A Modern Homage to Catalonia
Belmont Club
By wretchard
Iraq the Model describes what Maliki is doing to attract more insurgent groups to the negotiation table -- and how the holdouts are striking back. The Iraqi Prime Minister, in a backhanded acknowledgement of where the insurgency is supported from, made a tour of neighboring capitals.
The announced objective of the tour is to garner regional support for al-Maliki's reconciliation initiative and probably al-Maliki decided to make this tour after some insurgent groups have called for giving the Arab league and certain Arab countries a role in this project, meanwhile there are other groups alluding to a possible American pressure on these countries to play a constructive role referring to Khaliazad's earlier visit to Saudi Arabia.
And to those who argue that Iraq is on the verge of civil war, perhaps the most accurate comparison is with the Spanish Civil War, in which a global conflict played itself out in miniature within a single country. It is in effect, a cockpit in which global opponents are fighting through Iraqi proxies.
We must not forget that the conflict in Iraq is in fact an indirect conflict between the neighboring countries and America and among the neighboring countries themselves (a sectarian-ethnic conflict between the Arabs and Iran, a political conflict between Iran and America and another political conflict between Arabs and America and this one originates form the difference in the visions of America and Arabs for the region. Not to mention other smaller conflicts). Unfortunately the only Iraqi elements in these conflicts are the Iraqi parties that accepted to fight this conflict on behalf of Iraq's neighbors.
Will Maliki succeed? The indicators are mixed.
Al-Sabah is even reporting that yet more insurgent groups are joining the club: "sources said these groups are considering making a joint announcement in which they will declare dropping their weapons and joining the talks with the government within 15 days; this time the sources are talking about the "largest of the militant groups" that make up the bulk of the resistant groups." ...
On the other extreme there is the anti-reconciliation camp of which the association of Muslim scholars whose spokesman al-Dhari keeps saying that "no resistance groups had accepted al-Maliki's initiative" and even said the names presented by the media as names of militant groups did not exist. ...
Another report, this time from al-Mada gives an impression that al-Maliki wants to open as many dialogue channels as possible to encourage insurgents to come forward and talk to him even if no mediators were found. The paper says that al-Maliki announced a special email address to allow anyone-especially insurgent willing to reconcile-to allow them to contact him directly over a safe line. ... By the way, I couldn't get that email address, it was displayed only once on local TV and only for a few seconds "to avoid spam mail"!!
A special email address. Who said insurgents were living in the 8th century? We are now living in a world when special email offers of sudden wealth from ex-Ministers in Nigeria may jam a negotiating channel and where the success of the negotiations themselves are less a function of battlefield victory than public perception and private terror.
This reconciliation plan continues to face serious challenges and the worst of which is today's barbaric attack that killed and wounded dozens in Baghdad, in "Sadr city" to be more accurate. I'm afraid this attack will inflict more harm in the future than it already did today because it's similar to the Samarra bombing in its goals and this one I see as a blow directed at the reconciliation plan because the type of target suggests so. The attack carries the marks of al-Qaeda and this terror organization is learning to choose their targets carefully; they did see for example that assassinating relatives and colleagues of the members of the Accord Front did not deter them from joining the political process and becoming part of the cabinet because they were determined to do so. So this time in order to avoid similar results they did not target the parties that are willing to reconcile and chose the side that openly declared its rejection for the reconciliation plan and is well known for being a violent trend.
The attack on the "Sadr city" marketplace which may have killed over 60 people is a perfect example of how terrorism works. In concept it is no different from the al-Qaeda attack on Spain that brought down the Aznar government and installed Zapatero. Or 9/11. The Philip Bobbitt quote used in the last post applies exactly in this situation.
It is precisely because the Madrid attacks reversed an election that terrorism succeeded. Terrorism is the extension of al-Qa’eda’s diplomacy ... The attacks were, very simply, about democracy. They were an attempt to impose an answer on this question: will democratically elected governments be able to pursue their policies on the basis of the judgment of their institutions or can their leaders be tempted into ransoming their population when the public is hostage to violence?
Terrorism is extortion in the service of politics. Attacks on civilian targets are whole-page advertisements taken out to flog these wares on a reluctant public. The military power of terrorists is negligable. Despite the fantasies of those who imagine Iraq to be Vietnam, with divisions of NVA sending tanks down the road to Saigon; with legions of laborers dragging artillery pieces across the mountains to pound surrounded French garrisons into submission -- it is not that. Rather, it is a development of the techniques pioneered in the Algerian conflict against the French. It is the political and media power of terror which is important, not their military strength. And in a takeoff from Omar's riff on Maliki's email anecdote, I would venture to say that terror would have won against the US and the West already despite the vast power of America were it not for the Internet, which has ironically made it possible for neutralize the propaganda power of terror. The Internet makes it possible to show terror up for the murder that it is. To strip it of supposed justification. To remind people of what is never mentioned in the papers: that Osama like all men goes and takes a shit. Made it possible to answer back. In a way, the Internet and the blogosphere is the sole remaining voice the victims; whether of terror or counter-terror.
That fact doesn't mean that Maliki will succeed. But it gives him a chance; a chance he would not have had in the golden 60s everyone hankers after. If the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has demonstrated anything, it is the power of terror to thwart peace for decades. Everything that terror has learned in Gaza and the West Bank will be thrown at the new Iraqi government. And half the battlefield is right here, on your screen. fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com |
