<html>
<body>
<font size=3><br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3 color="#993300"><b>Iraqi
Battalion Refuses to </font>'Fight Iraqis' <br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3>By Thomas E. Ricks<br><br>
Washington</font> Post Staff Writer<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3>Sun</font>day, April 11, 2004;
Page A01 <br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2680-2004Apr10?language=printer">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2680-2004Apr10?language=printer</a><br><br>
<br><br>
BAGHDAD, April 10 -- A battalion of the new Iraqi army refused to go to
Fallujah earlier this week to support U.S. Marines battling for control
of the city, senior U.S. Army officers here said, disclosing an incident
that is casting new doubt on U.S. plans to transfer security matters to
Iraqi forces.<br><br>
<br><br>
It was the first time </font>U.S. commanders had sought to involve the
postwar Iraqi army in major combat operations, and the battalion's
refusal came as large parts of Iraqi security forces have stopped
carrying out their duties.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
The 620-man 2nd Battalion of the Iraqi Armed Forces refused to fight
Monday after members of the unit were shot at in a Shiite Muslim
neighborhood in Baghdad while en route to Fallujah, a </font>Sunni Muslim
stronghold, said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who is overseeing the
development of Iraqi security forces. The convoy then turned around and
returned to the battalion's post on a former Republican Guard base in
Taji, a town north of the capital.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
Eaton said members of the battalion insisted during the ensuing
discussions: </font><font size=3 color="#993300">"We did not sign up
to fight Iraqis."<br><br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
He declined to characterize the incident as a mutiny, but rather called
it "a command failure."<br><br>
<br><br>
The refusal of the battalion to perform as </font>U.S. officials had
hoped poses a significant problem for the occupation. The cornerstone of
the U.S. strategy in Iraq is to draw down its military presence and turn
over security functions to Iraqis.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
Over the past two weeks, that approach has suffered a severe setback as
Iraqi security forces have crumbled in some parts of the country.
</font>In recent days perhaps 20 percent to 25 percent of the Iraqi army,
civil defense, police and other security forces have quit, changed sides,
or otherwise failed to perform their duties, a senior Army officer said
Saturday.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
"I wouldn</font>'t say it is so widespread that it's the
majority," the senior officer said, speaking on condition of
anonymity. "But it concerns us."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
Eaton added: "The lines are blurring for a lot of Iraqis right now,
and we</font>'re having problems with a lot of security functions right
now."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
A soldier with the 1st Armored Division, who has recently been engaged in
combat in </font>Baghdad, said many of the Iraqi security troops with
whom he has worked are no longer reporting for duty. "I think what
we are seeing is not some mass quitting and mutiny by ICDC [Iraqi Civil
Defense Corps], but rather just plain fear," the soldier said.
"And all it takes is one Iraqi to take the lead in leaving, and they
all do out of fear."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
When the 2nd Battalion graduated from training camp on Jan. 6, Defense
Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld hailed it as a major part of the future of
</font>Iraq. Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the U.S. commander on the
ground in Iraq, attended the ceremony and said: "We are now into the
accelerated period of providing Iraqi security forces, and these soldiers
look very proud, very dedicated. I have high expectations that in fact
they would help us bring security and stability back to the
country."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
The battlefield refusal of the battalion -- one of just four that exist
in the Iraqi army -- began Monday when it was ordered to travel about 60
miles to support the Marines, then locked in battle with fighters in
Fallujah. The mission of the Iraqi troops was to help with secondary
military tasks such as manning road checkpoints and securing the
perimeter, Eaton said.<br><br>
<br><br>
One of the problems, Eaton said, was that the Iraqi troops were not told
they would be given a relatively benign role, and assumed they were being
hurled into the middle of a bloody fight, battling on the side of the
Americans against Arabs. "The battalion thought it was going to be
thrown into a firestorm in Fallujah," he said.<br><br>
<br><br>
Com</font>plicating communications, he said, was that the battalion had
10 new U.S. advisers who rotated into their jobs April 1, just four days
before the incident, replacing the advisers who had trained the unit for
months.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
The battalion, traveling by truck and escorted by troops from the
</font>U.S. Army's 1st Armored Division, passed through a Shiite area in
northwest Baghdad. They were fired on, and six members of the unit were
wounded, one seriously, Eaton said. A crowd of Shiites gathered and
"surged" at the convoy, he said. "They were stunned that
they were taken under fire by their fellow population," he
said.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
The battalion was then sent back to Taji, where preparations were made to
fly it to the Fallujah area. But opposition to the mission stiffened,
Eaton said, "so we decided not to involve them in the Fallujah
operation."<br><br>
<br><br>
Accounts differ on whether the other Iraqi battalion based at Taji also
indicated that it would decline to go to Fallujah. Eaton said it was not
involved, because it was not yet deemed ready to fight. <br><br>
<br><br>
But the other Army official said that a decision was made not to force
the issue with that unit</font>'s commanders. "I don't think they
pushed them to the brink where they said, 'Hell, no, we won't go,' "
the official said.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
The two senior officers also differed on what motivated the
refusal.<br><br>
<br><br>
The Iraqi rebuff was based on "pure fear," said the Army
official. "They just got cold feet."<br><br>
<br><br>
But Eaton, who visited the unit the day after the incident, disagreed. He
noted that Iraqi troops have "fought very, very bravely"
against </font>Iran. He said that, in his view, the problem was caused by
poor leadership and complicated by the fact that the unit was trained by
U.S. advisers who emphasized that their job would be to defend Iraq
against outside forces.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
Eaton, who oversees the organization, training and equipping of the Iraqi
army, the civil defense force, the police, security guards and border
patrol, said the recalcitrant battalion</font>'s Iraqi leadership would
be "reorganized."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
He also said that training would be different for future battalions, and
handled almost exclusively by Iraqi officers, a group of which recently
finished re-training in </font>Jordan. "They will train their own
men," he said.<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
Eaton, who previously was chief of infantry training for the U.S. Army,
said that solutions would be found to the setback.<br><br>
<br><br>
"Is it disappointing? Obviously," he said. "We</font>'re
just going to work our way through it."<br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
© 2004 The </font>Washington Post Company <br><br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=3> <br><br>
</b></font><font size=3 color="#FF0000">The Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br>
(415) 863-9977<br>
</font><font size=3><a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">www.freedomarchives.org</a></font></body>
</html>