharpshooters on every roof top. When the gang shows their force, BOOM end of problem. The Iraq people need to set aside their religious differences and start thinking about protecting their own personal families from these fanantics and extremely disturbed individuals. We also take care of rabid Mad dogs in the same method.
Phil, your comments make no sense. Let famine, which is totally fixable, kill off thousands, but stop global warming.……duh!
Only those who are there know the benefits of a wall, just like those who live on the border of Mexico. Armchair quarterbacks always resemble a chair, not an athlete. Remember that!
Treat this affair as a war.….get in there, stay in there, and don’t stop till the mission is complete. Does that mean it will be a country like America when we’re finished?.…hell no…but the decent people of that country will be united and won’t stand for anymore of this coercion through terror. They will call a spade a spade and let these sissies know that Iraq and the world thinks they are fakes and dishonorable people. They are not heroes.….just selfish, theatrical children who need to grow up. Once that happens, terrorism will cease.
Anyone who hides their face, their uniform, and trains children to fight for them, has to be the most dishonorable spineless chicken in the entire world. If they knew that a real man was peaceful, proper and prepared.….a protector of all that was good and honorable, someone willing to spend his entire life searching for those things for himself and his family.…then they would see that all they have been told is a lie and would lay down their weapons and come to the table to discuss peace. That is a real man and hero.…no matter what country you’re from.
Walling off selected neighborhoods will probably be effective. If you can create a sense of safety for people, even temporarily, they will be more likely to accept that it can be that way for ever. This, in turn will make them less apprehensive about cooperating with the security forces to identify the bad guys.
Re: Phil, that’s a really great idea. Let’s continue to support the system that has created most of the insurgents and suicide bombers. Take away any hope they might have and give them a clear target to blame for it.
Timbrusky, your boy Dubya didn’t send enough troops in the first place to accomplish that goal of a sniper on every roof and now congress and the grateful American nation didn’t send enough to do it either. Just plugging the holes isn’t enough, we need not only to put up walls but have enough troops to man them.
The only reason 21K are on there way to Iraq is because we won’t take off the “kitten” gloves and consider this a real war.
Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan should pray everyday that it’s a 21st century war and not something out of WWII.
Who would be in the hideouts after 30 days of carpet bombing?
Having been there and done that, I have to agree with the assessment that this is a WAR first and foremost. The walls, though uncomforting to the populace, save lives. That same populace would be SO much unhappier if half of them died due to sectarian violence. Purpose dictates necessity. The US public and all those naysayers of the practices in Iraq thus far need to keep their mouths shut. Children talk, adults DO. Until you have held a dying comrade in the field, wondered if you would ever see your own child again, or endured the changes a war makes on you personally you have nothing of import to say and are merely talking to support your own ego. Those men and women serving and dying to support freedoms, both yours and others, cannot afford your childishness and deserve your QUIET respect and UNFAILING support. They do as they have to do, which may offend some tender sensibilities. Guess what, that is WAR.…..DEAL WITH IT!!! Please remember that!!
Phil (at 0617 hrs) writes that we should leave Iraq and “Let famine, a.k.a. “Darwinism” weed out the sick and weak. Let disease run its course.“
I suppose we could, but the result would be an Islamofascist caliphate with nuclear weapons. Darwinism doesn’t necessarily mean that the good guys will win.
Have you ever heard of ID 10 T? That is this guys name in a nutshell. IDIOT if you still did not get it. His arguement is unfounded. Let the world to itself it will fix itself in the end. What did we fight two world wars over. Remember your history buddy. Isolationism of America created the most horrible wars in history. It is our responsibilty to make sure that never happens again. I have served now for 10 years in the US Army. I am going to finish the other 10 in the US Army. So put up or shut up. Let others do the fighting you are so afraid to do. I have been there, and if you really where an American patriot you would go down to the recruiter and sign up today. Like I said put up or shut up.
If we are going to fight this war,lets do it right and destroy the enemy.
We cannot “win” this insurgency in a conventional way. The days of the Pentomic army and FEBA are over. Our friends of the day are our enemies at night. The enemies of our enemies are our friends, until their allegiances shift (again). There is no possibility of conventional success in a special operations, low intensity conflict which is bordered by time limits in a country where strength is measured by repression, brutality, and intimidation, historically.
