Oh dear. It seems I missed this story yesterday.

BAGHDAD, June 10 -- A tribal coalition formed to oppose the extremist group al-Qaeda in Iraq, a development that U.S. officials say has reduced violence in Iraq's troubled Anbar province, is beginning to splinter, according to an Anbar tribal leader and a U.S. military official familiar with tribal politics.

In an interview in his Baghdad office, Ali Hatem Ali Suleiman, 35, a leader of the Dulaim confederation, the largest tribal organization in Anbar, said that the Anbar Salvation Council would be dissolved because of growing internal dissatisfaction over its cooperation with U.S. soldiers and the behavior of the council's most prominent member, Abdul Sattar Abu Risha. Suleiman called Abu Risha a "traitor" who "sells his beliefs, his religion and his people for money."

Abu Risha, who enjoys the support of U.S. military commanders, denied the allegations and said the council is not at risk of breaking apart. "There is no such thing going on," he said in a telephone interview from Jordan.

Lt. Col. Richard D. Welch, a U.S. military official who works closely with the tribal leaders in Iraq, said that relations inside the group were strained and that he expected a complete overhaul of the coalition in coming days.

Well, it was a good run, while it lasted. I’m a bit disappointed about a couple of things. COL Sean MacFarland put some hard work into creating this alliance and should be lauded for his efforts. It was a shining example of a new strategy that has been eagerly seized upon by MNF-I. Just because an alliance fallen apart in Anbar is no reason to expect it to fail in Salah-el Din or Amariya, is it?

The other disappointment is all the ca$h and weaponry we’ve undoubtedly given these tribesmen. If they’re unable to patch up their quarrel about who is a traitor and who is a sheep-stealer or worse, then they’re liable to blame it all on us and I’m sure you get my drift about what happens then.

Tribal relations are notoriously fickle and fluid, and recent tensions within the Anbar Salvation Council bear some hallmarks of a power struggle that could signal either its evolution or its collapse.

Welch, a U.S. Army Reserve officer in Baghdad who specializes in tribal and religious affairs, said that "you will see, I think, in the next few days a complete severing" of relations between Abu Risha and other members of the council, and the formation of a new group.

Suleiman said 12 Anbar tribal leaders have signed an agreement to form a new coalition that would result in the dissolution of the Anbar Salvation Council and the purging of Abu Risha. "Those people have thrown themselves in the arms of the U.S. forces for their own benefit," he said.

OK, so now it’s US + Suleiman’s new group vs al-Qaeda + Abdul Sattar Abu Risha? COL Pat Lang discussed the ephemeral quality of this sort of alliance just yesterday.

For the rest of you I will say that this tactic as well as that of cooperating with tribal groups in Iraq (whether Sunni or Shia) has my full support.

Can you trust them? Will they be loyal to the Americans (or the government)? Is this "paying protection money?" Will this hurt the Iraqi government?

The answers; No. Not necessarily. No. Maybe (So what!)
…
It is not a question of the "new friends" being loyal to anyone except themselves. People are generally faithless if they think their interests are not favored. You have to to deal with that. That is how people generally are in the Middle East (or anywhere else). The real question here is whether or not these people can be useful to you with regard to something specific that you want to get done. (like kill Jihadis) The solution, use'em and then abuse'em if they become a real liability.

Use ‘em and abuse ‘em, but just never turn your back on ‘em. Speaking of which, I deeply regret any incorrect inferences any reader might have drawn from my comment about sheep-stealing or worse above. This is a family online magazine and we try to rise about the gutter, ya know.

Apropos of picking the wrong candidate(s) or the wrong time to pontificate, it seems that just two days ago renowned Napoleonic War expert and military strategist extraordinaire Fred Kagan was taking a victory lap in the pages of the LA Times.

The Iraqi government has long declared its determination to root out terrorists in the country, and its security forces have been fighting Al Qaeda for months. But now, ordinary Iraqis, most significantly Sunni Arabs in Al Anbar province (until now the chief supporters of the terrorists), are putting their lives on the line against Al Qaeda as well.

By the week after next Mr Kagan will be denying he ever wrote the editorial.

I don’t know what it is out there on the Left Coast. Is it the water or the hot sun burning down on their heads all day long that leads them to make such poor choices about informing the public