Iraqis – do they want us there or not … & does it matter?

[nerdgirl 0]

Split this off from the “Iraq war & Vietnam war comparisons” thread, as it’s a substantive topic shift.

----- --- -----

Quote

The people of Iraq did not ask us to save them. They did not ask us to come there. They did not ask us to stay there. We are unwelcome and unwanted intruders in their land.

Quote

I recall mention of a recent poll that shows they *DO* want us there.

Can anyone provide a link to the data mentioned in the 2nd quote? (And methodology?)
And does anyone have a link to similar data on Afghanistan?

The 2 polls of Iraqi opinion (admittedly an even more challenging and subject to interpretation task than counting dead bodies) with which I am familiar suggest a different conclusion w/r/t Iraqi opposition to US presence.

(1) The March 2008 BBC/ABC/NHK poll (UK/US {not Australian ABC News}/Japan) that DZJ cited (& thanks for the primary data!).

On one hand:

“In the fifth survey of Iraqis taken, in February 2008, 55% of those questioned say their lives are good, compared to 39% in the last poll in August 2007.” 39% Feb 07; 71% 2005, 70% 2004

“Broadly, people think life in the country will continue to improve, although there are still problems with the supply of basic facilities such as electricity and water and the availability of jobs, to which 70% of those questioned said was quite or very bad.”

“The survey suggests most people think security in their own area has improved since last year [62% Feb08, up from 43% Feb07], but that it is still the greatest problem facing the nation.” The 2nd greatest problem reported was “Terrorist attacks.” The “US occupation/presence” ranked higher as a problem than “Presence of Al-Qaeda/foreign jihadis.”

On the other hand:

72% oppose US and coalition presence, which is down from Aug 07 when 79% opposed … altho’ in 2004, it was only 51%.

“The majority of Iraqis believe the presence of US troops makes the security situation worse – 61% think the presence of US forces in Iraq makes the security situation worse, down from 72% last August – yet the number who want the Americans to pull out immediately has fallen from last year. 38% want US and coalition forces to leave now” [the single largest response] – down from 47% in Aug07; Feb 07 it was 35%. Instead 51% (largest portion) credit the “Awakening Councils” for improvements.

Of those who said the Security Situation has “become worse,” when asked “Who do you feel deserves the most blame for this worsened security?” 20% (the largest single response) indicated “US forces operations.”

57% now indicate that attacks on US or coalition forces are *unacceptable* up from 43% (Aug 07), 49% (Feb 07). Altho’ 42% still indicated attacks were acceptable.

IM-ever-HO – the first ‘So What? Who Cares?’: The Iraqi public sees things as getting better, but the US and coalition efforts are not getting “credit” for it, to some extent rather the converse, which makes it more dangerous for US service members and more difficult.

(2) World Public Opinion Organization poll (released Sept 06)

“71% wanted U.S.-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year.”

“78% believe that the U.S. military presence is provoking more conflict than it is preventing.”

“61% approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces in their country, a 14% increase from [January 2006].”

Correlating w/a US poll, they found (in Sept 06) that “American perceptions (or misperceptions) of how Iraqis feel about the U.S. presence are also highly related to their attitudes toward a withdrawal timetable. Support for an open-ended commitment is much higher (49%) among those who believe (incorrectly) that only a minority of Iraqis approve of attacking foreign forces than among those who think that half or more of the Iraqi population approves of such attacks (27%).”

---- ----- ----

What does that mean?, aka the second ‘So What? Who Cares?’, im-ever-ho:

Polls are not a measure of (traditional) combat operations – wars aren’t conducted as popularity contests.
(‘Shoulds’ or ‘shouldn’t be’ are normative assertions; normatives aren’t particularly relevant to realists [like "St Carl" Clausewitz], unless useful for leveraging for the desired political outcome.)

Opinion polls _are_ a measure of effectiveness of strategic communications, i.e., ‘winning the hearts and minds,’ and a measure of effectiveness of counter-insurgency (COIN) operations. Are we still (re-)learning counterinsurgency & struggling with SSTR for the 21st century?

The results from the Pew report that I posted last week suggests that the counter-insurgency efforts are working with/for/on the American public.

