September 6, 2004
IT'S NOT A NATION:
Iraq's Survival Still at Stake, Report Warns (Reuters, 9/03/04)
Iraq could splinter into civil war and destabilize the whole region if the interim government, U.S. forces and United Nations fail to hold the ring among factions struggling for power, according to a British thinktank.The best Iraq can hope for is to muddle through an 18-month political transition that began when Washington formally handed over sovereignty on June 28, said a report released this week by the prestigious Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Under the rosiest of three scenarios set out in the report, the interim government would prove able to keep majority Shi'ite Muslims, minority Sunni Muslims, secular nationalists and Kurdish leaders broadly engaged in the political process.
"No one will be very happy, but no one will monopolize power either," the report said. [...]
Under a darker scenario, Iraq would fragment and, if U.S.-led forces left prematurely, collapse into civil war. "Even if U.S. forces try to hold out and prop up the central authority, it may still lose control," the report said.
Kurdish separatism and Shi'ite assertiveness would disrupt the path to elections, while Sunnis kept up their insurgency.
Hostility to U.S. forces would grow, even if no unified nationalist movement emerged, especially if Washington were seen to be ignoring the interim government or calling the shots.
In the worst case, instability in Iraq would suck in its neighbors and cause a regional upheaval which the report said would be "beyond U.S. or multinational control."
Well, the Kurds are certainly going to have anm independent state and the Shi'a will dominate the rest of Iraq, so it's really just a question of whether the Sunni consent to be a normal democratic minority or whether they insist on being defeated militarily. Given that Iraq is surrounded by Syria, Sau'di Arabia, Iran, etc., it's hard to see why anyone would be unwilling to see a period of instability. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 6, 2004 10:38 PM
In the words of Robert Kaplan, 'Iraq was a Frankenstein cobbled together by the British Foreign Office out of three forlorn former Ottoman provinces.'
As I've argued earlier, returning it to its natural state of three different entities would do a lot more to bring peace than all this wrangling.
Posted by: Bart at September 7, 2004 7:31 AMTwo, then peace.
Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 8:30 AMThere is no good reason for the Shi'tes to rule Sunni Baghdad and there is no good reason for the Sunnis to rule Shi'ite Basra. Forcing ethnic and religious minorities which hate each other to live together is a Holbrookean recipe for future conflict.
Posted by: Bart at September 7, 2004 9:12 AMYes. The Sunni will probably have to leave.
Posted by: oj at September 7, 2004 9:20 AMIt's been the same border for the better part of 500 years. Except the Northeast Mosul sector, which was Persia (Iran's)
Posted by: narciso at September 7, 2004 11:01 AM10 million people are not going to leave
and the moment Kurdistan declares its independence, it will be invaded by two and possibly 3 armies
Posted by: Harry Eagar at September 8, 2004 7:38 PMGood. That gives us our pretext to do Syria.
Posted by: oj at September 8, 2004 7:57 PM