UNITED STATES:The perceived enemy for US troops has changed once again following Gen Petraeus's testimony to Congress, writes PETER SPIEGEL.
EVER SINCE Gen David Petraeus was appointed to oversee Iraq more than a year ago, the primary perceived enemy for US troops has been shifting.
When Petraeus left for Baghdad, the Pentagon considered radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr the gravest threat. Once he arrived, it switched to Sunni extremists affiliated with al-Qaeda, an old foe.
This week things changed again. In two days of Capitol Hill testimony, Petraeus declared allegedly Iranian-backed "special groups" - hardened fighters who are part of larger Shia militias - to be the "greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq".
The shifting US view of its top enemy reflects both the changing nature of the conflict and the complexity of Iraq's array of armed groups. As threats from al-Sadr and al-Qaeda receded, others were magnified.
Despite new intelligence, officials cannot agree if it shows Iran in control of Iraq's Shia factions, or merely as one key player.
US accusations that Iran is training and equipping Shia militias are hardly new. But the prominence of the special groups has been cast in a harsh new light by Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's recent military offensive in the southern city of Basra.
There, senior US officers alleged that these groups played a central role in fighting government troops to a standstill.
At the same time, Iran's role in last month's fighting has sparked an intense debate within the US military and intelligence communities over just how much control Tehran has over events inside Iraq. In their two days of testimony, Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Iraq, suggested that Iran's role in last month's fighting - and in Iraq as a whole - extends well beyond directing the special groups and their fighters in Baghdad and Basra.
Most significantly, Petraeus agreed that Iran was able to play the role of mediator as last month's fighting spun out of control. "Iran, at the end of the day, clearly played a role as an arbiter, if you will, for talks among all of the different parties," Petraeus told the Senate armed services committee.
Such clout worries some US officials, who have argued that it illustrates Iran's ability to control levels of fighting even as the US struggles for influence with the same groups.
But not all US officials agree that Iran's role was pivotal. One defence official, who like several others spoke on the condition of anonymity when discussing intelligence assessments, insisted that while Iran was involved in talks between the Maliki government and fighters loyal to Sadr's Mahdi army, they in no way directed the actions of either side.
"Anybody would be concerned if we thought the Iranians were truly calling the shots on the Shia militias," said a senior military officer who has seen US intelligence on the fighting. "I don't think they were calling the shots."
Trita Parsi, an Iranian expert at John Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, said the US appears to be overplaying Iranian links to justify high troop levels.
"I don't think this is all about Iran," Parsi said. "Crocker, in my view, is trying to portray this in such a way that . . . if we don't [stay], we'll be abandoning Maliki and giving him to Iran. It's not really working like that."
Also in dispute is the extent of Iran's ties to al-Sadr himself. Some analysts have argued that Sadr's repeated visits to Iran - and the fact he failed to return to Iraq during last month's fighting - is evidence that the radical cleric has become co-opted by radical elements within Iran.
Such a view is controversial within the Pentagon where Sadr has been viewed increasingly as an independent political player who potentially can be co-opted and neutralised.
One American officer based in Baghdad said the military leadership there has been in regular contact with Sadr's political organisation, known as the Office of the Martyr Sadr. And several Pentagon officials said they believe the cleric remains a free agent who is being courted simultaneously by Maliki, Tehran and the US.
"I have no evidence that Sadr is doing everything at the behest of the Iranians," said the senior military official."I don't think Sadr wants to be an Iranian tool. I think he wants to have influence in and of his own right."
There is less disagreement over Iran's involvement with the special groups, although vehemently denied by Tehran. According to US officials involved in the debate, almost all agree that the Iranian Quds Force - a unit of the country's Revolutionary Guard that is responsible for international operations - has been central to the creation of special groups and is able to direct their operations inside Iraq. Petraeus testified that Quds operatives carefully select fighters to become part of the special groups, largely recruiting from members of Sadr's own militia. They then train, arm and pay them, enabling Quds to control their actions.
Petraeus added that he is preparing to make public intelligence, including information obtained from four of the group's "master trainers" captured by US forces, that make Quds' ties clear.
- (LA Times-Washington Post service)