Obama's first victory in Iraq war

US pressure on the new Shiite-led Iraqi government results in a Sunni lawmaker becoming defense minister. Such democratic unity will help Iraqi troops defeat the Islamic State. 

AP Photo
Iraqi security forces and tribal fighters gather Oct. 17 to defend the city of Haditha, northwest of Baghdad, Iraq.

President Obama’s war in Iraq, aimed at destroying the Islamic State group, won a key victory Saturday. But it was not a military one. Rather it was a victory over the major religious fault-line in the Middle East.

A new Iraqi prime minister, Haider Al-Abadi, who is Shiite, convinced a Shiite-dominated parliament to approve a Sunni, legislator Khaled al-Obeidi, as defense minister. The selection was a final, difficult act in forming an inclusive cabinet.

The cabinet appointments, while not all ideal, were a condition for the American-led military campaign against IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL). They are meant to form the transcendent bonds that affirm a national civic identity.

The war itself would be futile if Iraq’s minority Sunnis continue to back IS as an alternative to Shiite dominance or if the Iraqi military were not led by a unity government. It was, after all, the military’s collapse in June against the IS advance that led to the political downfall of the eight-year premiership of Nouri al-Maliki and his severe sectarian rule.

While journalists focus mainly on the armed conflict, the real struggle lies in attempts to reconcile Iraq’s factions, including ethnic Kurds. Winning that “war” is a reflection of what is needed in almost every conflict in the region – within Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen, as well as the regional power struggle between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Iraq’s civil progress in forming a unity regime needs to be celebrated, if not emulated. It even suggests, ever so faintly, that fighters still joining IS day by day might someday be won over by negotiation.

“We cannot do this for [Iraq], because it’s not just a military problem, it is a political problem,” President Obama said in a 60 Minutes interview. Many countries in the region, he said, must “think about what tolerance means.”

To be sure, one key cabinet appointment, lawmaker Mohammed Salem al-Ghabban as interior minister, may probably cause concern. He is a member of the pro-Iran, hard-line Shi’ite Badr Organization. The Badr’s militia wing, with more than 10,000 fighters, is notorious for attacks on Sunnis. As overseer of police forces, Mr. Ghabban will need to be evenhanded .

Even with Iran’s meddling role in neighboring Iraq, there is hope in its ongoing negotiations with the US over its nuclear program. A settlement there would reshape Shiite-Sunni tensions in the region.

The more Iraq makes progress in building a democratic, prosperous state for all its citizen, the more such groups as Islamic State will lose legitimacy. Destroying IS will be done mostly within itself. Each act of democratic unity in Baghdad is more powerful than all the American air attacks in Iraq. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.