The Fight for Fallujah

Though American officials have warned of increased bloodshed in Iraq as the June date for the handover of sovereignty nears, few were prepared to witness the gruesome acts perpetrated against U.S. civilian security contractors this week in the Sunni dominated town of Fallujah. Clearly inspired by the impact that graphic displays of violence had on U.S. policy in Somalia in 1993, those who carried out the enraged attack are unlikely to achieve a similar response, that is, American withdrawal. Conversely, U.S. officials have vowed to respond deliberately to the attacks, compounded today with another strike on a military convoy outside Fallujah. The images solicited this week by an Iraqi minority violently opposed to the American occupation has provoked an impassioned array of American public response, raised questions about the way violence in Iraq is portrayed in the U.S. media and brought to light the increasing use of private security firms in conflict zones such as Iraq.

Burying the Ghost of Mogadishu

“Yesterday's attack is proof of how much we hate the Americans,” said Sameer Sami, a Fallujah resident whose comments to the BBC underscored the dramatic and many say dehumanizing actions carried out in the former Saddam stronghold this week. Four American private security contractors, a number of them former U.S. servicemen, were attacked and killed by masked gunman before their bodies mutilated in a manner that drew immediate comparison to the Battle of Mogadishu -- famously portrayed in the film “Black Hawk Down.”

But while the rage and raw violence behind this week's attack may bear some similarities to Somalia in 1993, experts say that such comparisons do not account for important differences between the two, particularly the level of commitment among the U.S. public. “Most Americans, regardless of whether they agree with the war, have a fairly clear understanding of the danger facing forces and civilians in Iraq – and weapons of mass destruction or not – the military is committed on a much larger scale than it was to Somalia, where U.S. troops were associated with a UN peacekeeping force,” write analysts at Stratfor.com. “In addition, this was an attack on civilians…and the public response will be aimed at the attackers rather than at a U.S. government perceived by many as having allowed a national disgrace in Somalia.”

Indeed, much of the initial American response played out on op-ed pages called not for an American withdrawal, as in Somalia, but for a more aggressive approach. “Whatever the long-term impact of the charred bodies the short term response must be a message to Fallujah and to all the young men of Iraq: the violent and unlawful will be broken. Savagery is yesterday; it left with Saddam,” writes Wall Street Journal contributing editor Peggy Noonan. “This time, the response must be the opposite of the response to Mogadishu.”

Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post also calls for a more decisive military policy in Iraq. “Bush has claimed the mantle as a war president. He must respond personally, and forcefully, to such barbaric challenges with his own words and show of resolution. He must ensure that his military commanders in Iraq have every resource they need to deal with the killers in Fallujah and their supporters.”

Robert Alt, reporting from Baghdad for National Review, said that the difficulty in solving the problem in Fallujah is profound. “I fear that the Western media is already showing squeamishness about the use of force by Marines, but they would do well to remember that Iraqis generally subscribe to a philosophy that respects strength, and not weakness. Failing to respond to the violence therefore would invite still more violence, not less,” he writes in his Web journal. “Because of turbulent areas such as Fallujah and the random acts of terrorism throughout the country, Iraq is still a very dangerous place. But these dangers, though serious, are not statistically representative of the views of the Iraqi people. A major goal of the terrorists and the small enclaves of Saddam supporters is to use dramatic attacks such as the one in Fallujah to garner media attention, and thereby to skew public perception concerning Iraqi sentiment and the progress of the transition. But the view on the street — the view of the average Iraqi enjoying his first taste of freedom — is one of hope and promise.”

Television Coverage Questioned

The graphic killings also raised questions about American media coverage of violence in Iraq, with producers from various networks chiming in on the issue. “CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and even Arabic news network Al Jazeera all broadcast images during the day of the contractors' burning car, but initially declined to show scenes of the charred bodies being strung up and beaten by Iraqi crowds,” said a media report from the Wall St. Journal.

"We have no plans to show more graphic footage," said Bill Shine, vice president of production for Fox News. "We made the call that it was too graphic in nature to put on our air." '

"War is a horrible thing. It is about killing," ABC News "Nightline" executive producer Leroy Sievers said in an unusual message to the program's e-mail subscribers discussing the issues posed by yesterday's killings, according to the Boston Globe. "If we try to avoid showing pictures of bodies, if we make it too clean, then maybe we make it too easy to go to war again."

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan also entered into the fray over coverage. “The enemies of freedom, the enemies of the Iraqi people, are trying to shake our will. But they cannot. We will not be intimidated,” said McClellan, according to the Boston Globe. “I hope everybody acts responsibly in their coverage.”

The Globe report cited sources worried that “Acting ‘responsibly' and not showing troubling scenes…could have the effect of helping the White House maintain public confidence for the war effort.”

American Military Response

Administration officials in Washington and Baghdad have vowed a swift response, despite critics' claims that no U.S. forces reacted immediately to the attack. "I think that there was a well thought-out decision on the part of the Marines that, let's not rush headlong into there, there may be ambushes set up, there may be civilians being used as human shields,” said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, military spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority. “While it was dreadful, while it was unacceptable, while it was bestial, a preemptive attack into the city could have taken a bad situation and made it even worse." Reports from Fallujah describe the lack of American military personnel currently in Fallujah as a kind of calm before the storm.

“Yesterday's events in Fallujah are dramatic examples of the ongoing struggle between human dignity and barbarism,” said Coalition Provisional Authority chief Paul Bremer, who noted that that attack “would not go unpunished.”

According to the Coalition Provisional Authority Web site, Brig. Gen. Kimmitt told a press conference that the U.S. response would not be "a pell-mell rush on the town" but a carefully orchestrated and highly effective response. “It's going to be deliberate, it will be precise and it will be overwhelming."

His comments accompanied those from Iraqi Interior Minister Nori al Badran, who said that Iraqi troops would help “bring the killers to justice,” according to a report in the Times of London. “Forces will be sent to Fallujah…from the Army, the police and from the civil defense (force),” he added. Residents in Fallujah have warned that, “hell will break loose” should American forces enter the town.

Security Policy

The attacks also bring to light many questions about the role of private security companies operating in areas of conflict. Blackwater Security Consulting, the company that employed the American victims, helps guard food aid to Iraq, and also assists with security detail for Paul Bremer. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Blackwater is just one of the firms that “have poured in an estimated 15,000 private security agents into Iraq” since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

“The U.S. has so far spent $20 billion on reconstruction in Iraq. The companies which have won these contracts currently expect to spend about 10 percent of their budgets on providing personal security planning and protection for their workers,” says a report from the BBC. “Hence a highly lucrative market has sprung up.”

Dan Senor, the spokesman for coalition chief L. Paul Bremer in Baghdad, told CNN that the U.S. government has “the utmost confidence in Blackwater and the other security institutions that protect Ambassador Bremer,'' according to Bloomberg News.

One problem with using private security firms is the inability for insurgents to determine the difference between those hoping to secure humanitarian missions and those officially aligned with the American military occupation. According to a New York Times report, many in Fallujah “insisted that the four security guards, who were driving in unmarked sport utility vehicles, were working for the Central Intelligence Agency.”

"This is what these spies deserve," said Salam Aldulayme, a 28-year-old Fallujah resident, reportedly commented.

Most, however, would beg to differ.