It began with some children throwing stones. It left a town turned into a battle zone and 10 people lying dead
By Patrick Cockburn in Amara
26 June 2003
It was nine o'clock on a hot and dusty morning in southern Iraq when six members of 156 Provost Company of the Royal Military Police arrived at the police station at Majar al-Kabir.
The soldiers were on a routine search for weapons, after British troops reached an agreement on house searches with the local leaders living on a plain south of Amara, about 210 miles south of Baghdad. But on Tuesday, their search set off a four-hour gun battle in which six British soldiers and four Iraqis were killed - the worst attack since the war on Iraq officially ended on 1 May.
Ali al-Atiyah, a senior lieutenant in a local militia that fought Saddam Hussein's government from hideouts in the marshes for a quarter of a century, said he knew there would be trouble when the British ignored the agreement negotiated with the tribesmen.
"They said they wanted to look at the type of weapons militiamen use," Mr Atiyah said. "They wanted to make a foot patrol. They were told 'it is unsafe for you to walk in the city, it is against the agreement. Maybe many problems will follow'."
At first the patrol heeded the advice, but then it started to move down the street. Soon children were throwing stones. The crucial moment came when one British soldier went into a firing position, pointing his weapon at a child. Mr Atiyah said: "A local man called Taissir Abdul Wahad thought the soldier was going to shoot and pointed his own gun and was shot dead by the soldiers. After the death of Taissir nobody could control their anger."
<snip>
The gun battle on Tuesday had nothing to do with the remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime, or his supporters, who were always far and few between in this Shia stronghold. But it has demonstrated the danger of trying to disarm tribesmen or enter their homes to search for weapons, the possession of which they regard as a fundamental right.
Local residents complained about the use of dogs by the soldiers and alleged that they pointed weapons at women and children. "As Muslims, we can't accept dogs at our homes," Rabee al-Malki told Reuters. Muslims believe that the animals are impure.
Others alleged, as many do in Iraq, that the soldiers were disrespectful towards women. "A British soldier held the underwear of a woman and stretched it. How can we accept this as Muslims and as Shias?" said Faleh Saleem, who lives in Majar al-Kabir.
<snip>
The killings show the danger of trying to disarm Iraqis, something that Saddam never succeeded in doing. In the early 1990s he did try to buy up heavy weapons and one tribe near Amara sold him three tanks.
An official in Amara said: "Most of the Iraqi tribes - especially in southern Iraq - think that weapons are part of their life and are something holy. If they try to take them away again there will be trouble."
The US and British forces also appear to have underestimated the Iraqis' ability to fight after the swift defeat of the armed forces in the war. Iraqis say the the Allies' victory was easy because so few people in the country were willing to get killed for Saddam or his regime. Iraqis, such as the tribesmen around Amara, also have intense loyalties to clan, tribe and religious or ethnic community, which is usually greater than loyalty to the state.
[.....]
full at http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=419088
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com