As the battle between Iraqi security forces and Iranian-backed Shia militias raged in the port of Basra over the past week, British troops remained largely on the sidelines. Some 30,000 Iraqi soldiers were sent into the city by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to retake control from the Mahdi army led by Iranian-based firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, but struggled to gain a foothold and defeat the heavily armed militias. Al-Sadr has since declared a temporary ceasefire, and has ordered his men off the streets, but there is no prospect they will lay down their arms, and the militias remain in control of large swathes of Basra. There have been reports of some Iraqi forces either deserting or defecting to the Mahdi side. The fighting has spread to other towns in the south, including Nasariyah and Hilla, as well as to Baghdad, with over 250 people killed across Iraq and several hundred injured.
President Bush described the Iraqi offensive as “a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq.” U.S. forces were involved in a series of raids against al-Sadr’s followers in the capital, and American jets took part in air strikes in support of Iraqi forces in Basra. In contrast, Great Britain, with 4,100 troops stationed at an airbase on the outskirts of the city, chose to stay out of the conflict, with the exception of logistical support and limited artillery shelling of Mahdi Army mortar positions. There are however indications of a rift emerging over tactics among British diplomats and military chiefs.
As the battle for Basra progresses, it will be increasingly difficult for Britain to stay out of the fighting, and with the possibility of a defeat for the Iraqi army, London will be faced with a difficult choice: to accelerate Britain’s departure from southern Iraq, or stand and fight. It is the latter option that is the right strategic choice for Britain to make. Since pulling out of Basra last September, Britain has sent a half-hearted and weak message to terrorist groups operating in the south. That stance must change, and British forces must be given the freedom to actively engage and defeat the enemy.
Downing Street should reverse
earlier plans to withdraw 2,500 British troops from Iraq in the spring, and instead reinforce troop strength around Basra with the addition of at least 2,000 soldiers drawn from bases in Germany (where 15,000 troops are stationed), which would increase Britain’s deployment in Iraq to over 6,000. The U.K. should follow the example of the successful U.S. surge campaign, launched over a year ago with the phased introduction of an additional 30,000 American soldiers in central Iraq. It demonstrated that the West is capable today of fighting and winning a protracted counterinsurgency war against well-armed and highly trained militia groups thousands of miles away in the Middle East.
The three British battle groups
based outside of the city —1st Battalion Scots Guards, with Challenger 2 tanks and Warrior armored vehicles; 1st Battalion the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment; and 1st Battalion the Mercian Regiment — should be deployed inside Basra itself to inflict a decisive blow against the Mahdi Army. The Royal Air Force, with its 18 units in Iraq, should also play an active role in bombing raids against insurgents in and around Basra, alongside their U.S. counterparts.
CONTINUED 1 2 Next > 
