Page added on June 16, 2014
Wielding the threat of sectarian slaughter, Sunni Islamist militants
claimed on Sunday that they had massacred hundreds of captive Shiite members
of Iraq’s security forces, posting grisly pictures of a mass execution in Tikrit as
evidence and warning of more killing to come.
The possible mass killing came as militants cemented control of the city of Tal
Afar, west of Mosul, after two days of fierce clashes with Iraqi troops, residents
and senior security officials said. The city came under mortar attack, sending
many residents fleeing toward Sinjar to the west and Mosul to the east. Residents
said the militants freed dozens of prisoners.
Even as anecdotal reports of extrajudicial killings around the country seemed
to bear out the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria’s intent to kill Shiites wherever it
could, Iraqi officials and some human rights groups cautioned that the militants’
claim to have killed 1,700 soldiers in Tikrit could not be immediately verified.
But with their claim, the Sunni militants were reveling in an atrocity that if
confirmed would be the worst yet in the conflicts that roil the region, outstripping
even the poison gas attack near Damascus last year.
In an atmosphere where there were already fears that the militants’ sudden
advance near the capital would prompt Shiite reprisal attacks against Sunni Arab
civilians, the claims by ISIS were potentially explosive. And that is exactly the
group’s stated intent: to stoke a return to all-out sectarian warfare that would
bolster its attempts to carve out a Sunni Islamist caliphate that crosses borders
through the region.
The sectarian element of the killings may put more pressure on the Obama administration to aid Iraq militarily. In fact, the militants seemed to be counting
on it. A pronouncement on Sunday by the group’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi,
had a clear message for the United States: “Soon we will face you, and we are
waiting for this day.”
The group’s announcement was made in a series of gruesome photographs
uploaded to an ISIS Twitter feed and on websites late on Saturday night. Some
showed insurgents, many wearing black masks, lining up at the edges of what
looked like shallow mass graves and apparently firing their weapons into young
men who had their hands bound behind their backs and were packed closely
together in large groups.
The photographs showed what appeared to be seven massacre sites, although
several of them may have been different views of the same sites. In any one of the
pictures, no more than about 60 victims could be seen and sometimes as few as 20
at each of the sites, although it was not clear if the photographs showed the entire
graves.
The militants’ captions seemed tailor-made to ignite anger and fear among
Shiites. “The filthy Shiites are killed in the hundreds,” one read. “The liquidation
of the Shiites who ran away from their military bases,” read another, and, “This is
the destiny of Maliki’s Shiites,” referring to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.
Many of the captions mocked the victims. In one photograph, showing a
group of young men walking toward an apparent execution site, where armed
masked men awaited, the caption read, “Look at them walking to death on their
own feet.”
So far, Iraq’s majority Shiites were not rising to the bait. Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani, their supreme religious leader, issued a statement on Saturday calling
for all groups to “exert the highest possible level of self-restraint during this
tumultuous period.” And there was little immediate public reaction to the ISIS
claims in Baghdad or other southern Iraqi cities.
A senior Iraqi government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity
because he was not authorized to make press statements, said news of the
executions was slow to circulate because Twitter and other social media sites had
been blocked for days. “I don’t doubt they are real, but 1,700 is a big number,” he
said. “We are trying to control the reaction.”
Acutely aware of the potential for retaliatory violence, some government officials who had heard about the ISIS claims took pains to play them down,
confirming only that some executions had taken place in Tikrit, but not on a large
scale.
One Iraqi security official claimed that no more than 11 bodies of executed
soldiers were recovered from the Tigris River downstream from the execution site,
a group of six and a group of five, although he confirmed that 800 soldiers had
been taken prisoner in the area. He also reported finding 17 bodies washed up
against a dam near Samarra, another city the militants are fighting for. But he
said, “There is no such superstitious number as 1,700 people executed.”
An official statement posted on the Ministry of Defense’s website denied the
executions had taken place at all.
Still, other officials and human rights representatives, while cautioning that
they could not confirm the full 1,700 number being claimed, said that ISIS had
shown no compunctions against hunting Shiites. And they reiterated that such
horrific claims would go to further the group’s intent to sow chaos.
“We’re trying to verify the pics, and I am not convinced they are authentic,”
said Erin Evers, the Human Rights Watch researcher in Iraq. “As far as ISIS
claiming it has killed 1,700 people and publishing horrific photos to support that
claim, it is unfortunately in keeping with their pattern of commission of atrocities,
and obviously intended to further fuel sectarian war.”