In looking at the BBC/ABC/NHK data (from Feb 08, Aug 07, Feb 07, 2005, & 2004), there are *improvements* in the Iraqi perceptions reported for Feb 08 from the Aug 07 and Feb 07 data. Now, there’s a lot of data in the poll. And it really deserves a (much) more thorough analysis than I gave it here.

Not sure how many points we need to make a line either. If counter-insurgency operations are working, substantial improvements should continue w/the next poll.

Last Friday’s briefing by Dan Roper, (USA COL) suggests/re-iterates pieces are moving in a positive direction: “The general Iraqi population was tired of the guys that would come into the neighborhood and cause bad things to happen. They knew they couldn’t trust them” Transcript / Audio

…Altho’ I am less sure/certain/convinced w/r/t the stabilizing influence of ‘Concerned Local Citizens’/‘Sons of Iraq’ groups. Paying people to fight for one side or another probably goes back to the origin of war & commerce; when payment stops what does history tell us happens?

He went on to note that “They [coalition forces] weren’t saying ‘winning’; they were saying ‘succeeding,’ because ultimately, winning or losing is a political decision of all parties involved. Guys who had been kicking in doors a month prior to me getting in their particular neighborhood were describing how they had evolved to get into the soft-knock scenario, and spent more time passing out candy and playing with the kids in the street than they did firing their weapons.”

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[GQ_jumper 4]

Late into my third trip we moved into an area of Iraq that had been largely untouched by CF since the invasion. It was known for being a collection of AQ hideouts but no units were willing to operate in such a remote area. When we started engaging all the locals to see what we could do for them to encourage them to help us they turned over basically everyone that had been on the target list in that area and avoiding capture for 3+ years. The target list was almost completely erased in under 2 months, they knew these people were there the whole time and wanted them out but were afraid to do anything on their own. They were thrilled to have us in the area, I honestly can't remember ever rolling into an area where the locals didn't want to help us and didn't like having us around. We have the ass to take care of the situations that the local IP's are hesitant to deal with themselves and we have the logistics to help better their situation. I'd venture to guess that the majority of those polls are taken right in the middl of Baghdad where AQ is making an effort to lash out at innocent civilians in an effort to turn them against us.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[nerdgirl 0]

Thanks for additional information from the ground. Appreciate it very much.

Quote

I'd venture to guess that the majority of those polls are taken right in the middl of Baghdad where AQ is making an effort to lash out at innocent civilians in an effort to turn them against us.

The methodology is given in detail: randomized sampling from all provinces and ethnic groups.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Thanks for additional information from the ground. Appreciate it very much.

Quote

I'd venture to guess that the majority of those polls are taken right in the middl of Baghdad where AQ is making an effort to lash out at innocent civilians in an effort to turn them against us.

The methodology is given in detail: randomized sampling from all provinces and ethnic groups.

VR/Marg

It's still far too dynamic an environment to consider it an accurate cross section. al Anbar province is massive, Ramadi is four times the size of Fallujah. If surveys were conducted in 2005-2006 time frame, they didn't get accurate results.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[GQ_jumper 4]

It's still far too dynamic an environment to consider it an accurate cross section. al Anbar province is massive, Ramadi is four times the size of Fallujah. If surveys were conducted in 2005-2006 time frame, they didn't get accurate results.

Quote

I agree, the attitudes from one end of the country to the other are far to different to really get a nationwide poll thats accurate. If they perhaps broke the polls down by provinces and ethnic groups that would shed a lot of light on why exactly we aren't welcome in some areas

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

It's still far too dynamic an environment to consider it an accurate cross section. al Anbar province is massive, Ramadi is four times the size of Fallujah. If surveys were conducted in 2005-2006 time frame, they didn't get accurate results.

I agree, the attitudes from one end of the country to the other are far to different to really get a nationwide poll thats accurate. If they perhaps broke the polls down by provinces and ethnic groups that would shed a lot of light on why exactly we aren't welcome in some areas

I’m going to challenge on a couple of different bases.

Again to acknowledge, as I wrote in the OP, opinion polling in a unstable security state is “admittedly an even more challenging and subject to interpretation task than counting dead bodies.”

The poll results aren’t all bad … they aren’t all good either. Like much of the real world – it’s complicated. I’m okay with complicated.