Travis,
“Until you have held a dying comrade in the field, wondered if you would ever see your own child again, or endured the changes a war makes on you personally you have nothing of import to say and are merely talking to support your own ego“
So by your standard, GWBush, Dick Cheney, Rummy, and Tony Snow should have nothing to say about this war and we should be listening to Al Gore, John Kerry, John Murtha, Jim Webb and Max Cleland who all fit your criteria.
Grandjester: you have a lot of issues…the big one is the yellow stripe up your back…
Richard,
Couldn’t help but notice, you did not refute my point, merely disparaged me. If you have nothing to contribute, move on. Travis had placed three very specific qualifiers for one to be able to speak about the war. I merely pointed out that those currently in charge of policy do not meet those qualifiers and quite a few in opposition actually do.
Ever changing tactics will be required and have been required in any conflict. Most bloggers including myself will not be prepared to live with the adverse effects of pulling out will have.
Here’s the plan. The Iraqi Govt orders the immediate disarmament of all civilians. Anyone with a weapon after the mandatory turn-in date is jailed. Iraqi squad sized units move into neighborhoods to stay. Warnings are given that all out force will be used to eliminate armed resistance regardless of “collateral” damage. To maintain order, citizens are encouraged to immediately report any insurgent armed activity or arms caches. When soldiers come under fire they withdraw and call in airstrikes and/or artillery barrages to entirely destroy enemy forces and their hideouts. After eradication of enemy forces via the use of firepower, loyal Iraqi forces move to reestablish firm control over the assigned geographic area. We need to save American lives by using Iraqi forces supported by our nations overwealming firepower.
I wonder how namy people in The United States have served their country and how many understand what war is all about.I served 20 long years and dam proud of it. But I would not serve under of the DAM democratics baster and the reason we pulled out Veitnam. Just look what Jimmy Carter done when he let IRAN take our poeple in 1979.
Joe,
Unfortunately, your theory would fail in a most miserable way. The collateral damage is what we are trying to avoid as much as possible. It is the insurgents who want it. The unnecessary damage to buildings and civilians helps to discredit the United States and the current Iraqi government. We are fighting a guerrilla war. Its like using a scalpel against someone with a 40 pound sledge hammer. Mao Tse Tung once said, “Guerrillas never win wars but their enemies often lose them.” This was proven in Viet Nam. This time we are fighting the war in a different method. No longer using conventional warfare against unconventional foes. It will take a long time. It will be bloody. American sons and daughters will die. But we have a social responsibility to remain until we have re stabilized (if you call Saddam stable) the country of Iraq. Whether the decision to stay is unpopular or not it is the right one. A stable Iraq government will also provide some stability to the region. The United States will not stop coming under attack by terrorists. We are the most powerful nation on earth and definately the most visible in international politics. That makes us a target. Everyone needs to get used to a constant state of readiness and, sadly, a steady stream of wounded until someone comes up with a completely remote controlled robot that can replace the US Infantry or Marine.
For anyone who has actually been to the cities in Iraq, knowledge that the homes in them are usually confined behind high walls anyway is common. They consider them a ‘privacy fence’ of sorts, however, they make a nice place for terrorists to hide as well. The idea isn’t new, if you build a wall around your property, those who you don’t want within it will more than likely want to find out what your hiding in there. While those ‘safe’ behind the walls feel trapped and imprisoned.
Walls aside, how many people actually understand the Bedouin mentality and education of the Arabic cultures that habitate Iraq? This is more than religion to them, it’s being part of a tribe. Their culture has been around for thousands of years, perpetuated by familial leaders to this day. An Imam isn’t just a religios figure, he’s your brother or father or cousin, a teacher, your neighbor, your santuary and safety. He’s usually related to the majroity of his ‘flock’ by blood in some way, through marriage or other means of kinship. His power and influence over the members of his clan — and his protection of them — is in the heart of the situation. You are always right if you are backed by your ‘tribe.’ So, what we westerners fail to see, is just a prevalent amongst us — you stand up for your family even when you don’t agree with them. How are they that much different than ‘us’?
