Juan Cole: Violence in Iraq ‘has not subsided.’
Juan Cole: Violence in Iraq ‘has not subsided.’
Appearing on the PBS News Hour last night, University of Michigan professor Juan Cole — who runs the blog Informed Comment — discussed the recent bombings in northern Iraq. Cole explained that such violence “is unstoppable by military means,” and “the only way” to quell it is for there to be political reconciliation between Sunni and Shiite groups. Cole debunked the myth that there has been progress on the security front:
You know, the number of Iraqis killed went up 25 percent in July over June. The number of troops killed in July was twice what it ordinarily has been in July. It depends on how you look at these numbers. There have been fewer big bombings; although, there still are big bombings, but there have been more people killed by sniper fire.
So the violence has not subsided, and the guerrilla resistance in the Sunni Arab regions is still very powerful. And there’s no sign of a political solution to this thing, which is the only real solution to this kind of guerrilla war. So I’m afraid I don’t think, if the report is honest, we’re going to see a lot of progress here.
Watch it:
Transcript:
COLE: Well, this kind of violence is unstoppable by military means. You couldn’t possibly guard all of the small villages in Iraq. There are still big bombs going off in downtown Baghdad. The only way realistically for this violence to end is for the Sunni Arab guerrilla groups that are behind it to be brought into the political process. You have to have something like what happened with the IRA in Britain.
[...]
COLE: Well, I think that we’ve got excellent personnel in Iraq. Ryan Crocker is an experienced ambassador to the region. General David Petraeus is among our best officers, especially on counterterrorism. But the task that they have been given is just insuperable.
You know, the number of Iraqis killed went up 25 percent in July over June. The number of troops killed in July was twice what it ordinarily has been in July. It depends on how you look at these numbers. There have been fewer big bombings; although, there still are big bombings, but there have been more people killed by sniper fire.
So the violence has not subsided, and the guerrilla resistance in the Sunni Arab regions is still very powerful. And there’s no sign of a political solution to this thing, which is the only real solution to this kind of guerrilla war. So I’m afraid I don’t think, if the report is honest, we’re going to see a lot of progress here.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Juan Cole is a voice of reason and an expert in the Middle East. His blog, Informed Comment, has been a consistent source of insight for me as we have slogged through the Iraq fiasco.
I really hope that the majority party in our Congress is listening to him. It is w-a-a-a-a-y past time for us to remove our troops from the impossible position in which GDumbya has put them.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:06 amJuan Cole is a breath of fresh air, especially when compared to the Reich Ministry of Propaganda(Trannie Coulter, Rush Limpdick, et al).
August 16th, 2007 at 11:15 amI think he gives far too much credit to Betrayus, who is obviously a Bush tool, but other than that, he speaks from education, understanding and experience, putting him only about 634.339 lightyears ahead of any of the Conservative-dominated news media whoresor Republican America-haters in the Congress and White House..
August 16th, 2007 at 11:15 amALAAHAA – - – - God
http://www.learnassyrian.com/aramaic/church/church.html
August 16th, 2007 at 11:17 amOh man this guy is awesome.
I’m going to read his book Napoleon’s Egypt as soon as I finish the new John Perkins. I promise!
August 16th, 2007 at 11:18 amOh, hey, it’s Juan C.!!!!!
You’re on TV, Juan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(I know….)
August 16th, 2007 at 11:23 amYou’re on TV, Juan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(I know….)
Comment by Nachos of Justice
Ive always hated suits and ties. ;)
August 16th, 2007 at 11:32 amI think he gives far too much credit to Betrayus, who is obviously a Bush tool, but other than that, he speaks from education, understanding and experience, putting him only about 634.339 lightyears ahead of any of the Conservative-dominated news media whoresor Republican America-haters in the Congress and White House..
Comment by ronjazz
Well, it became very clear when little Dana “Katie Couric” Perino said the report was coming from the WH, not form Betrayus. He is just waiting out his time and hoping for that last star before he retires to the “Land of the Compromised Generals” , which is a growing fraternity under BushCo. Then he will make a pile of petro-dollars as an arms dealer. (Just not too good at inventory control though. Losing 190,000 weapons hurts the profit margin.)
August 16th, 2007 at 11:35 amIf you dig through the numbers you can always find something to say. If the bombings are down then you dig through all the ways people can die and find the one that is up. That is a poor handling of statistics from what I can tell.
According to icasualties.org civilian deaths have dropped dramatically as a whole in Iraq since the surge began. He says there has been a 25% increase in July over June. He is right but have a look at those numbers in context:
Jan 07 – 1802
Feb 07 – 3014
Mar 07 – 2977
Apr 07 – 1821
May 07 – 1980
June 07 – 1345
July 07 – 1690
Does that look like we have taken a step back? He said July deaths were 200% what is normally is in July. Do you know what the toll was in July 06? 1280. That means July 07 should have been over 2500 deaths to make the 200% mark.
