Iraqi army takes the initiative in Basra

While much of the media has been showing concern over the Basra operation against the Sadr forces, the important thing to not is that the Iraqi army is running an operation to remove the militia from control of Basra. This is a very good and positive thing despite what the Washington Post and NY Times suggest in their stories about the operation. The lead in the Times suggest this is a problem.

Heavy fighting broke out Tuesday in two of Iraq’s largest cities, as Iraqi ground forces and helicopters mounted a huge operation to break the grip of the Shiite militias controlling Basra, and Iraqi forces clashed with militias in Baghdad. The fighting threatened to destabilize a long-term truce that had helped reduce the level of violence in the five-year-old Iraq war.

...

Note the passive voice on fighting breaking out, rather than recognizing that the Iraqi army has the initiative in this fight and the militia is on the defensive. It also appears that the Iraqis are using overwhelming force which should give them a significant advantage.

The Post uses the same passive voice.

Fierce gun battles erupted between Iraqi security forces and Shiite militias in Basra, Baghdad and other cities Tuesday as the government, backed by U.S. and British reconnaissance planes, launched an offensive aimed at breaking the power of politically backed gunmen.

The fiercest fighting took place in Basra neighborhoods where Iraqi forces targeted members of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, further risking the collapse of a cease-fire that Sadr declared last summer. His fighters' stand-down has been widely credited with helping curb violence throughout the country during the U.S. troop buildup known as the surge.

...

The news is that the government force launched a massive strike supported by US and British air and they are taking the battle to the militia. The fight did not "erupt" but was the result of a planned attach that was executed by the government forces. The two papers are using the passive voice because they are locked into a mindset that any violence is a failure of the government and US effort in Iraq. In this case it is the opposite. It is a sign that the Iraqi army has matured to the point where it can take the lead in a large operation to secure control of a large city.

It is a sign the Iraqis are standing up to the challenge of leading and securing their country.

Sadr's cease fire has been more for the benefit of his weak militia than for the benefit of the government. He knew that his forces could not stand up to the US troop surge and they would be destroyed if they tried. Now they cannot stand up to the Iraqi army either which is finally asserting itself in southern Iraq. Sadr has only gotten weaker since he fled the country to hide in Iran.