Individual accounts *do* provide powerful narratives. Friends and colleagues of mine who are or have been ‘in the sandbox’ (uniformed, retired-now-contractors, and USG civilian; FOBBIT and non-FOBBIT) have shared stories ranging from it’s “a complete hole” to heartbreaking stories of individuals and families trying to maintain vague ‘semblence to normalcy to “here’s the latest project/cool thing we did with [X] group” to “check out the video of the intercepted ordnance we detonated last night!” (paraphrasing on the latter)

From a strategic communications (IO) perspective, those stories are powerful – both the ones that support the US mission and the ones that don’t.

Stories and individual observations (even a whole bunch of them) can lead us to ask the right questions, but that’s still not data. To invoke kallend’s axiom: “the plural of anecdote is not data.” Also goes to the whole correlation versus causality conundrum – they are not the same.

In consideration of ‘accuracy’ (or precision), yes, those are geographically large areas … & yes, both sets of data *are* broken down by Sh’ia, Sunni, and Kurdish identification. To no one’s surprise (who has been paying attention ), Kurds rate things as better; substantially in some areas: “Sulaymania – the Berkeley of Iraq.” What happens to the overall data, if the positive Kurdish data is removed? Prolly doesn’t shift in the direction we would like to see.

Anthony Cordesman did a robust analysis of the Feb 07 BBC/ABC/NHK data along regional, ethnic, sectarian and tribal lines in Iraqi Perceptions of the War: Public Opinion by City and Region.

If I was advising on this (rather than pontificating on the internet ), I would be strongly advocating that any effort (COIN, military, or civilian) must carefully consider individually the patterns in Iraqi perceptions and civil conflicts. As well, as cultural, which is more Montgomery McFate’s territory. That’s not, however, the point at which the thread started.

An additional complication and one required for a more robust analysis is consideration of the effect of the internally displaced persons and those who have left the country altogether.

According to the 2007 CIA Factbook “approximately two million Iraqis have fled the conflict in Iraq” and another 1.9M internally displaced persons (aka ‘balkanization’ along ethnic, sectarian, & religious lines). (NB: other sources give higher numbers but used the CIA figures as most conservative estimates).

So >7% of the population (or more) have voiced their opinion with their feet and left. Another 7% of the population has relocated far enough to be internally displaced.

The BBC/ABC/NHK survey has been done 5 times (2004, 2005, Feb07, Aug07, Feb08). The five iterations of polling data have been collected from different individuals. Do the variations/changes make sense? Yes. Or are the responses so wildly variable as to make one question the accuracy or precision of the data? No.

I cited two data sets, the BBC/ABC/NHK survey and the WPO survey. Do the two independent surveys vary substantively in their results from similar times? No.

I’m still waiting on *publicly available* surveys, with similar robust analytical methodology, to offer counter-evidence suggesting that “they *DO* want us there.”

---- ---- ----

Again, polls are not a measure of (traditional) combat operations. They are a measure of effectiveness of strategic communications.

You guys know – better than I do – counter-insurgency success/SSTR does not happen overnight. How long did it take in Malaysia?

In a larger context than these 7 opinion polls (two data sets) and my cursory analysis, I am not alone in recognizing this:

“Public relations was invented in the United States, yet we are miserable at communicating to the rest of the world what we are about as a society and a culture, about freedom and democracy, about our policies and our goals. It is just plain embarrassing that al Qaeda is better at communicating its message on the Internet than America.”

Okay, now tell me where my analysis is wrong … really(!). Without challenges, my thinking does not get sharper.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[GQ_jumper 4]

I wasn't disagreeing with your point specifically I was just commenting about how difficult it really is to get a good sampling in a place like Iraq.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[auburnguy 0]

We made a mess and now we have to do whatever it takes to clean it up. A lot of the people we are fighting in iraq and afghanistan got their big start in afghanistan in the 80's with the help of the CIA. The problem is that instead of trying to help to fix the war torn country after the russians pulled out we left and it filled up with all the crazies.
We broke it, we have to fix it. And unfortunately just leaving isnt going to fix it. I wish it did because pakistan is going to explode before too much longer and we will have a whole other crisis and not enough resources or man power to take it on.