Col. Suhail al-Samaraie, head of the Awakening Council in Samarra, a
pro-government Sunni grouping, confirmed that officials in Salahuddin Province
were aware that large-scale executions had taken place, but did not know how
many. “They are targeting anyone working with the government side, any place,
anywhere,” he said. He said the insurgents were targeting both Sunnis and Shiites,
anyone with a government affiliation, but claiming for propaganda reasons that
the victims were all Shiites.
A New York Times employee in Tikrit said local residents saw hundreds of
Iraqi military personnel captured when they tried to flee Camp Speicher, a former
American military base and airfield now used as an air force training center on the
edge of Tikrit. It is still in government hands.
Most of those captured were air force cadets, the employee said. Those who
were Sunnis were given civilian clothes and sent home; the Shiites were marched
and trucked off to the grounds of Saddam Hussein’s old palace in Tikrit, where they reportedly were executed. He added that the bodies had been dumped in the
Tigris River, which runs by the palace compound.
The ISIS photographs appeared to have been taken at that location, the
employee said. However, he said he had not spoken to any witnesses who claimed
to have seen the executions or the victims’ bodies.
Ryan C. Crocker, a former ambassador to Iraq and a critic of America’s 2011
withdrawal from that nation after the two countries failed to sign a mutual security
pact, said the atrocity claims, proven or not, made it more urgent than ever for
Washington to become involved.
“What this administration has to do is get John Kerry on a plane right now,
like we did when I was there, and sit down with Shia, Sunni and Kurdish leaders
and help them get to a position of declared national unity. Iraqis have to stand
together now,” Mr. Crocker said. Regarding the massacres, he said, “Whatever it
is, however many people, it’s clearly an effort to ignite an Iraqi civil war.”
Political analysts here mostly agreed about the militants’ intent. “The problem
now is that you are dealing with emotions and ISIS is trying to provoke the other
side to take revenge,” said Ameer Jabbar al-Sa’aedi, a Baghdad-based analyst.
“There are extremists among the Shia, too, and if they respond, they could begin
killing and not exclude anyone. It would be just like what happened in 2006.”
Even though Ayatollah Sistani’s statement over the weekend was intended to
call for restraint on the part of Shiites, it came after his call just a day before for
every Iraqi to take up arms to support the government.
That appeal was expected to greatly accelerate the formation of volunteer
groups to supplement Shiite militias — nominally to fight alongside the Iraqi
Army. But during the worst of the sectarian bloodletting in Iraq, from 2005
through 2007, some such Shiite groups were deeply involved in violence that was
killing as many as 1,000 civilians each week.
One militia leader, Abu Bakr al-Zubaidi, from a group called Asaib Al Haq, a
hard-line offshoot of the Mahdi Army militia, said he was not surprised to hear of
the executions.
“ISIS regards Shia as their eternal enemy, and they will kill whoever falls in
their hands who is Shia, whether they are soldiers, grocers or even singers,” he
said. “Our response to that is there will not be any living ISIS prisoner.”
8 Comments on "As Massacre Claim Shakes Iraq, Militants Seize New City"
rockman on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 10:22 am
I can’t understand why anyone would doubt the claims of the executions. Iraq hasn’t been invaded by the Boy Scouts. At least initially the insurgents were a relatively small force. Tactically they couldn’t hold POW’s nor leave their rear exposed. It might offend our western sensitivity but a no prisoner policy would be mandated in such circumstances. The anti Shia spin might be more for propaganda value then to justify the executions. As the legendary commander of N Vietnam forces once said: “Kill them all and they’ll send no more”. How enthused will the Shia military be to engage the insurgents if they know surrender isn’t a viable option for them?
Davey on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 10:47 am
Rock, when the Shia’s back is to the wall the Shia’s will fight as fierce as the ISIS. The fight so far has been against the least qualified Iraqi army forces. The best Shia forces are in Shia controlled areas. The current Iraqi army has little motivation to fight in Sunni north against a hostile population with determined radicals. We saw in Somalia and see in Syria the short comings of these radicals. They may be fierce fighters but all they have proven thus far is their ability to control enclaves and small cities. I am not saying with the right leadership they couldn’t control and hold the Sunni north and threaten the south. With popular Sunni support this is highly likely. Yet, who is going to recognize them and trade with them like a normal country. Their oil resources are the smallest of the three regions. It is apparent the Kurds are siding with the Shia’s at least at the moment. I am not yet very impressed with the ISIS. That may change .
bobinget on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 11:03 am
It would appear fabric of Islamic political structure is undergoing change.
