↓
 
Home » RIP Donald Rumsfeld

RIP Donald Rumsfeld

The New Neo Posted on by

Rumsfeld died on June 29 at the age of 88.

It seems like a long time ago that he was a mover and shaker on the world stage.

A portrait of Rumsfeld by someone who knew him well:

That’s the way he saw the world—he and Joyce blessed by providence and a wonderful country. From his days as a young aviator in the United States Navy, he spent the majority of his adult life serving that country. When Rumsfeld left government in 2006, he took all the weight of the Bush administration’s failure in Iraq onto his shoulders and bore it into exile. Though he offered some defense of his actions, he also protected colleagues by refusing to reveal in his books some of the more damning information he knew that could have justified some of his decisions. He refused many opportunities to make a McNamara-esque apology for Iraq that would make him look good or to fault President Bush or others for the decisions he took part in. Instead he lived his life—writing bestselling memoirs, spending time out West, helping others where he could, trying to make the world a better place without bitterness or rancor.

And that’s what most every obituary or essay on Rumsfeld you will read in the wake of his death will get wrong. They’ll tell you the story of the ferocious, take-no-prisoners Washington operator whose headstrong tactics got us into an unwinnable war. The great irony is that in the end, this supposedly ruthless political animal didn’t play the game that many others played against him.

Here’s one of his most memorable sayings:

I was surprised that this statement was widely mocked at the time. My guess is that it was mocked by people who think they know what they don’t know.

Comments

RIP Donald Rumsfeld — 57 Comments

  1. I was sad to see it reported elsewhere that really vile statements have come from some Cretins on the Left. I am heartened to think that Rumsfeld really would not give a damn.

    I greatly admired the man. I thought he was brilliant, strong, and a magnificent servant to the Republic. He also had an eclectic sense of humor, that often baffled his detractors.

    I am thoroughly convinced that if President Bush had followed his counsel after the defeat of Saddam, rather than that of the feckless Colin Powell, and his State Department alter-ego, Richard Armitage. our history in Iraq would have been much different. To review, small foot print and early transfer of government to Iraqi ex-Pats who were prepared to govern.

    I have always cherished that we had similar roots, with notable exceptions. Both were Naval Aviators, but he had an Ivy League education and boundless energy, whereas I was a college drop out. That may have portended that he would go on to an unparalleled post-Navy career; while on the other hand…
    Rest in Peace you good and faithful servant.

  3. His quote left out “The things we know that just aren’t true”.

    A lot of us have forgotten this last category over the years.

  4. The reason why Rumsfeld’s “known unknowns” comment was widely mocked and deservedly so isn’t that people didn’t understand what he meant (though many likely did not). It was because he wasn’t saying it as a philosophy professor addressing a class of freshmen. He was the Secretary of Defense being asked bout the lack of evidence linking Iraq to supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups. And his response to a legitimate question about the life and death of nations and a great many people was a bit of sophistry with which he was obviously quite pleased.

    Donald Rumsfeld wasn’t a monster. He doesn’t deserve to bear all the blame for the Iraq War or for the rest of his life to be obviated by it. But, to use the example from the obit quoted by Neo, Rumsfeld didn’t need to write a book apologizing for Iraq to make himself look good or shift the blame to others. He needed to write a book that was honest about the mistakes and errors and arrogance of the Iraq War BECAUSE HIS FELLOW CITIZENS NEEDED IT.

    Mike

  5. Bunge resorts to all caps. Because Bunge knows all that should have and must be done.

    BDS in Bunge raises it’s countenance again.

    Obey the Bunge, cretins.

    “He doesn’t deserve to bear all the blame for the Iraq War or for the rest of his life to be obviated by it.” – He’s dead Jim.

  6. I’ve always been proud of Rumsfeld. I knew him slightly when we were both in Pensacola. He was an impressive guy even then. I thought he might go right to the top in the Navy. But he took a different route. I was surprised to read in the late 60s that he had become a member of the Nixon administration. He had gone into politics, not stayed in the Navy.

    He was a former wrestler. If you have known many wrestlers, you know that generally they are fierce competitors. And Rumsfeld was that. But he had a formidable intellect to go along with it. As well as a great sense of humor. He served our nation well in a variety of positions, but his two stints as SecDef are the most notable.

    His was a life well lived, and a grateful nation (at least the Republican side of it) mourns his passing. Condolences to his family and may he RIP.

  8. MBunge:

    I don’t recall most people being anywhere near that sophisticated in their responses. It seemed that most of them thought he’d made a nonsensical statement.