Also, his reasoning about the increase of sniper related deaths is like saying car accident deaths are down as a whole but this new seat belt initiative isn’t working because car accident deaths by blunt trauma are up.
I just don’t buy it. Have a look at the numbers and you will see this guy is blowing smoke.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:43 amLater that evening. PBS ran a segment on the sixties titled The Sixties which showed, among other things, people protesting in the streets because of America’s involvement in the Vietnam War. Will it take a reinstatement of the military draft before people today finally take to the streets again to protest against the illegal, corrupt, and immoral policies of this administration?
August 16th, 2007 at 11:46 amHave a look at the numbers and you will see this guy is blowing smoke.
Comment by Matt Dabbs
Yes…things are much better in Iraq. Smoke, that is… Yep.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:49 amHe said July deaths were 200% what is normally is in July. Do you know what the toll was in July 06? 1280. That means July 07 should have been over 2500 deaths to make the 200% mark.
He doesn’t say the number of civilian deaths was twice as high in July. He said the number of soldiers killed was. Don’t know if Mr. Cole has his numbers right but it appears you don’t either.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:49 amWill it take a reinstatement of the military draft before people today finally take to the streets again to protest against the illegal, corrupt, and immoral policies of this administration?
Comment by Erroll — August 16, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Yes.
Until people perceive there is some risk that would affect them personally, they can’t be torn away from their bread and circuses.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:50 amWill it take a reinstatement of the military draft before people today finally take to the streets again to protest against the illegal, corrupt, and immoral policies of this administration?
People do take the streets. They just don’t show it on the corporate media.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:50 am“if the report is honest, ”
Don’t hold your breathe, we’d have an epidemic of purple people.
August 16th, 2007 at 11:58 amIf Bush feels that he is really losing control of the people he will declare martial law and EVEN THE PASTORS will be in on the controlling of the people….
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/160807_quell_dissent.htm
“A whistleblower who was secretly enrolled into the program told us that the feds were clandestinely recruiting religious leaders to help implement Homeland Security directives in anticipation of a a potential bio-terrorist attack, any natural disaster or a nationally declared emergency.”
August 16th, 2007 at 11:58 amI just don’t buy it. Have a look at the numbers and you will see this guy is blowing smoke.
He said “troop deaths” moron.
Also, his reasoning about the increase of sniper related deaths is like saying car accident deaths are down as a whole but this new seat belt initiative isn’t working because car accident deaths by blunt trauma are up.
Right, because we’re only there to stop the bombings, not the sniper fire. Good lord, you’re an idiot. We’re over there to help quell violence. If one type of violence goes down, and another goes up, we’re not doing it right.
Please read and think a little bit before embarrassing yourself again.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:21 pmYes and if you can’t see that from the numbers YOU posted, then you are blind.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:21 pmHe doesn’t say the number of civilian deaths was twice as high in July. He said the number of soldiers killed was. Don’t know if Mr. Cole has his numbers right but it appears you don’t either.
Comment by Empire Burlesque — August 16, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Either way, it doesn’t matter. The success of the surge is not measured in casualties, but in achievement of political goals, which Iraq is getting farther away from reaching:
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark/2007/08/iraqs-emergency.html
August 16th, 2007 at 12:33 pmIt’s no surprise that insurgents go underground when the pressure is put on. Fact is, we can’t sustain that amount of pressure forever.
More to the point, the Iraqi government now on vacation while people die daily is now without Sunni representation. Maliki is losing his grip, and is begging Ahmedinejad for help. No military action can substitute for a political solution, and that prospect has vanished into thin air.
The escalation is nothing but a convenient ruse to make it seem like Bush will be drawing down troops come early 2008. Surely that’s how it’ll be described by the right wing media like CNN and ABC. These media outlets compliantly have begun daily doses of “Two Minutes Hate” for Ahmedinejad, repeated 24/7, despite that most of the insurgency is Iraqi, and most of the small fraction of foreign insurgency is Sunni supported by the Saudis, not Iranian. Those untidy facts are never reported.
