No, I’m not talking about the WMD’s that were going to appear in a “mushroom cloud” if American failed to dethrone Saddam Hussein. I’m talking about the unified, democratic Iraq theory that is now driving America’s misguided military misadventure. But the two are cut from the same cloth. Just as there never were any significant amounts of chemical and biological weapons (outdated, nearly inert sarin gas or low grade anthrax remains for example) and no nuclear programs to be discovered in Iraq, there is no real historical or cultural justification for maintaining the arbitrary lines that mark that country on today’s maps.
The country we call Iraq was created by the French and British, carving up territory won from the Ottoman Empire after WWI. Without taking into account the politics of the different ethnic and religious groups in the country, in particular those of the Kurds to the north, Britain imposed a Hāshimite monarchy on Iraq and defined the territorial limits of Iraq . (Wikipedia) Prior to the creation of the present-day boundaries of Iraq, the various ethnic and cultural peoples did not consider themselves to be of one nation. Only under the iron fist of dictators and strongmen could Iraq exist as a political reality. Remove the tyrant and the facade melts away. Anyone with a few minutes and an ounce of perspective could have surmised as much before starting a war over there. We know our leaders thought long and hard on this whole Iraq mess. I guess it’s the ounce of perspective they lack.
When it comes to Iraq, Bush is like the kid in junior high school who learns that the girl he had a crush on didn’t like him back. But instead of getting on with life, he becomes a stalker, sending friends over with “do you like Gerogie” notes, and trying to get invited to the same parties. The difference here is that instead trying to get a seat next to the girl in the cafeteria, Bush is sending a generation of American’s into a hellhole of his choosing, as if to say, “If I can’t have you, nobody will.”
We begin the fifth year of American corporate warfare with over 3200 dead American soldiers, tens of thousands of seriously wounded veterans, hundreds of thousands of emotionally injured troops, millions of affected wives, husbands, and children, tens of millions of displaced Iraqi families (the use of Iraqi here is used in the current meaning to identify any number of ethnicities in the region formerly know as Iraq), and an entire region of the world in chaos. That’s a lot to pay for something that was never there to begin with. For something many pretended was there even though it never was. For the artificial construct that is Iraq.
Once the dictator fell, and once the people realized that the conquerors were just after the resources under the sand (that is, that for the American government Iraq represented a massive wealth transfer operation disguised as any number of changing rationale) and would not continue to rule with a strong hand, or with any hands at all, the long-buried but unforgotten ethnic enmity returned, and the reality on the ground today is at least as historically motivated as it is terrorist-driven or anti-occupationist in nature. In essence, the bloody chaos in Iraq is a violent reminder of what happens when imperialism carves up the world for itself.
The Iraq War can not be won by conventional military means wrought upon the people of Iraq by the American military. It did not work in Vietnam. It is not working now. You do not democratize a people by killing every other one of them and starving the rest of work, food, modern essentials and sanitation. Even if the vast majority of Iraqi citizens wanted to work with the American’s to restore their country, they would still be consumed by fighting amongst themselves for eventual internal control. Under the assumption that victory in Iraq must be measured by the establishment and continued viability of a single, unified, national democratic government, victory is all but impossible; defeat all but assured. No amount of American soldiers will change that reality. No amount of treasure. No amount of tears.
The Bush Administration’s insistance on maintaining the facade that Iraq is a unified nation and must remain so is likely a major contributor to the inability of elected Iraqi legislators to achieve any sort of progress. They do not want to be unified. They do not consider themselves as brother’s in arms. They are Kurds or Shia or Sunni. Then they are of their family group and town. Only after that might they consider themselves as Iraqi. The sectarian violence and relative peaceful Kurdish region separated in the north are testaments to that idea.
Often the neo-cons and other war supporters will claim that those who want the war to end have no ‘plan to stop the war.’ The truth is that they just aren’t (a)listening, (b) comprehending, (c)realistic or (d) any of the above. Stopping a war is actually pretty easy when you have a defined enemy. You call a formal truce, arrange a peace treaty meeting, make agreements, and cease armed hostility. It can’t be done overnight, but it certainly can be done.
When faced with an amorphous enemy or one who has no desire to make peace with you, you have no alternative but to fight until one side can fight no longer. Or until one side can be convinced to fight no longer.
