Why?Originally Posted by davidbfpo
Agreed... that's why I think we're looking at a partition in progress. I've heard it said that a truly inclusive government could hold Iraq together, but that doesn't seem a realistic aspiration.
Certainly not I. That's why I would not want to see the US investing resources in an effort to hold Iraq together.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Mencken
Interesting (IMO at least):
Kurdish intelligence officer: British ISIL militants 'will target UK'
Yes the pitch was for military aid for the Kurds... but there may well be some merit in the warning he gives.He told Sky News: "If only 10% of these people survive, if I know Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (ISIL leader) he will use these people to attack the UK.
"According to the intelligence we have, just Britain alone has around 400 to 450 known people fighting amongst the ranks of ISIL."
In the old days - when the Brits still had a military of consequence - all efforts would have been made to make sure that the maximum number of these UK militants were killed in the pursuit of their jihad in Syria and Iraq (and not wait for them to attempt to return home to continue with the jihad).
Now today's Brits will be wringing their hands over any act contributing to the deaths of UK citizens even if they are jihadis.
But the Brits are saved by the sad fact that they no longer have any significant military reach to do anything about the 450 odd British jihadis. Therefore to do nothing is their only option.
Seems as if the Iraqi government cannot even get the internet blockade thing right as well.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...sis-sites.html
It still seems that civilians in the WH and DoD still cannot get things rights even after 8 years in Iraq.
Chalabi has American blood on his hands, he basically provided the "false" intel to get the war going and now we turn to him because what he is an expert?---he had initially wanted Malaki's job in 2005 but we did not support him then. We seem never to learn from anything.
Secondly, it looks like that US capped the contact to the key and largest Sunni tribes after 2011 not to "anger" Malaki. Again DoS has always seems to make the wrong moves. Maybe it was their swimming pool that kept them from not traveling around the countryside.
Looks like the Sunni tribes will fight until Baghdad has a "balanced government and no Malaki" and we all know in advance that will not work.
So what have we really learned in eight years of fighting in Iraq--nothing really.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-iraq-war.html
Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 06-21-2014 at 06:29 AM.
The Sunni protests that lasted for a year in Iraq and none of them talked about creating a new Sunni country. The two main arguments were over a more inclusive government with real power sharing and carrying out reforms both realistic and not so much or decentralization and creating a Sunni federal region.
Sunni sectarian identity as it has developed since 2003 has a couple main components. One is that they are victims of the Americans, the Shiites and Iran. Many in fact believe those three have worked together in a conspiracy to destroy Iraq and the Sunnis. In turn, a narrative has developed that the new order in Iraq is wrong because they are a majority. They claim that Sunni Arabs are a plurality and with Sunni Kurds they are a majority. This is used for a justification for why they should rule Iraq or at least have a 50-50 split of positions within the government with the Shia. Those believes are actually increasing in Iraq. They already got one hard message during the civil war that the Shiites might in fact be more numerous than they are but that has apparently faded as the majority narrative is even discussed by leading Iraqi parties like Speaker of Parliament Nujafi's Mutahidun.
While your suggestion is very practical it would take a major reformulation of Sunni identity to make any headway.
A really good article from the New York Times today on just how effective the ISIS is/has been and how wealthy they are---tends to support my thoughts that we have constantly under estimated them since Zarqawi called for the Caliphate in 2004 in Baqubah at the Green Dome.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/21/wo...-advance.html?
A voice from inside Mosul
A very different perspective from a human rights activist in Mosul. I say different because nearly all the commentary is from faraway observers and a few in Kurdistan (incl. BBC).
Hat tip to Open Democracy:http://www.opendemocracy.net/arab-aw...m-inside-mosul
davidbfpo
Here's my latest article Security In Iraq’s Anbar Shows Battle Against Insurgents Will Be Long And Often Futile Anbar province shows that the Iraqi forces with the help of tribes can take territory but can't hold it. Used example of Saqlawiya which is just outside of Fallujah. Has been cleared of insurgents then retaken by militants and cleared again three times in just the last month and a half. Shows what fighting will be like in the rest of the country. Iraq is heading towards a long war of attrition with many reversals.
