Civil war possible in Iraq?
History of grievances between sects leaves US officials wary.
Reuters reports that as the US struggles to find a formula to return sovereignty to Iraq, officials are worried about the
potential for civil war in a country marked by religious and ethnic tensions. Although US officials in Iraq say that a civil war would be unlikely with 123,000 US troops in the country, they are still wary because of the history of mutual grievances between Sunni and Shiite Muslims and Kurds.
Reuters says a "traumatic event" could trigger such an occurance, such as the assassination of a major religious political leader by another faction. Or, as Brookings Institution defense analyst Michael O'Hanlon points out, the chances of civil war may rise once US troops are gone.
"In the longer term, you have the very distinct possibility of the militias of the different ethnic groups being the most powerful military forces in Iraq. And if the national army doesn't hold together or doesn't turn out to be very powerful, you could have a situation where when we try to pull out in five years you see civil warfare at that point," O'Hanlon said.
Knight-Ridder reports that whispers of "revolution"
are growing louder in Baghdad this month at teahouses, public protests and tribal meetings. Iraqi's look back to 1920, when they rebelled against British rule.
Knight-Ridder says many believe the situation in the country now is similar to the situation 84 years ago: unpopular foreign occupiers, unelected governing bodies and unhappy residents eager for self-determination. Many Shiites are looking to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani for guidance.
"If Sistani called for revolution, I would sacrifice my life for the good of my country," said Hamdiya al Niemi, a 27-year-old street vendor whose father raised her on stories of the 1920 uprising. "My father was so proud talking about that time, how we kicked out the British and how we should never allow foreigners to rule our land."
The San Jose Mercury News reports that the
White House is deeply divided over how to defuse Mr. Sistani's opposition to a US-backed plan for restoring self-rule to Iraq and avert even deeper instability. In public, the White House and Paul Bremer, the US administrator in Iraq, remain committed to turning over power on July 1 to an interim government, selected by an interim assembly, chosen through regional caucuses. But behind the scenes a number of difference options are being examined.
Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld favor a proposal to turn over power early – by April 1 – to the Governing Council, a body of US-installed Iraqi leaders, said senior US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity. The council would be expanded from its current 25 seats to include more Shiites. The aim would be to persuade Sistani to agree to delaying elections, they said. ... But the State Department, the National Security Council staff and the CIA oppose the idea, the officials said. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and senior US diplomats prefer a "go slow" approach, said the second senior US official. They want to wait to hear from a United Nations fact-finding team that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is expected to send to Iraq to determine whether conditions exist for free and credible elections, he said.
The Financial Times reports on the real mission of the United Nations team about to be
sent to Iraq – not the stated objective of discovering if election can be held, but to find a way to
end the stalemate between Sistani and the US. But by asking to talk directly to the United Nations,
The Times says, Sistani has basically undercut the authority of the US and the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. It could also provide him with a way to back out of the confrontation with the US without appearing to give in to US pressure.
Reuters reports that UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi said on Tuesday premature elections in Iraq
could do more harm than good and signaled he would not play the kind of leadership role there that Washington has pressed him to play. "We'd like him to play a leadership role in this," a senior US official told
Reuters. "Our argument to him is that he's been very, very successful in Afghanistan, which was a very difficult situation. Someone who's got that kind of experience and knowledge can apply it to this situation as well." But Mr. Brahimi seemed to rule out this kind of role. The
Philadelphia Inquirer looks at the Bush administrations
newly minted fondness for multilateralism.
Dilip Hiro, author of
Secrets and Lies: Operation 'Iraqi Freedom' asks in an oped piece in
The New York Times how the US, a country that fought a "war for democracy," now finds itself
opposing Sistani's call for direct elections. Mr. Hiro says its because US leaders "can't stomach the idea that democracy in Iraq will mean Shiites assuming power," and probably developing closer ties with Iran.
The Associated Press reports Sistani's rivals are
pointing to his Iranian citizenship as proof that he should not be allowed to speak about Iraq's constitution. But many experts, both inside and outside the Bush administration,
dismiss the idea that Sistani wants an Iranian-style, Islamic state in Iraq.
"Iran had revolution. In Iraq you didn't," James Dobbins, a former State Department official now with the Rand research group said. "Also, the existence of the Iranian model is a factor militating against a repetition in Iraq. Iraq realizes the Iranian model hasn't worked." But the rise of Sistani alarms another key group in Iraq, the Kurds. Khasraw Saleh Koyi, writing in the
Kurdistan Observer, says Kurds believe that a Shiite dominated assembly
would act with Iran to prevent Kurdish autonomy in the north.
There is a Kurdish consensus that Iraq's Arab Shiite clergy is behaving in tandem with the ruling clergy of the Iranian regime who is against the notion of an ethnic federation that allows the Kurds the opportunity to steer the course of their own destiny by themselves than by an Arab dominated central authority in Baghdad. To justify such mistrust, Kurds have piles of hard evidence; that is in addition to the simple wisdom which suggest: "To predict others' future behaviour, one needs no more than knowing their past behavior." Finally,
Agence-France Presse reports that the head of the Iraqi interim Governing Council, Adnan Pachachi says the council will have a
three-member presidency when it takes over political power from the US-led coalition on June 30. This model for the executive power will be spelled out by the "fundamental law" to be drafted by the Governing Council by February 28, he said.
Also...
•
Nigeria seeking N. Korea missiles (
BBC)
•
Truth catching up to Bush (
Toronto Star)
•
Humor: Gondor accepted into United Nations (
Watley Review)
•
Aging hawks and new world (
Santa Maria Times)
•
Army lists supply snarls in Iraq: Logistics woes dogged invasion, study finds (
The New Orleans Times Picayune)
•
Iraqis snap up US army rubbish (
Agence-France Presse)
•
Now Blair must tell the truth on WMD (
The Mirror, UK)
•
Journalism under threat from Hutton, warns Rees-Mogg (
Guardian)
• Feedback appreciated. E-mail
Tom Regan
.
|
RSS feed