"If you don't like your job, you don't strike! You just go in every day, and do it really half assed. That's the American way."
- Homer Simpson

[GQ_jumper 4]

And unfortunately just leaving isnt going to fix it. I wish it did because pakistan is going to explode before too much longer and we will have a whole other crisis and not enough resources or man power to take it on.

Quote

agreed 100%

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[DesertDevil 1]

Iraqis want the Americans out. Generally speaking, they don't mind other people there, such as the English or Japanese or Holland or Germans. But not the Americans, which all goes back to the war in Iran, the first Gulf War, and now this war. If you want to know what's going on there, I have lived there. I served in Saddam's Military, the Iraq military, and the US military. There's a lot of misperception out there about what's going on.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Iraqis want the Americans out. Generally speaking, they don't mind other people there, such as the English or Japanese or Holland or Germans. But not the Americans, which all goes back to the war in Iran, the first Gulf War, and now this war. If you want to know what's going on there, I have lived there. I served in Saddam's Military, the Iraq military, and the US military. There's a lot of misperception out there about what's going on.

Yes, I would *very much welcome* reading your observations and comments.

How did you go from Saddam's Military to the Iraq military to the US military?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

We broke it, we have to fix it. And unfortunately just leaving isnt going to fix it.

Since it's unclear to me from my reading of your response -- withdrawal of troops versus continued military engagement is not the discussion or issue here. (Another topic, yes ... just not this one.)

As I read your response, you have alluded to (perhaps without even realizing it ) one part of the on-going debate between the counterinsurgency/COIN/SSTR folks and the ‘traditional’ militarists (or what I call “Fulda Gap” or un-reformed Soviet specialist mentality, when I’m frustrated). It also reflects the ongoing debate between as epitomized between LTC John Nagl (USA) and LTC Gian Gentile (USA).

The underlying issues (here) are about how ‘winning’ and ‘success’ are defined and about how (the ways & means) we go about pursuing those ends in the 21st century.

Again, don’t take my word for it: refer back to SecDef Gates' quote above on the importance of public relations and strategic communications, or the comments of GEN Sir Rupert Smith:

“The new paradigm is war amongst the people [in the US, more commonly known as ‘asymmetric warfare’ – nerdgirl] where the strategic objective is to win hearts and minds, and the battle is for the people's will, rather than the destruction of an opponent's forces.

“The essential difference is that military force is no longer used to decide the matter … The strategic objective being to alter the opponent’s intentions rather than to destroy him.”

We can blow things up like no one else can; innovative technology for blowing things up is not a problem, but can we re-build them? And rebuild them so that when we leave they don’t crumble/disintegrate completely?

Quote

We made a mess and now we have to do whatever it takes to clean it up. …. The problem is that instead of trying to help to fix the war torn country after the russians pulled out we left and it filled up with all the crazies.

Altho’ I probably would not express it with quite the same verbiage, essentially yes.

You encapsulated the SSTR conundrum – if a post-conflict state only reaches “Security” and does not proceed to “Stabilization” “Transition” and “Reconstruction,” the slide back to insecurity, conflict, and opening a gaping vacuum for opportunistic individuals to seize power, e.g., rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Somali warlords, etc., is the historical precedent of the late 20th Century. (NB: Liberia may emerge as an exceptional case of the start of the 21st Century.)

We don’t do SSTR well, and we don’t train (most) of our uniformed military to do SSTR.

The $50B question remains: *who* is going to do SSTR effectively and *how*?
Whoever can provide an executable answer is worthy of an Undersecretary position.

If we are not even recognizing what is the opinion of larger citizenry is (not ours, *theirs,* i.e., the ones we want to change).
It’s not about changing attitudes of ‘terrorists’/coddling insurgents/‘hating America’/historical revisionism/whatever – it’s recognition that the civilian population provides tacit or direct support of the ‘terrorists’ or insurgents and why & how important that is: those are the men (mostly) that in some combination we will have to convince, cajole, capture, or kill (… and compromise with …) if we are to win.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

We broke it, we have to fix it. And unfortunately just leaving isnt going to fix it. I wish it did because pakistan is going to explode before too much longer and we will have a whole other crisis and not enough resources or man power to take it on.

IMO having US troops in perpetual occupation (McCain is fine with 100 years, apparently) isn't going to fix it either. Military force is NOT the answer to all problems.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.