DRAFT THE RICH.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:39 pmJaun Cole is an apologist for radical Islam, a rabid Jew-hater and a fraud…
http://sandbox.blog-city.com/commander_of__arabic.htm
http://sandbox.blog-city.com/israeli_plot_against_juan_cole.htm
http://www.slate.com/id/2140947/fr/rss/
August 16th, 2007 at 12:44 pm….and a first rate twit.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:44 pmEither way, it doesn’t matter. The success of the surge is not measured in casualties, but in achievement of political goals, which Iraq is getting farther away from reaching:
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/ abuaardvark/ 2007/ 08/ iraqs-emergency.html
Comment by toasterhead — August 16, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
No. The success of the surge is measured by the progress that has been made in securing various regions in Iraq, so that the Iraqis could deal with politics (and by the way, the fact that the Separatist Sunni bloc quit, is a good sign because they were obviously not team players). If the Coalition wanted to establish a permenant government in Iraq no matter what the cost, it would already be so. But we are not Imperialists, we are giving the Iraqis the opportunity that they need, and so far the surge has been an overwhelming success.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:44 pmWhen Saddam was toppled, there were 500 MILLION TONS of explosives left unattended in Iraq. Looters had a field day, and most of the IED’s and truck bombs now contain this deadly material. A couple years ago, an Iraqi could get $100 for placing a successfull IED….now the going rate is about $40.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:46 pmMillitary leaders refer to the target of this carnage as DABing. Driving around Baghdad. Our troop have turned off their somewhat successfull jamming devices, because they were interfereing with their own communications devices. The militaries best strategy to avoid IED’s…..Foot patrols.
This inexpensive and deadly answer to our $ 400 million a year Military is spreading throughout the Middle East and other Muslim countries.
“and so far the surge has been an overwhelming success.
Comment by dumplings — August 16, 2007 @ 12:44 pm”
Please pass that pipe your smoking, because that has to be some GOOD $hit maynard….
August 16th, 2007 at 12:47 pmI like it:
DRAFT THE RICH.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:47 pmComment by dumplings — August 16, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
#
Note to you: one of the main operations we have been running in Iraq for some time now is a push to re-integrate Sunnis and former Ba’athists back into the Iraqi government. An all Shia government would be a tremendous ally for Iran. The reasons the Sunnis left was because their cries for extra security and equal oil rights fell on deaf ears. They felt they were not represented in the Iraqi government.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:52 pmPlease pass that pipe your smoking, because that has to be some GOOD $hit maynard….
Comment by RemoveBush — August 16, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Perhaps if someone had “passed the dutchie” to the “right” hand side some of our current problems could have been avoided
August 16th, 2007 at 12:53 pmTHE STATED purpose of the surge was to ‘buy time’ for the Iraqi gummint to get it together.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:55 pmThat isn’t, hasn’t, ain’t gonna happen.
So the surge, despite some limited military temporary security improvements, can’t possibly succeed in anything but the very short term.
It won’t last long enough for the Iraqi gummint to find cohesion, cause that won’t happen until the year 2183.
No. The success of the surge is measured by the progress that has been made in securing various regions in Iraq, so that the Iraqis could deal with politics
Really? Cause the White House sees things differently. They include political benchmarks in their progress report on the surge: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070712.html
(and by the way, the fact that the Separatist Sunni bloc quit, is a good sign because they were obviously not team players).
Ah, yes. It’s much better to have 1/3 of the country not represented. What part of democracy do you hate, exactly?
If the Coalition wanted to establish a permenant government in Iraq no matter what the cost, it would already be so. But we are not Imperialists, we are giving the Iraqis the opportunity that they need, and so far the surge has been an overwhelming success.
Comment by dumplings — August 16, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
You mean they’d have a stable government if we’d killed 2 million Iraqis instead of just 1 million?
And we are Imperialists. We wouldn’t be in Iraq if we weren’t. In fact, there wouldn’t BE an Iraq if we weren’t.
August 16th, 2007 at 12:58 pmComment by dumplings — August 16, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
#
Note to you: one of the main operations we have been running in Iraq for some time now is a push to re-integrate Sunnis and former Ba’athists back into the Iraqi government. An all Shia government would be a tremendous ally for Iran. The reasons the Sunnis left was because their cries for extra security and equal oil rights fell on deaf ears. They felt they were not represented in the Iraqi government.
Comment by Chris L — August 16, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
I read that the Sunnis gave al-Maliki an ultimatum, demanding that prisoners be set free and that security groups be disbanded in certain areas.
As for the oil problem, it seems that everyone wants it all, and that is another huge problem. However, I don’t think it was related to the walk out.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:05 pmThroughout the Surge, Shiite Militias have been ethnically cleansing Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad. Under the watchfull eyes of the Iraqi Police and Army, the Shiites have been forcing Sunni families out of their homes, and replacing them with shiite families.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:13 pmIt’s not surprising that the Sunnis have walked out of the Govt.
Really? Cause the White House sees things differently. They include political benchmarks in their progress report on the surge: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/ releases/ 2007/ 07/ 20070712.html
But the political benchmarks lie on the shoulders of the Iraqis. The surge was to provide them the opportunity to work with each other.
Ah, yes. It’s much better to have 1/3 of the country not represented. What part of democracy do you hate, exactly?
This does not mean the reconciliation process must stop. Now maybe some Sunnis who are serious about working with their fellow Iraqis will step up. You know, even elected officials can be bad leaders, I say good riddance!