  9. Bunge; If you do thorough research on the subject you will soon know that Rumsfeld could not write a book about the mistakes of Iraq without pointing the finger directly at the two I mentioned. Why getting into a Peeing contest with a cult figure? Black Secretary of State, etc.

    As far as Rumsfeld’s quote not being understood, that is foolish. Any sensible person could divine his meaning. And, he was not ducking a question, he was stating facts. We had clear evidence that Saddam had used bio and chemical weapons. We did not know the extent of his capability. Nor was it Rumsfeld’s responsibility to make that determination. We have a generously funded, vaunted intelligence community. Rumsfeld’s responsibility was to provide the Field Commanders the wherewithal to defeat Saddam when the President so ordered. He did that.

    Moreover, as I recall and perhaps you do not, it was Colin Powell who went to the UN and made the case against Saddam.

  10. It seemed that most of them thought he’d made a nonsensical statement. –neo

    There was also much partisan spin on the ball.

    If Obama had said the same, I’m sure the usual suspects would have been seized with rapture over the Messiah’s intelligence and wisdom.

    One may disagree with Rumsfeld, but still grant he was a smart, effective guy. I was impressed with him.

  11. There were WMD in Iraq, past, precursors, and in progress. However, that was only one of several probable causes cited to end the war in Iraq. It is indeed unfortunate that Bush Sr. stopped at the border, did not bring Hussein to justice, and left an opening for our allies to suffer retributive change over 8 years, and our soldiers to regret investment of their blood and welfare. Rumsfeld was right. RIP

  12. huxley:

    I agree that if Obama had said it, it would have been considered mind-bogglingly brilliant.

  13. Like neo, I was surprised Rummy was mocked for that saying. I thought it was a great insight and very wise.

    What *exactly* was liberals objection to what he said?

    I agree with Scott Adams. With liberals and conservatives, it is two movies on one screen.

    I, too, was a great admirer of Rumsfeld. I loved how he carved up the Fake News during his press conferences.

    I also loved Rumsfeld’s Rules.

  14. spending time out West, helping others where he could, trying to make the world a better place without bitterness or rancor.

    What ever done during his time but the outcome we are living in not “the world a better place without bitterness or rancor”

    However I don’t think he was the main key to be blamed for what went wrong in Iraq, there are many others who may to be blamed rather him even Bush. In the end I think people of Iraq hold 50% of their chose and nastiness happing in their yard till now.

  15. What ever done during his time but the outcome we are living in not “the world a better place without bitterness or rancor”

    dh:

    Seems like a case of the floating antecedent to a prepositional phrase. I read it as:

    …trying to make, without bitterness or rancor, the world a better place.

    I loved the way Rumsfeld could wade into a hostile press conference and make the journos look like fools. Maybe the jeers over “unknown unknowns” was an attempt at payback. The man could think on his feet.

  16. Rumsfeld was the worst secretary of defense in American history. Being newly dead shouldn’t spare him this distinction. He was worse than the closest contender, Robert McNamara, and that is not a competition to judge lightly. McNamara’s folly was that of a whole generation of Cold Warriors who believed that Indochina was a vital front in the struggle against communism. His growing realization that the Vietnam War was an unwinnable waste made him more insightful than some of his peers; his decision to keep this realization from the American public made him an unforgivable coward. But Rumsfeld was the chief advocate of every disaster in the years after September 11. Wherever the United States government contemplated a wrong turn, Rumsfeld was there first with his hard smile—squinting, mocking the cautious, shoving his country deeper into a hole. His fatal judgment was equaled only by his absolute self-assurance. He lacked the courage to doubt himself. He lacked the wisdom to change his mind.

    How Rumsfeld Deserves to Be Remembered

  17. oldflyer,

    Well said indeed.

    MBunge,

    “He needed to write a book that was honest about the mistakes and errors and arrogance of the Iraq War”

    In order to do that, he’d have had to admit that the Bush administration’s main rationale for invading Iraq was never that Saddam was in pursuit of nuclear WMDs.

    That was a convenient claim to offer, especially as prior to Powell’s presentation at the U.N. every major democrat politician was on record as stating with certainty that Saddam was in pursuit of WMDs. Thus, almost everyone in the West already believed that Saddam was in pursuit of nuclear weapons capability.

    The Bush administration clearly believed that its actual rationale for invading Iraq was too complicated and thus too difficult to sell to the world.

