Pessimism 'growing among Iraqis'

For the Bush administration this is called progress.

Poll: Iraqis say Life is Getting Better

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1530762.ece

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

One in four Iraqis has had a family member murdered, says the poll by Opinion Research Business. In Baghdad, the capital, one in four has had a relative kidnapped and one in three said members of their family had fled abroad.

Only 38% of 2,200 Iraqis polled said the situation was better than it was before the 2003 war to remove Saddam Hussein, while 50% said it was worse.

Less than 40% surveyed in 450 places in all 18 of the country's provinces said things were generally good in their lives. In contrast, a similar poll conducted in late 2005 came up with an equivalent figure of 71%.

Only 26% of people said they felt safe in their own neighbourhoods, while more than half said they had sometimes avoided markets or other crowded places, which have been targets for suicide bombers.

Almost nine in 10 of those surveyed said they feared they or a family member could become a victim of violence, while only 5% said they worried "hardly at all" about this. But a majority of respondents said that they did not believe Iraq was in a state of civil war. Mr Bush could also take solace from the finding that only 35% believed foreign troops should leave Iraq now, with a further 63% wanting them to depart after security has improved.

Kurds, who make up 15 to 20 percent of the Iraqi population, describe the fewest problems and express the most optimism about progress in the next year. Shiites, who make up about 60 percent of the population, say they're struggling, but many remain hopeful about Iraq's long-term future. Sunni Arabs, another 15-20 percent of the population, express almost universal desperation, according to the poll.

Conditions in Baghdad are worse than elsewhere for Sunnis and Shiites. Of the 429 Baghdad residents surveyed, no one felt safe in his or her own neighborhood. Everyone interviewed in the capital said he or she often avoided even going outside because of violence.

Beyond Baghdad, the security situation is better, albeit only relatively so. Across the country, Iraqis say the basics of day-to-day living have deteriorated.

ABC, USA Today, and the BBC?

British Leaving Basra to the Mahdi Militia
By Bernhard Zand

Southern Iraq is relatively secure. But the British have not taken advantage of the four years of occupation to develop this bleak region. Now that they are pulling out, the Shiite Mahdi militia are standing by to take over.

The British are beginning to leave Basra. But to what?
When Hussein Ali Kassim left a friend's house a few nights ago in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, the midnight scene was quite unlike what one might expect to see in war-torn Baghdad: Drivers were out and about and fruit sellers plied their sweets beneath street corner lamp posts. There were neither car bombs bursting nor the kind of strictly enforced night-time curfews common in Baghdad.

"The security situation in Basra is good," says Kassim, a local pharmacist. "It's still worse than before the war, but it's improving every month."

That is exactly the conclusion that the British Prime Minister Tony Blair reached this week. On Wednesday, he announced the withdrawal of 1,600 of 7,000 British soldiers stationed in southern Iraq, citing an improved security situation in the town and a drop in murders to 30 in December. Sectarian violence in Basra has fallen "enormously," Blair said.

Compared to the 50 daily murders common in Baghdad, this is indeed an improvement. Reconstruction aid is flowing into the city, and while Iraqis in other parts of the country are battling it out with extremists, Basra's people have been spared the headline-making horrors.

"There is real progress there and we don't want to get in the way of that progress" by staying too long in the country, Blair noted.

Indeed, the situation couldn't be more different in Baghdad. President George W. Bush has begun sending an additional 20,000 troops to the Iraqi capital despite opposition from the US congress.

But does the fact that the British are sending troops home mean "mission accomplished" in southern Iraq? Not really.

Kassim, the pharmacist in Basra, is reluctant to talk candidly about the situation. Why is everything really so quiet in Basra? Who exactly controls the streets?

And who really takes care of imposing order? The police? The British? The Iraqi army? The militias?

"I can't say anything about that at the moment. I'm surrounded by people here. Let's talk about it later," he says.

British fail in Basra
The strategic advantage that the British had from the very beginning was that Basra, unlike other parts of Iraq, boasts a relatively homogeneous population sharing similar religious beliefs. The sectarian wars plaguing the rest of the country never spread here. Shiite-dominated southern Iraq suffered under Saddam, and for this reason, there was less resistance to the presence of foreign troops than was the case in central Iraq.

Added to this, Sunni extremists, al-Qaida in Iraq, and Fedayeen units loyal to the former regime, never gained a foothold in southern Iraq, which meant that Basra was spared the devastating bomb attacks responsible for hundreds of deaths elsewhere in the nation.

The British faced a different set of challenges in their sector, namely to recapture state authority, to mute the influence of Iranian-backed militias, and to focus on fixing war damage inflicted upon this country's poorest region.

Did they succeed? Despite the number of troops deployed here, the answer is no.

Today many parts of the city lack running water. Blackouts are a daily occurrence. Many seriously ill people have to reckon with taking a dangerous journey to Baghdad when they need anything other than aspirin or charcoal pills.

"Before the war we would ask for leukaemia medicine and know that the wait to get it could be long," says an oncologist at Basra's university hospital. "Today, when we make requests, we are pretty certain nothing will arrive."

Even though southern Iraq's oil industry is producing and exporting less oil than it did before for the war, its pumps and pipelines are actually operating at capacity -- aging, damaged valves, and insufficient storage make production increases impossible. There is scant discussion -- on the British side, anyway -- of how this critical economic jewel might one day fuel Iraqi's economic recovery. It would not be unfair to say that the British missed their chance to build a much-needed infrastructure here in this relatively peaceful region where such projects might have been successful.

75 percent of the police are loyal to Sadr
To be sure, the British have neither improved security in the region nor rebuilt a functioning state apparatus independent of Iranian influence. Thus, while the British army officially handed over power to the 10th Division of the Iraqi Army this weekend, locals like Kassim the pharmacist and others are not sure they are up to the task.

The town's police is efficient, albeit dominated by members of the Mahdi, a Shiite militia loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr. According to journalist Ghalid Khazal, 75 percent of the city's police officers follow orders from Sadr headquarters. That number is roughly the same as that mentioned by General Major Hassan Sawadi, the former police chief of Basra, one and a half years ago, when he said. "I estimate that 80 percent of the force's members do not obey my orders."

Tony Blair said that George W. Bush was completely satisfied with British plans to withdraw troops from Iraq. One man, however, is even more pleased by the move, for the British retreat means a gain for his group. Abd al-Karim al Insi, the Basra representative of Shiite ruler Moqtada al-Sadr, sees the departure as affirming an adage popular among Arabs during British colonial exploits in the region 100 years ago: "Nobody knows Mecca better than the people from Mecca."

"Since the invasion, we have pushed for the occupiers to leave Iraq," al Insi said. "Nobody can protect our country better than we can. We welcome this first step in the British withdrawal. Hopefully the Americans will present a timetable soon."

Are there signs of intensified Iranian interference in Iraq?

Is Iran's involvement in Iraq impeding U.S. progress there?
To some degree, experts say. The Bush administration accuses Iran of abetting various groups in Iraq that carry out terrorist attacks against U.S. forces. "Parts of the Iranian government are engaged in activities that have the end result of posing a threat" to U.S. forces, says State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack. But some analysts say the White House is overly focused on Iran when it should focus instead on the insurgency, which is primarily Sunni and abetted by Sunni Arab states. "[T]he place where Americans are dying most frequently, is not in the Shia territories…and they're not by Shia weapons," says Gary G. Sick of Columbia University, in an interview with the Newshour. Others say Iran provides a useful scapegoat, or distraction, for the Bush administration. "If Iran were to go away today, the situation in Iraq would not change dramatically," says Korb