In Iraq, we face both scenarios. If America were to accede to at least listening to ideas that Iraq divide into three autonomous regions such talks could lead to a drastic reduction in sectarian violence and reduce the elements of civil war that now engulf much of Iraq. There have been talks of a tripartite oil revenue commission to fairly distribute oil wealth from the former Iraq to the three new sovereign nations. Such talks could lead to the political solution that even our military leaders have said is the only realistic path to take. And frankly, it should make no difference to us (or the Bush Administration) if the end result is three friendly countries or even 2 friendly countries in the region instead of one. Unless of course, if by acceding to such a plan, or even to talks, it would irreversably let loose the grip Team Bush and their cut and run corporate buddies like Halliburton have of all that oil.
In addition to prompting a sectarian cease-fire, the possibility of ethnic autonomy could lead to a concerted effort by each group to help root out the real terrorists in their midsts so as to speed up their own path to their self-determined future. And with renewed effort, American’s could work with and train “Iraqi” units in each region to restore order, moderation, and modern living to the regions.
And for those terror groups with whom we must ‘fight to the end,’ at least we’d have the ability and the cooperation to actually disrupt and end their murderous reign over civilians and soldiers alike.
Unfortunately, it’s really the oil that the Bush-puppet has been in love with all along. All the way back to the first Iraqi invasion, when the fledgling neo-cons like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and their dark little minions begat their foul plan for oil domination in the Middle East. And that’s why they’ve continued to come up with excuse after excuse to validate their horrific misadventure. And that’s why American troops will never leave Iraq so long as Bush is president and Cheney is still in line for the job. And frankly, I’m not all that confident in the Democrats ability to rectify the solution either.
Victory in Iraq means that Iraq no longer exists. But in it’s place could stand three new, strong, modern, and moderate nations that at the very least could be ambivalent towards the west and at the very most long lasting allies in a new middle east
.
(cross posted at Bring It On!)
This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 20th, 2007 at 6:29 am and is filed under Bush, Iraq, Military, Politics, War, World News.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
While I do think that partition should be a considered option, there are certainly drawbacks. Iraq is not perfectly divided upon ethnic lines. There will always be minority populations within each region and those people will be target by militias, whether Sunni or Shia, just as they are today. And while its certainly possible that a political peace could be reached between the people, it seems unlikely that they are willing to work together or trust each other.
The major problem, however, is probably oil, which is largerly in the SE part of the country. It would be nearly impossible for the three groups to reach an agreement that would spread the wealth.
Of course, maybe and hopefully it could work. The Kurds have established control over the Northern part of the country already–an area where I believe the military had good success rooting out terrorists.
Just a sad situation all around.
Time had a good article about it a while back: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555130,00.html
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
What I find sad is Neo-con’s total disregard for public opinion that the War is bullshit. A couple of months more or even years is not going to stablisie the region by the US asserting its presence in the region. The arab countries surrounding Iraq also have an effect on this situation and sentiment for the US isn’t exactly on a good footing in the Arab world.
Let’s hope, someone with some sense can put an end to it, sooner rather than later.
March 27th, 2007 at 7:36 am
“Stopping a war is actually pretty easy when you have a defined enemy. You call a formal truce, arrange a peace treaty meeting, make agreements, and cease armed hostility. It can’t be done overnight, but it certainly can be done.
When faced with an amorphous enemy or one who has no desire to make peace with you, you have no alternative but to fight until one side can fight no longer. Or until one side can be convinced to fight no longer.”
Excellent point. I am so sad and disgusted that this war is still dragging on, with little hope of it ending well.
March 31st, 2007 at 8:19 pm
Excellent writing! It annoys me that people who have no inkling on ethnic conflict (and who play up on it) are supposed to be the ones who will bring peace about. America needs to recognise that every problem does not have an American solution. The arrogance is just too much.
March 31st, 2007 at 8:20 pm
***need an American solution
April 5th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Sometimes I think the politicians in charge have about as much political knowledge of the situation in Iraq as I do! Which is not a lot…
What is it going to take to get them to stop the insanity? Because it is insanity. If you apply the facts of how our govt has acted here, to any other situation, it would look completely crazy.