ISIS could be sitting on top of a $2 bil war chest. Earns $8 mil/mo from taxes on trade between Syria and Iraq, $20 mil/yr in oil sales to Syria and Turkish companies, $30 mil/yr from kidnapping foreign aid workers and reporters in Syria. Uses money not only for funding operations but to administer the regions it controls in Syria. Money will now be going to places like Mosul in Iraq.
http://www.npr.org/2014/06/20/323844...dant-war-chest
A very disturbing repercussions that can cause problems in India too.Govt fears Shia-Sunni tension, issues alert
NEW DELHI: Concerned by reports that the developments in Iraq could lead to Shia-Sunni confrontation in the country, the government has issued an alert after the matter was discussed in the review meeting chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday.
Meanwhile, a city-based Shia Muslim organization has enlisted around 19,000 volunteers to travel to trouble-torn Iraq to defend the holy shrines in Karbala and Najaf and provide aid to the suffering Iraqis.
On Wednesday, Shia group Anjuman-e-Haidari distributed forms seeking volunteers to travel to Iraq where several cities have been over-run by Sunni militants under the banner of ISIS.
Shias ran around 50 camps outside mosques across the country on Friday. The volunteers have to sign on a declaration attached to the form which says, "I am against terrorism which I believe is one of the most serious threats to humanity."
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...w/36921774.cms
The lost moral of Islam’s divide
SHAJAHAN MADAMPAT
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-e...?homepage=true
I feel we are going about this all wrong. We should not be helping the Iraqi government - we should be looking for the moderate elements in the Sunni coalition that we could work with and then sow the seeds of hate and discontent amongst the ruling Sunni coalition. We should be repeating "ISIS is getting all the money while you do all the hard work of controlling the territory." "They have done nothing we could not have done ourselves." and then we need to determine who is at the top of ISIS besides Al Baghdadi. Target someone we could turn, and then kill everyone above him. Old fashion king making. Because the reality is that the tribal politics have more in common with the Western world pre-Westphalia than the Western world now. And if we continue to pretend that the tribal/religious elements who are now in control of Sunni Iraq are willing to work within a power sharing government out of Baghdad then we are fooling ourselves.
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
Ray,
I think this incredibly important and a lot of folks in the U.S. who work counterterrorism and the strategic implications of terrorism don't grasp the potential scale of the challenge throughout South Asia, but especially India since Al-Qaeda and its various affiliates will target India, probably more so once the jihad ends or scales down in Afghanistan.
Intentional or accidental, and based on my reading of various Islamist doctrine and strategy I believe it is the former, one of the more effective ways for them to create to a high degree of instability they can exploit to spark to an ethnic conflict, either between Shia and Sunni, Sunni and Christian, Sunni and Buddhist, etc.
The Sunni/Shia conflict in Syria and now in Iraq (this has been ongoing, but it is more prominent now in the media, to include Jihadist websites) creates opportunities that can be exploited by both sides.
I brought this up once before to people who have known better and they were briefing senior leaders that were no Shia in India, and for that matter no Shia in the USPACOM region, and they were of course wrong on both accounts. Once they realized they were wrong they defended their position by stating they were only a small percentage.
Let's look at that argument in India alone. India is the second or most populace nation in the world. They have the third largest Muslim population in the world, close to 161 million Muslims. The so called experts are right, Shia are a minority estimated to represent 10-13% of that population, so darn there are only around 16 million Shia in India. That is more than the population of many countries, to include: Mali, Tunisia, Belgium, Cuba, UAE, Sweden, etc. No problem easy to manage for India's security forces right?
I think the assumption that all politics is local is deeply flawed. Global issues may manifest differently in various locales but they're still global issue that often mobilize people regardless of good the local governance is. In fact their issues often have nothing to due with the local governance issues.
Hope India can get to the left of this. Another aspect worth watching is Shia foreign fighters traveling to Iraq now, much like many traveled to Syria to support Assad. I doubt they'll be focused on targeting the West or their host nations when they return, but they could very well continue their civil war against the Sunnis when they return.
I heard yesterday for the first time that the U.S. is only capable of focusing on one thing at a time when it comes to national security, and while I think that is an exaggeration, we do focus on one thing (Al-Qaeda) to the extent that we don't appreciate the significance of other things simultaneously.