    The invasion of Iraq was part of a larger strategy to attack the logistical support for terrorism. Terrorist network’s consist of three elements; the actual terrorist networks, the rogue nations that provide refuge and direct support and the enabling nations that protect the rogue nations from direct reprisal by blocking effective consensus in the UN.

    “Rogue states never turn out to be quite the pariahs they are deemed. They are only able to cause, or at least threaten to cause, mayhem because they enjoy the covert support – usually by means of technology transfers – of one or more major powers within the charmed circle of global ‘good guys’.” Margaret Thatcher

    When Bush gave his speech at the UN where he stated that nations were “either with us or against us” he was throwing down a gauntlet. Directly implying that the old game was over and that henceforth enabling nations would be seen as our enemy.

    The left’s criticism in Congress and the media revealed Bush’s lack of moral courage and he backed away from that stand. That undermined the message that the invasion of Iraq was intended to convey; rogue nations would no longer have protection from the US military regardless of their support in the UN. Consequences only provide deterrence when they are actually applied. So for instance Pakistan paid no price for its support for the Taliban and al Qaeda. And Qatar paid no price for its financial support for terrorism.

    Wherein Bush and his neocon supporters fundamentally erred was in its embrace of the false premise that democracy could be grafted upon societies where individual freedom is considered an anathema. They believed that humanity’s aspiration for self-determination superseded cultural imperatives. At the time I shared that illusion. Bush’s failure to acknowledge that lesson speaks to a lack of character.

    “It is indeed unfortunate that Bush Sr. stopped at the border…” n.n.

    He had to stop, as he had gathered the “Coalition of the Gulf War … Nations Security Council Resolution 678, a coalition of 35 countries, led by the United States” by repeatedly assuring the Saudis and other countries that his only goal was to drive Saddam out of Kuwait.

    The Saudis were critical to staging our troops and were very reluctant to grant the US Military access to their base(s). More than a few Saudis feared that America would seize the Saudi oil fields and that attacking Saddam was a way to accomplish America’s ‘real’ goal. Had Bush Sr. violated his sworn oath to the Saudis he would have lost all credibility in their eyes and the Coalition would have fallen apart. Bush Sr was thinking long term and had no premonition that al Qaeda would successfully attack America. Leading the son and neocons to come up with a flawed strategy in response. In fairness, the left bears its full share of responsibility for sabotaging that flawed strategy.

  18. “It is indeed unfortunate that Bush Sr. stopped at the border>..” n.n

    Geoffrey Britain
    According at that time VOA radio station broadcasted report about Iraq and why “Bush Sr. stopped at the border”
    In that report they side according to TEN men who went inside Iraq early stage of that war spending time in southern Iraqi cities, went back to Washington and gave their advise to president to stope at the border…..

  19. I find Rumsfeld’s statement to be perfectly clear. Those who mock it and claim it to be nonsensical are filtering it through their feelings of animosity for Rumsfeld. Demonizing opponents makes for fools.

    “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish!” Euripides, 480 – c. 406 BC

    “His quote left out “The things we know that just aren’t true”.” Fubar.N.Wass

    That’s the area where reality gets us every time.

  20. dh,

    Given that prior to the US Military and Coalition’s attack upon Saddam’s forces in Kuwait, Bush Sr. was repeatedly quoted in the media as having repeatedly assured all concerned that the goal of the US and Coalition members was only to free Kuwait from Iraqi occupation… I find that assertion to be highly problematic. I also remember Bush being strongly criticized for not ‘finishing the job’ and him publicly repeating that his and the Coalition’s goal was only to stop Saddam’s aggression.

  21. He should have trashed Cheney for disbanding the Iraqi Army behind the backs of Bush and Blair and Rumsfeld , all dictated by the Iranian spy Chalabi..
    It should have been a quick surgical strike with rapid withdrawal , but no 5000 dead Americans and countless amputees.

  22. How Rumsfeld Deserves to Be Remembered

    Rumsfeld doesn’t come close to the duplicitous McNamarsa who ran the war room in Chappaquidick.
    The only viable politician in South Vietnam was Diem, and he was secretly negotiating , via DeGaulle,with Ho to establish an independent neutral Vietnam , but he and JFK arranged a coup that killed Diem ( with no viable successor) that led to a corrupt unpopular musical chair government that needed the US to fight the war for them.

  26. Geoffrey Britain
    Bush Sr. was repeatedly quoted in the media as having repeatedly assured all concerned that the goal of the US and Coalition members was only to free Kuwait from Iraqi occupation…

    General Clark on the Iraq Invasion | American War Generals and here

    Retired U.S. General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned, Seven Countries In Five Years

  28. “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” – Donald Rumsfeld.

