Previous page | Contents | Next page
9.5  |  June 2006 to 27 June 2007
“II. No one person or group controls all JAM activity and activities of other Shia
militias and individuals are often wrongly attributed to it. The apparently contradictory
actions of some JAM members are a result of increasing fractures within the
movement, particularly over the use of violence.
“III. Sadr has to balance his political ambitions with those of his militant followers.
He could easily increase levels of violence … though this is unlikely at present.
He would have more difficulty reining in violence by his militant followers against the
MNF … He remains liable to change tack at short notice.
“IV. In some areas such as Basra ‘secret cells’ with little loyalty to Sadr are
responsible for a significant proportion of the anti‑MNF violence carried out in the
name of JAM …
“V. Some ‘secret cells’ are receiving funding, training and supplies from Lebanese
Hizballah and the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force. Despite
accepting Iranian help Sadr remains an Iraqi nationalist: he suspects Iranian motives
and resents their influence. The Iranians for their part find Sadr a frustrating partner.
But Iran still views Sadr as an important player in the future Iraq.”
321.  The JIC assessed that JAM members joined for differing reasons. For some the
attraction was the power and prestige that came with bearing arms and belonging to a
militia. But in a climate of increasing violence, JAM membership also offered safety in
numbers and the likelihood of retribution if attacked. Others joined JAM out of a sense
of religious duty; some to attack Sunnis and the MNF, and a small minority used JAM
as a cover for solely criminal activity:
“We judge that this variety of motivating factors is partly responsible for the divisions
within JAM. JAM labels such as ‘mainstream’, ‘militant’ and ‘secret cell’ are a
valuable analytical aid, but membership is fluid and individuals would not perceive
themselves in this way …
“MNF estimates that there are around 10,000 active supporters with varying degrees
of paramilitary training and a further 20,000 sympathisers who could be mobilised
rapidly … many members of JAM have joined the Iraqi Security Forces, particularly
the police. Tribal loyalties remain important …”
322.  The Iraq Study Group published its report on 6 December.177 Although it stressed
that there was “no magic formula” to guarantee success, it offered 79 recommendations
to improve US policy in Iraq. In particular, it recommended:
changing the primary mission of US forces in Iraq to one of supporting the Iraqi
army, to enable the withdrawal of US combat forces from Iraq by the first quarter
of 2008;
177  Transcript, 6 December 2006, ‘Iraq Study Group Press Conference’.
61
Previous page | Contents | Next page