Izzat al-Douri orders Baath Party insurgents to stop fighting

Saddam Hussein's former second in command, now a fugitive with a $10 million bounty on his head, has ordered Baath party bosses still in Iraq to cease attacks, according to government and parliamentary officials who claimed knowledge of the developments.

Four officials in the Iraqi government and parliament, each in a position to hear about largely secret efforts to reach accord with members of the Sunni insurgency, said former Iraqi vice president Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri has ordered Baath party bosses still in Iraq to end attacks within the past two days.

In a major concession to insurgents and the Sunni community Monday, the government agreed to legislation that would reinstate Baathist officials to positions of responsibility. The Baathist officials had been purged from their jobs in the first days of the U.S. occupation.

http://www.wkrc.com/...

Two of the biggest events in Iraq in the past three years have occured back to back making it hard for me not to think these two events are connected.

Yesterday the Shia led Iraqi government got rid of de-Baathification and will allow senior Baath party members to return to their jobs in the Army and in the government. Then today we hear Saddam's right hand man who has run the Baathist insurgency since the end of the war tells the Baathist insurgents to stop attacking the US and the Shia.

Its hard to ever know completely what is going on behind the scenes, but these two events strike me as connected.

•  The Baathist element of the insurgency

  is no longer as significant as it was in 2003. Al Qaida and Shiite militias are the real problems now.

  by Progressive Moderate on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 12:58:32 AM PDT

  •  I agree the biggest killers are al-Qaeda

    and the Madhi Army. But, the Baathists are quite plenty in number and they know exactly were al-Qaeda is and what it has been doing. Thousands of Baathists are about to be allowed back into the Iraqi Army and the Iraqi government. That won't hurt the Madhi Army in the short run, but it will hurt al-Qaeda as they will be fighting lots of guys they had reciently fought with and who have a hell of alot more support of Sunnis then al-Qaeda does.

    by ECH on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:05:36 AM PDT

  •  Don't underestimate the Baath Party role

    Most of the insurgency is homegrown, former government officials have a big role in support and other types of jobs.  This could be huge.  Its a wonder it took so friggin long.

    by slothlax on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:33:33 AM PDT

•  And didn't Saddam himself

  tell Iraqis to shake hands and quit their enmity?  It seems like there's more communication between Saddam and the outside than we would have imagined.

  Any cessation or even decrease in the violence is a good thing.  This is truly a major event.  Keep us posted on further developments.  We've been a bit distracted lately.

  by Bob Love on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:01:11 AM PDT

  •  There is still

    An outside chance he may wind up running the place again.

    And this time he wouldn't even need to be brutal.

    by Demena on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:05:10 AM PDT

    •  Saddam will be dead within three months

      the Baath Party leaders today would rather be the leaders of the Sunni community instead of Saddam anyway.

      by ECH on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:08:06 AM PDT

      •  Ever read "The Prince"?

        Saddam can offer each of them more than they can obtain on their own and he has a lot of experience at doing just that.  He has the skills the US needed and just did not have.

        Not that he is anything but an evil man.  Don't underestimate his competance.

        by Demena on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:57:17 AM PDT

  •  In the near term the violence won't go down much

    Like a poster said above al-Qaeda and the Madhi Army are the main factors driving the killing.

    But, by making a deal with the Baathist insurgency like they have done it will allow the US and the Iraqi Army to concentrate on the bigger problems. It will also bring in alot of well trained professionals and Army officers back into the government.

    The Baathists should have never been our enemy after the war in the first place. Bremer by kicking them all out of their jobs and saying they couldn't come back made them our enemy.

    by ECH on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:14:10 AM PDT

•  We'll see what happens

  This reminds me of the earlier quid pro quo with Zarqawi.

  Also, it shoudl be noted that the offer for de-Baathification being rescinded is only a proposal, not an actual law.

  But I agree - there is clearly a connection between these two events.

  by Ben P on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:18:55 AM PDT

  •  The UIA seems to be supporting it

    at least for now, the Sadrists so far haven't said anything against it.

    by ECH on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:27:45 AM PDT

    •  Also

      I'm not sure how much the Baath Party is really behind the insurgency - at least in any organized sense. I don't think most of those involved really care about the Baath Party's future in Iraqi politiics.

      Obviously, Baathists are in it - but I don't know how central they are to it at all - especially at this point, where the nature of the insurgency has been transformed by events. Things like tribal and urban miltias are very important. Al Qaeda and other Sunni radicals are in the picture.

      Basically, I think the inurgency's major goal is to drive the US out of the country - or at least get from the Iraqi government a commitment to a timetable for the US's departure. From the stuff I've read, this is the goal. Because they assume they will be able to negotiate from a much better position once the US has left.

      by Ben P on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 01:43:07 AM PDT

      •  I agree with you in part

        Clearly much of the insurgency has been taken over by Islamic extremists.

        But, what most Sunnis want at this point is jobs, oil money, and security against being butchered by Shia militias.

        The Iraqi government can provide jobs like they seem to be trying to do with this law and the US needs to pressure them to provide oil money to the Sunnis.

        But, the last step is most important, convicing the Sunnis that they aren't signing their death warrents by disarming their militias. No one wants to be the first to disarm only to find the other isn't going to do the same.

        by ECH on Wed Nov 08, 2006 at 02:03:14 AM PDT