    “It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.” – Ronald Reagan.

    “It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So” – Mark Twain? Josh Billings? Artemus Ward? Kin Hubbard? Will Rogers? Anonymous?

    https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/11/18/know-trouble/

    I’ve always been intrigued by the fourth quadrant: the unknown knowns.
    Things we don’t know that we know, because somehow they aren’t “jogged” by the subject at hand.
    I run into that situation often, when someone else makes a pertinent observation, and I realize I could have done the same if I had only connected the dots better.

  29. Col. Andrew Bacevich – featured on Democracynow.org and PBS. Otay, buckwheat.

    Gen. Wesley Clark – ran for POTUS as a Democrat at one time. Otay, buckwheat.

    Where are Lt. Col. Vindman or Gen. Miley (sic, but I don’t really care)?

  31. Subsequently, ex-President Chirac confirmed the nutty event in a long interview with French journalist Jean-Claude Maurice, who tells the tale in his new book, “Si Vous le Repetez, Je Dementirai” (“If You Repeat it, I Will Deny”), released in March by the publisher Plon.

    Jean-Claude Maurice “If You Repeat it, I Will Deny”
    Bush’s comments

  33. “He Was a Disaster”: Ret. Col. Andrew Bacevich

    My suggestion in re Bacevich is that you have a look at every working paper and article with his name on it issued since 1987, and see how his predictions have panned out.

  34. Avi, I have no idea what your sources are.
    My firm understanding is that Rumsfeld’s position was to eliminate Saddam, and withdraw quickly. Given the relationship between them, I assume that Cheney agreed. One aspect of the invasion plan that supports that view, is the way the campaign itself was conducted. You may recall that “informed critics” predicted failure because the invasion force was so light. In other words, it was not designed for a lengthy occupation.

    Unfortunately, Bush went with the Colin Powell model. After all, SecDef manages war, and SecState manages peace. Powell, apparently listened to Armitage (whose nefarious role in the Scooter Libby case is well documented). The Paul Bremer debacle ensued. Bremer was Armitage’s creature.

    Powell, and his lackeys, conducted a massive campaign to discredit Chalabi, the Ex-Pat who would have likely formed the government under the Rumsfeld scheme. I noted that Wiki paints Chalabi as a master villain. I have no idea what the truth is about him. Recent history has demonstrated how effectively our Intelligence Community, and the Media, can spin their distorted version of truth. One thing we do know is that the CIA and Powell needed a scapegoat to explain the WMD mess. “Chalabi tricked us all.” became the narrative.

    We will never know how things might have differed if the Rumsfeld (and Cheney?) ideas had been implemented.
    .

  35. Re-litigating the Iraq War is, I suppose, inevitable given the division of opinions about it. The war itself was legal and went extremely well. See Jeane Kirkpatrick’s analysis in her book, :”Making War to Keep Peace : Trials and Errors in American Foreign Policy from Kuwait to Baghdad.”

    It was the peace/occupation tat was botched, as oldflyer points out. There are many opinions as to what would have worked to help Iraq become a Muslim democracy in the Turkish model. Well, it’s water under the bridge now. Iraq is now essentially a satellite of Iran, along with Syria and Lebanon. We have to play he hand we are holding now. And the way forward, considering that Biden is cozying up to Iran, is not clear.

    IMO, Rumsfeld did the best he could given the circumstances of such a divided country and an administration with competing opinions. At this time my wish is only to empathize with Rumsfeld’s family and say nice things about a man who served his country to the best of his ability.

  37. Bremer was Armitage’s creature.

    He wasn’t. Bremer was a protégé of Henry Kissinger’s. He was a career FSO who left the service in middle age to take a position in Kissinger’s consulting business. He later worked for a different consulting business. Prior to 2004, he’d never worked for Armitage.

  38. We stayed in Iraq because it was seen as necessary to the goal of ‘grafting’ democracy onto the Middle East.

    Iraq was seen as a fairly secular society having been under the domination of the communist Batthist party for decades. Making it the best candidate for introducing democracy into the M.E.

    That strategy was based upon a plausible but false premise: that a uiversal desire for self-determination supersedes cultural imperatives.

    As for General Clark, I’ve never seen anything that has led me to reevaluate my opinion of him. He’s a weasel, a political animal that threw himself in support of the left. Another Gen. Milley.

