IRAQ - Maysan Insurgency.

In an article published on Nov. 4, Michael Schwartz, a professor of sociology at Stony Brook University, focused on the "Marsh Arabs" - Shi'ites who live in the south-eastern province of Maysan bordering with Iran. Maysan is a small Shi'ite area, not in the eye of the Sunni/Neo-Salafi insurgency and not occupied by US troops. But it is policed by the British Staffordshire Regiment, "renowned for its non-aggressive approach to occupying Iraq", and there is a low-intensity but continuous insurgency against them.

The region's only claim to newsworthiness, Schwartz wrote, "has been its status as the historical home of the Marsh Arabs, infamously dispersed by Saddam...when he drained the marshes which cover a substantial portion of the province". In 2003, there was a brief flurry of Maysan coverage by the Western media when, just after the US-led invasion, the marshes were partially re-flooded and some of the Marsh Arabs returned to their ancestral home. He added: "...Maysan...for the past two-plus years...has been the site of a low-intensity, low-visibility war which may be a better measure of the fate of the occupation than higher profile battles in [Sunni] cities" like Falluja and Tal A'far.

Maysan has a rebellious history. Saddam could not to bring it to heel. This was a key motivation for draining the marshes and displacing the Marsh Arabs. But even that draconian solution did not pacify Maysan. For years, his regime maintained an occupying force of 20,000 there, partly because of the province's proximity to Iran and partly to suppress local guerrillas, who remained active up to the US invasion. When the US attack became imminent and Saddam pulled his troops out to defend Baghdad, local guerrillas took control of the capital, Amarah, and installed their own government. The British - in charge of southern Iraq for the US-led CPA - arrived five days later, and "local residents greeted them as invaders with no business in town". According to Capt. Andy McLannahan, the British commander, the local attitude was, "What are you doing here? As far as the locals were concerned, "it was they who ousted...[Saddam's] forces, not the US invasion".

When the British imposed their authority and displaced the local government, the residents were bitter. As UPI put it, "In the local eyes they had just traded one occupation for another". Since then, the British have had no better success than Saddam in subduing the province. The insurgency there has evolved through several stages, each a response to changing British strategies and their own capabilities. The British estimate that, like much of Iraq, most of the locals only want to get on with their lives. It is a small minority which is up to no good. But the large majority allow the small number to carry on. As in any low-intensity guerrilla war, the majority allow the guerrillas to operate. The police and National Guard do their part by failing to apprehend the local guerrillas, even when ordered to do so by their British superiors. It is clear that the resistance in Maysan has now dug in for a protracted war of attrition.