How much longer can a Islamic warrior class maintain this posture of violence? This is a PR nightmare for
Islamic states with mixed populations.
Are Shiites and Sunnis at war with ‘Great Satin’ or obsessed with justifying murdering each other over dated, obscure doctrine?
If the US goes it alone, again, it can rightfully be viewed again “The Enemy” adding vigor to Muslim frustration losing the Syrian Proxy war.
If Iran alone engages ISIS and hardened Syrian rebels
and the US simply passes only intel, the fight remains intramural.
I believe a bipartisan case (in Congress) can be made to permit ‘the crazy bastards to kill each other’.
The US has ‘already lost’ Saudi Royal support and needs Iraqi and more to the point, Iranian oil.
Nigeria is another case. Nigeria had a terrible, million death civil war between Christians and Muslims.
Today– Boko Haram seems intent on killing mainly Christians. Since Nigeria is one of America’s
lifeblood suppliers, an excellent military aid case can be made to aid Christians. As you can see, lines are
far clearer in Nigeria.
IMO, Boko Haram will take encouragement from events in Iraq, Syria. Seeing their main chance Boko could attempt to hold more territory
in Nigeria’s Northeast. This puts Christians living in the region in a terrible position as ill fed never paid Nigerian Army refuses to die for an entirely corrupt government.
rockman on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 11:40 am
Davey – Valid points. But “Yet, who is going to recognize them and trade with them like a normal country.” The Kurds don’t have a “normal country” and nor does N Korea. Yet trade happens. And is Shea controlled southern Iraq going to be a normal country to trade with as long as a hostile force sits 100 miles from Baghdad and the oil fields are easy targets. If you were CEO of a Big Oil or a Big Service Company how much of your capex would you put in harm’s way? How much foreign capex is going into Libya these days to bolster production?
Then jump back in time: after Germany invaded Poland et at were they a “normal country” others continued to trade with? It really doesn’t matter what context we try to frame the current situation IMHO. A portion of the oil producing region the world is dependent upon is now a war zone. The insurgent gains might not stand. OTOH it might expand to greater area. It wasn’t that long ago Iran was at war with the Shia gov’t of Iraq and US forces were fighting and dying to free Kuwait from it’s “insurgents”. Remember the original problem was isolated in Syria…no need for the US to worry much about.
Just like the common sentiment in the US in the 1930’s: that crazy German Adolf was a European problem and not ours. The problem in Iraq today isn’t a US problem…until it becomes one.
Arthur2 on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 5:36 pm
Iraq these days offers golden opportunities for headhunters. Seriously, Kunstler suspects that ISIS in reality is after the Greenzone and US embassy and not Bagdad.
http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/heads-you-lose/
Makati1 on Mon, 16th Jun 2014 8:15 pm
“…How much longer can a Islamic warrior class maintain this posture of violence?…”
Well, it’s been going on for about 1200 years, so a few more decades will not be much of a problem.
ulenspiegel on Tue, 17th Jun 2014 5:06 am
@bob
If you actually talk to people who live in countries like Pakistan with a high level of violence you will understand that for most of them this part of their daily life and violence is in some cultures condsidered a positve attribute of males. We men in the western countries are weaklings for them.
Add the fact that they really struggle to understand that our low level of violence is the main reason for our societies being quite stable and developed, the outlook becomes really sad, at least in my opinion.
They also do not understand that our civilization/weakness is only a thin layer that being removed enables wars like 1914-18 and 1939-45.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Tue, 17th Jun 2014 7:04 am
Ulensiegle, the level of violence here in the US is as bad as these countries you spoke of. Europe is not currently but Europe has a history of this violence when a power vacuum develops. In the US we are the most heavily armed country in the world at all levels of the military, police and individuals. We also have a male cult of violence with being armed and ready to fight IMA perpetuated in Hollywood and video games. Our industry dominates the manufacture of tools of death and destruction. We have a warrior culture of men that go off to fight. We have the toughest military in the world at all level because of this culture, industry and the fact that we are in fights constantly. Our boys are involved in wars and that is the best training. Is this good no, is it powerful yes. What is needed is a crisis at all level to focus our attention close to home away from the foreign adventures. Once we have a focus on the local here in the US we can triage out the localities of violence. I see no hope for a less violent America just as places like Pakistan are lost causes. Once these personality cults take hold it has to end itself through self-destruction.