  39. We stayed in Iraq because it was seen as necessary to the goal of ‘grafting’ democracy onto the Middle East.

    Functional parliamentary institutions would be helpful, but the main object was re-establishing order in Iraq.

    Iraq was seen as a fairly secular society having been under the domination of the communist Batthist party for decades. Making it the best candidate for introducing democracy into the M.E.

    The Ba’ath Party is more properly described as a fascist movement. Iraq from its founding in 1920 had never had an islamist government, in which respect it was like nearly every other Arab country, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, and Libya excepted.

    I’m fascinated to know who it was who thought Iraq was ‘the best candidate’ for parliamentary government. Wm. Kristol of all people, interviewed on NPR in 2003, offered he thought political life in Iraq going forward would be tense. As it happens, Morocco, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Turkey all had a history with parliamentary institutions and all had such institutions in place in 2003, so you wouldn’t be ‘introducing’ anything in Iraq. Apart from these, you had Tunisia, a relatively affluent Arab country with out much in the way of ethnic or confessional fissures. And, as it happens, Tunisia is the one success story attributable to the Arab Spring 10 years ago.

  40. Art+Deco, you are very sure of your opinions and have a good head for research. However, when you make an assertion like “It isn’t” referring to my assertion that Iran has greater influence in Iraq than any other country at this time, it would be helpful if you would provide more detail. I’m persuadable that my opinion is wrong, if given a few facts. Otherwise your comment just seems like sour grapes from the peanut gallery.

  42. Geoffrey Britain
    We stayed in Iraq because it was seen as necessary to the goal of ‘grafting’ democracy onto the Middle East.

    I think that the goal they initially came to believe. but what happen aftermath was disastrous outcome.
    1- Counting on “wrong” guys (Iranian Proxy)of course Iranian been very aware of flourishing democracy in neighbouring country, in addition they hold in their mind that Iraq is their backyard and they never sacrifice this opportunity to have it in.

    2- Most Arab neighbours (Jordan, Saudi, Kuwaitis and UEA) all were not happy inside to see Iraq as democratic country going forward that time Iraq were more developed and secular society which is far forward from its neighbours in many things.

    3- The Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse blow every chance to have US as friend and lost hearts and mind of Iraqi as it was very big and all those countries well perceived for marketing for them that US democracy project for Iraq by US looking bad (US fed the beasts ).

    4 Bremer dismantling the Iraqi military., security, police and other regime apparatus open the doors for the chose that follow. I do not know why US not follow same path after WWII in Germany and Japan…..

  43. referring to my assertion that Iran has greater influence in Iraq than any other country at this time,

    That wasn’t your assertion. Your actual assertion is in cold print north of here.

    As far as I can glean from Direction-of-Trade data, the sum of Iraq’s exports and imports in 2019 amounted to $122 bn, of which 0.25% crossed the Iran-Iraq border.

    Political parties favorable to Iran have about 30% of the seats in the Iraqi legislature.

  44. Art+Deco on July 2, 2021 at 2:21 pm said:
    The Ba’ath Party is more properly described as a fascist movement. Iraq from its founding in 1920?

    Just to correct you with this matter. its was around 1951-1952 time not 1920!

    Fuad al-Rikabi founded the Iraqi Regional Branch in 1951 or 1952. There are those who trace the branch’s founding to Abd ar Rahman ad Damin and Abd al Khaliq al Khudayri in 1947, after their return from the 1st National Congress, which was held in Syria. Another version is that the branch was established in 1948 by Rikabi and Sa’dun Hamadi, a Shia Muslim. However, Efraim Karsh and Inari Rautsi contend that the Regional Branch was established in the 1940s, but that it received official recognition

    Wikipedia

  45. Most Arab neighbours (Jordan, Saudi, Kuwaitis and UEA) all were not happy inside to see Iraq as democratic country going forward that time Iraq were more developed and secular society which is far forward from its neighbours in many things.

    Whether they were happy or not, electoral politics has been consistently practiced in Kuwait and Jordan for 30 years. All four countries are more affluent than Iraq (even when you bracket out fuel and mineral exports), have higher life expectancy at birth, and have higher literacy rates.

  46. Just to correct you with this matter. its was around 1951-1952 time not 1920!

    I never contended the Ba’ath Party was founded in 1920. Iraq as a political unit was assembled in 1920 from three Ottoman provinces.

  47. Art Deco plays this game often; his “It isn’t.” can’t be questioned as unsupported, but when J.J. clarifies his statement Art falls back on the

    “That wasn’t your assertion. Your actual assertion is in cold print north of here.”

    Domestic fowl excreta.