Entire families are destroyed, all blood ties connected, and wiped from the face of the planet. A community which has survived for thousands of years with their familial ties so strong, being completely eradicated, gives rise to more terror –and revenge — than any wall could or can. When you are frightend or angry, you either fight or run. The pride of these people will not allow them to run, and their religious leaders feed the fires with dogma and other ‘dog’ stuff, so they fight to survive — and for their individual culture’s survival as well.
We’d like to think it is all about the religious aspect of the infighting. It isn’t, and when someone in power finally realizes that, then perhaps we can find a way for there to be peace. Fortunately, we Americans have spread our seed with such amazing overlapping religious beliefs that this kind of ‘clan’ mentality exists only in remote parts of this country. That said, there are those ‘religious fanatics’ in this country as well, who would as soon see the walls mushroom in the inner-cities across the land.
Our Forefathers knew that mixing religion and politics was a bad idea, that is the root of our constitution and the original argument between England and her colonies. Unfortunately, we’ve put so many narcissistic men in places of extreme power that they’ve all but destroyed the Constitution with their amendments, put the individual states into the role of subservient cows and The People have allowed — and assisted — them in doing so.
Let them put up the walls, if for no other gain than some kind of protection for our troops against the IED’s, rockets, VBIDS and the cell phones used to trigger them. If done correctly, perhaps the Iraqi people will decide that they like the look of LA’s suburbs and plant shrubs instead of bombs. When a ‘cluster’ of ‘bad guys’ is found in one of those walled communities, well, that makes it easier for strategic air strikes with limited collateral damage.
Hindsight will give us all clear vision. What lurks beyond the smoke from explosives could be your friend or your enemy. If he’s on the wrong side of the wall — he’s fair game. Build the walls and Change the ROE for our ground troops, there may be more ‘collateral damage’ but, things will get safer a lot faster — for everyone.
this is much like viet nam vc hit run a no win situation but God keep your hand on our troops
Travis,
I am aware of Gore and Kerry’s records, including Kerry’s post Vietnam comments/actions. You have set a rather impossible standard with: “Still, those “Patriots” who have served, those of unbiased military opinion, those who have the sense to consult miltary officials and not just spout off at the mouth, and those who have not since serving disgraced their own service should be listened to.” Since it requires an immense level of subjectivity on your part as to what exactly is “unbiased” (no such thing imho), Murtha regularly consults current officials but undoubtedly spouts off at the mouth and I would guess that your idea of “disgraced service” would be somewhat different than mine.
Where does that leave us? I don’t know. If only a handful of people may comment, wtf are we all doing here? Dissent and discussion is the American way, even “popular” wars have their detractors, hell at least a third of the Colonials wanted to remain British. Here in the USA anyone can speak their mind right or left, idiot or genius, right or wrong.
WE HAVE REAPED THE RESULTS OF RUMSFELD AND HIS TEAM NOT LISTENING TO JOINT CHEIFS OR COLIN POWELL ABOUT HAVING A EXIT STRATEGY. WALLS ARE NOT THE ANSWER. TAKE ALL THE MOTOR VEHICLES OUT OF BAGHDAD AND MAKE THEM WALK. MAKE THEM FEEL OUR PAIN.
Concur.
test comment
Travis,
I think you are playing a little loose with your “facts”:
#1 So you are not counting Gulf I or Vietnam?
#2 Debatable, Zarquawi has publicly stated he wants us to remain.
#3 Recent polling (while possibly inaccurate due to the situation) indicates they want us gone.
#4 They may think that but it doesn’t make it so. Dix and JFK guys are jerk-offs, no direct connection to Iraq or AQ and no actual capability to pull off what they were spouting off about.
#5 We cannot afford to win at this price apparently, what additional cost would what you call “losing” entail? Our image is blown, worldwide, we have little ability to influence our remaining freinds or intimidate our enemies.
Grandjester,
I have been away from this board for a bit now, but let me address your comments.
HAHAHAHA
You have proven my arguments for me.…CHECK YOUR FACTS.…estimated 378 deaths during Gulf 1—–total, estimated 8–10,000 deaths the first year of Vietnam. Image blown.…tell that to immigration. Thank you for fully supporting the CNN-fed authority reference.