I read the last part of this book:
The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End by Peter W. Galbraith
Galbraith has many sound recommendations. He has more experience with Iraqis in general and Kurds in particular than any one else of which I am aware. Therefore, I take his comments seriously.
Iraq was never a real country and never should have been designated as such. Who drew the lines in their sands to make this country? Obviously the perpetrators were not knowledgeable about various religious and tribal allegiances in that part of the world. Or, maybe they were and expected Iraq to be a weak semi-country which western imperialists could dominate. Does anyone have an authoritarian answer? I know that if Samuel Huntington had been consulted Iraq never would have been so constructed.
But, what to do with the southern Shiites who are mostly Arab and not Persians such as those in Iran? Although Iran will have a strong influence on them I doubt the Iraqi Shiites really want too much to do with Iran. They have a lot of oil. Should they have their own country? And what of the Kurds who exist in SE Turkey, NW Iran and northern Iraq. Why don't they deserve their own country?
The Sunnis in central and western Iraq are mostly Hashemites, the same as the dominant tribe in Jordan. Why not join western Iraq with Jordan?
So, no matter which way you slice and dice there are few rational solutions to anything but a tri partite division of Iraq with as much separatism or confederation as they settle upon, after a spate of civil war.
Our troops should go to Kurdistan where they are welcome and be used only in extreme emergencies to quell civil wars that get too out of hand, and to keep certain surrounding countries from coming in to capitalize on the unrest for their own advantage. Most of our troops should not come home just yet nor go to another country, such as Kuwait. If they do our public opinion polls here would never allow them to be returned to Iraq. They should mostly stay in Kurdistan -- for now.
Then, we should let the Iraqis define what they want in the way of a country, a confederation, or 3 separate entities. The strength of religious and tribal ties is perhaps now more operant than 150 years ago so the country that should never have been will soon be the country that was.
Turkey was fearful of a too independent Kurdistan but now seems to be changing its attitude. A stable Kurdistan could be a good buffer between Turkey and those other unstable groups in Iraq.
Bush went there to change things in the ME, and he sure did, but not altogether for the better and certainly not the way he anticipated. Remember when he landed on the aircraft carrier under the banner, "Mission Accomplished?"
My $0.02. Read Galbraith's book.
Now, what is the October surprise? Bush and his minions are trying to hold their ill-fated adventure together until the midterm elections, after which they will make some major shifts in ME policy. How will they save face? Will the group led by James Baker be the savior of our present failed policies? Too bad the situation gets so politicized. How many more of our brave troops will die waiting for Bush to get a more rational policy than that given to him by Rumsfeld, Cheney, and other neocons? Shades of Vietnam and quagmire! |