    What exactly is the temperature of print or pixels Art? Give the temperature distribution statistics and the calibration data for your intertube thermocouples.

  48. Domestic fowl excreta.

    His actual assertion is there for you to read and I quoted it verbatim in italics.

  50. Art+Deco
    Read the history will tell better

    It then assessed how the numbers changed in following decades as the continents were ravaged by introduced disease (smallpox, measles, etc), warfare, slavery and societal collapse.

    It’s the UCL group’s estimate that 60 million people were living across the Americas at the end of the 15th Century (about 10% of the world’s total population), and that this was reduced to just five or six million within a hundred years.

    The scientists calculated how much land previously cultivated by indigenous civilisations would have fallen into disuse, and what the impact would be if this ground was then repossessed by forest and savannah.

    The area is in the order of 56 million hectares, close in size to a country like modern France.

    What does the study show

    What about Native Americans?

  51. I haven’t a clue as to why you’re asking me these off-topic questions. I gather English isn’t your 1st language.

  52. Art Deco falls back into the domestic fowl excreta mode, a bug, not a feature.

    Is dh parroting the CCP line that Anglo Saxons are predisposed genetically for genocide? Not that the soldiers of the USSR could be considered Anglo Saxons by any stretch.

  53. I gather English isn’t your 1st language.

    haha, read don’t put your blame, all in your native language have nothing to do with me….

  54. The Ba’ath Party is more properly described as a fascist movement.

    I am not in any way defending the The Ba’ath fascist movement, wonder what about Communist party who celebrate its 100 years in China….., or south Korea your neighbour regime?
    What about Iranian Mullah regime?

  56. Art, the Shia militias in Iraq are the primary problem since ISIS has been neutered. They are financed primarily by Iran. What do you think Soleimani was doing in Iraq when he got zapped?

    The U.S. air strikes on Shia bases in Syria were in retaliation for Shia targeting of American facilities. Iraq’s government denounced the strikes. I assume they were prompted to do so by Iran. Maybe not. Maybe the Iraqis are really cheering for the Shia militias. In which case they are in the Shia Iranian orbit. That’s my thinking.

    Trade between the two? What are they going to do, sell each other oil? The primary export product for both countries? Also, Iran has been sanctioned heavily until Biden took over. Any trade they were doing until just recently was probably off the books.

    Thanks for sharing your points.

  57. J.J.
    Shia militias in Iraq

    Just to clear things up here, most of those Militia took orders from Tehran ( Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) through his commander Qassim Soleimani in the past now by Esmail Qaani.

    ISCI was founded in Iran in 1982 as the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, SCIRI consist of a general assembly of 70 members which represent various Islamic movements and scholars. SCIRI has a military forces called Badr Corps. It started as a brigade and developed into a division and then into a corps. The Badr Corps consist of thousands of former Iraqi officers and soldiers who defected from the Iraqi army, Iraqi refugees and POWs. Early days of its creation ISCI leaded by Iranian cleric, then during Iraq/Iran war it was visible to distance Iranian from this party the chose Mohamad Baqir Al Hakim to lead SCIRI, Iranian officials referred to Hakim as the leader of Iraq’s future Islamic state.

    In 2007, in an attempt to buttress its Iraqi nationalist credentials and distance itself from its Iranian patrons, SCIRI changed its name to the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, though many believe ISCI still retains close relations with Iran. SCIRI has about 4,000-8,000 fighters, composed of Iraqi Shiite exiles and prisoners of war, operating against the Iraqi military in southern Iraq. Although SCIRI has distanced itself from Iran to some extent, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard reportedly continues to provide it with weapons and training. Despite this ideological disagreement, several of SCIRI’s factions came from al-Dawa before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This historical intersection is significant because al-Dawa was widely viewed as a terrorist group who was carried terrorist operations in Kuwait, Lebanon and other places.

    ISCI’s control over state institutions, as well as continued funding from Iran, is the party’s main sources of power. , the Hakims; a surprising political pragmatism in light of profound sectarian inclinations; and a somewhat incongruous dual alliance with the U.S. and Iran.

    ISCI was allotted 36 seats of the 130 seats won by the United Iraqi Alliance in the December 2005 legislative elections. Large numbers of SCIRI’s Badr militia infiltrated the new Iraqi government’s security services during the party’s hold on the Interior Ministry in 2005. In 2007, in an attempt to buttress ISCI currently retains the loyalty of wide swathes of the security forces. Indeed, the Badr militia is now the security force of the Interior Ministry.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