Training the Iraqi Security Forces - "Mission Improbable"

Atrios notes how its Ground Hog day with those running the war hitting the same themes that they hit two years ago --- "we've trained a bunch of Iraqis and all we need to do is train a few more."

So how's the training really going? The short answer is "not good."

Two must-read articles for anyone serious about Iraq have come out in recent weeks. The first is from two Washington Post writers embedded in an American unit charged with training the Iraq Army's Chrlie Company; the unit for the reporters to cover was chosen by the U.S. military. Charlie Company disintegrated (all but 30 of the company's 250 soldiers quit) in December 2004 when its commander was killed. In effect, our trainers are starting from scratch though two years down the road. The piece contains much that is comedic though its implications are obviously tragic. For example:

They followed U.S. military protocol: Each soldier dismounted from the vehicle and cleared his weapon. Zwayid stayed in the truck, handed his gun to a friend and asked him to clear it.

"Get down and clear your own weapon!" Cpl. William Kozlowski shouted to Zwayid in English.

Zwayid answered in Arabic. "That's my weapon," he explained, pointing to his friend.

"Corporal, you're a leader!" Kozlowski shouted back. "Take charge!"

Zwayid smiled at him. "What's he saying to me?" he whispered.

Then there is the stark and candid assessment by our boots-on-the-ground soldiers:

"I know the party line. You know, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Army, five-star generals, four-star generals, President Bush, Donald Rumsfeld: The Iraqis will be ready in whatever time period," said 1st Lt. Kenrick Cato, 34, of Long Island, N.Y., the executive officer of McGovern's company, who sold his share in a database firm to join the military full time after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "But from the ground, I can say with certainty they won't be ready before I leave. And I know I'll be back in Iraq, probably in three or four years. And I don't think they'll be ready then."

The second is from The Economist which is - unfortunately - subscription only. The article details more tragi-comedy. Here's the first paragraph:

"BAHRO TAHIR is not the brightest soldier in Iraq's new army. Last week, at an American-assisted military academy in Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's home town, he began basic training for the fourth time. It was not that he wanted to spend another month studying tedious human-rights law and drilling under a blistering sun; Mr Tahir did not want to do that at all. Rather, according to the academy's Iraqi instructors, Iraqi army commanders tend to send to basic training only those too friendless or dim to wriggle out of it, which included Mr Tahir. "They said they were sending me here for a computer course," he lamented, to the amusement of the recruits within ear-shot, except for another basic-training veteran, who turned out to be deaf."

Worse --- the article goes on to describe the myriad of problems that have arisen, including that the soldiers are not getting paid since the US turned over that responsibility to Iraq's Ministry of Defense and that many who go through the basic training end up fighting for the insurgents. "Asked to estimate how many of the academy's students were motivated by a desire to help their country, Major Donald McArdle, the American in charge, reckoned 5%; his colleagues thought this too high."

I suspect that a large part of the problem is that any Iraqi who truly wants to be part of a security force and is motivated by a sense of pride in serving his community is more apt to join one of the sectarian militias. The men joining the Iraqi forces the U.S. are training appear to be tricked into service or motivated by a desire to make a quick buck.