In fact, there wouldn’t BE an Iraq if we weren’t.
Comment by toasterhead — August 16, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
Hey, buddy! It’s 2007!
August 16th, 2007 at 1:15 pmJuan Cole is THE expert on these issues.
Y’all piss-soaked trolls don’t have to like it.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:19 pmJuan Cole is THE expert on these issues.
Y’all piss-soaked trolls don’t have to like it.
Comment by Zooey — August 16, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Enlightening.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:21 pm“THE STATED purpose of the surge was to ‘buy time’ for the Iraqi gummint to get it together.”
“THE STATED purpose of the Iraq war was to ‘prevent’ the smoking gun being a mushroom cloud.”
Funny in a sick kind of way how neither was/is/will be TRUE!
August 16th, 2007 at 1:28 pmEnlightening.
Comment by dumplings — August 16, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
Thank you.
August 16th, 2007 at 1:49 pmI like how everyone is calling me an idiot. Posting is an agreement to stay away from such remarks through the Terms of Use. Stick to the facts. He did say troop deaths. I did miss that. That was a mistake, not a statement by an idiot.
Let’s get back to the numbers rather than to names. Civilian deaths are DOWN. Military deaths are up. Maybe some people don’t know what a SURGE is. That means there is increased fighting which means a higher probability of deaths as more troops are present and in harms way. Unfortunate. But it also resulted in the least civilian casualties in one month since July 2006. Some of you kick and scream because Iraqi civilians are dying and call it failure. When the death toll slows down you say we are doing worse. Which is it?
August 16th, 2007 at 3:51 pmAnd one more thing to put the post in perspective. Cole said civilian deaths were up by 25% in July over June. Stating it as a percentage is a little misleading considering that both months were the lowest it had been in a year.
August 16th, 2007 at 3:56 pmwow- so there is violence in the middle east- is this news as it has been happening for yrs, but there is also violence here in every town in the US, drug and alcohol inducted motor vehicle accidents, suicides, blah blah blah. One ? for you, if there was no civil war, would we still have slavery?
August 16th, 2007 at 4:48 pmtating it as a percentage is a little misleading considering that both months were the lowest it had been in a year.
Actually, that’s not true. January, February, and March all had lower death totals (for troops) than June, and roughly even with July. But that’s not what’s important. What’s important is how those months compare to the prior year. See, there are these things called seasons. One of them is summer, when it’s really really hot. Deaths tend to decrease in the summer months. But interestingly enough, both June and July ‘07 had almost double the number of troop deaths than June and July ‘06.
Yessir, that’s real progress. And yes, you’re still an idiot.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:12 pmCole is right, political progress is key here and it hasn’t happened. No matter how many troops are sent into this civil war as part of the surge no political progress will be made. The surge is a flawed idea that’s why the Joint Chiefs of Staff didn’t support it. Our presence in Iraq is used as a recruiting tool by the insurgents. Getting out will reduce the violence.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:41 pmSeitz,
You are absolutely incorrect. Apples and oranges. I am talking civilians and you are talking military. You are making the same mistake I made in my first post. So if I am an idiot, I guess I am in good company with you.
What you said about seasons is 100% correct and I appreciate you pointing that out.
So how do you define success? Do you expect to send in thousands of extra troops and get a lot done with fewer deaths? The surge is about increasing the conflict so it should come as no surprise that there are increased military deaths. A surge in force will result in an increase in military deaths. That is a no brainer.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:33 pmI like it:
DRAFT THE RICH.
Comment by wake-n-bake
August 16th, 2007 at 10:24 pmI agree , then we can send the hollyweird types so we dont have to hear form them anymore
The surge is about increasing the conflict so it should come as no surprise that there are increased military deaths.
No, it’s about increasing security. When you put a lot more cops on the street, you don’t do it so that you can increase crime. It’s about their presence increasing the level of security.
What we’ve done is simply increase the number of targets.
And you’re still an idiot.
August 17th, 2007 at 10:30 amWell, D U H !
August 18th, 2007 at 4:41 pmThere is no reliable way to measure civilian deaths in Iraq. All that’s certain is there are way too many, and that the dead are not going to enjoy the freedom Bush is supposedly bringing them.
In Baghdad civilian down, solely because the insurgents have been successful in their ethnic cleansing. When we stifle the insurgency on one region, it reappears somewhere else. And sometimes violence just dies down as insurgents re-group and re-think their strategies. Lulls are not always related to American activity. Their timetables are not our timetables, and there is no way to end the insurgency with more soldiers, more weapons, and more testosterone. Juan Cole’s main point is that “there’s no sign of a political solution to this thing, which is the only real solution to this kind of guerrilla war.†I don’t see any way to refute this.
September 10th, 2007 at 1:25 pm