I hear what you say and it reaffirms the view that the non-Kurd Sunnis are struggling to come to terms with their change in status in Iraq. I would ask the Kurds whether they would prefer to go it alone or play second fiddle to the non-Kurd Sunnis who even together still comprise a 40-60 minority to the Shias in a unified Iraq. Then of course you need to ask the Shia whether they want to remain in a state with the minority Sunni whose areas produce little oil contribution to the national economy. It could get interesting.
Thank you for your post.
At least it indicates some people are thinking beyond the cultural and racial boundaries.
India has been howling blue murder for a long time about the scourge of Islamic fundamentalism, but the world did not care.
It was only when 9/11 happened and Bush went ballistic that the world realised what has struck them and as the years progressed they realised the true horror this fundamentalism is havocking the world.
Shia or Sunni, Islam demands that they maintain their supremacy. Shias maybe the minority amongst them, but their fervour is no less. Sadly both the sect has mindless medieval mindset and one cannot change that because the religion is intense in it fire!
The religion has does not recognise Westphalian boundaries.
Therefore, we can wait and watch.
And hope that some sense prevails.
I hope India is ready for the onslaught.
This time it will not be a cakewalk.
Ray--was not one of the core Kashmir Sunni insurgent groups is in factIndain and one even the Indian government has had problems with and reports are coming in that they have returned in strength back into their home territory inside India with combat experience out of the Kashmir?
Also the Sunni fundamentalists will in fact target India eventually because India was one point in the world where both Shia and Sunni have gotten along exceptionally well over the last 300--400 years.
Ray, you are taking the same, shallow, biased tact that everyone else is taking. This is not religious. That is just the way it manifests itself. This is Identity Warfare. The same type of identity warfare that caused the religious wars in Europe or the genocide in Rwanda.
It is a combination of three factors. 1st, a social identity. Depending on your specialty this is either Identity Theory or Social Identity Theory. It is derived from the need for self esteem. The second element is limited resources. In a world of limited resources people tend to band together more tightly into the group that they identify with. This is derived from our need for security. The final element is some form of injustice, real or perceived. This causes them to lash out against those they see causing the injustice. The fact that this is an identity war should be clear from the fact ISIS claims Takfiri status - able to decide for themselves who shares their identity as a true Muslim and who does not.
The second and third elements are relative. Resource constraint was far greater 200 years ago. Each group compares themselves with other groups - where do they stand relative to others.
There are three ways to fight an identity war, 1) diminish the identity - you do this by crushing it (Not advised); 2) replace the identity - the idea behind creating a state identity (we are all Iraqis) or an individual identity* (the liberal or democratic peace); or 3) divide and conquer - find the fault lines within the group and exploit them. That is a temporary solution, but it can work.
Besides the fact that we are missing the reality of the situation, as long as we think this is a religious war it will never end ... well, it can end, when you kill off all the "radical" Muslims. But odds are that, the farther you go, the larger the group of "radical" Muslims becomes until you wipe them all out.
*creating a liberal identity requires removing the resource limitation. Once resources are sufficient then people no longer feel the need to band tightly together and begin to accept others for their individual characteristics instead of their stereotypical group identity.
Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 06-22-2014 at 03:47 PM.
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
Out of an article from Ken Pollack 11 June 2014:
... It is important to understand a few key points about the Sunni militant side of the new Iraqi civil war. It’s a Coalition, not a Single Group. First, ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) is essentially the “lead dog” of a larger Sunni militant coalition—hence my preference for the latter, more accurate description. ISIS has been fighting in conjunction with a number of other Iraqi Sunni militant groups. Effectively the entire rogue’s gallery of Sunni militias from the 2006-2008 civil war have been revived by Prime Minister Maliki’s alienation of the Sunni Arab community since 2011. AQI, the Naqshbandis, the Ba’th, Jaysh al-Muhammad, Ansar al-Sunnah, and all of the rest are back in operation in Iraq, in at least tacit cooperation with a number of Sunni tribes.
These groups are key members of the Sunni militant coalition. They have done a great deal of the fighting, dying and occupying. Often they are indistinguishable from one another to outsiders or even Iraqis who are not themselves Sunni militants.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks