August 16, 2007
WHICH AFFORDS US THE GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY...:
Are the Sunnis changing sides (James Dobbins, August 16, 2007, International Herald Tribune)
The war in Iraq began as a Sunni-dominated resistance movement to the American occupation. With the transfer of sovereignty to a democratically elected and therefore Shiite-dominated government in 2005, the conflict began mutating into a true civil war. Today the warring parties are more interested in fighting each other than expelling the United States, although most of them also retain that as an ultimate goal.The latest development, much commented upon in recent weeks, is that Sunni insurgents are increasingly coming to the view that they cannot successfully resist both the United States and the Shiite-dominated government at the same time. Increasing numbers of Sunni fighters in Anbar Province are therefore preparing for a tactical accommodation with the less dangerous enemy, the United States.
The immediate objective of the Sunnis reaching out to America is to suppress their heretofore Al Qaeda allies. Their secondary objective, in all likelihood, is to strengthen their ability to resist the Shiite dominated government.
...to put down the foreign fighters while identifying and detailing the Sunni resistance structure and then helping the Shi'ites put down the latter. Posted by Orrin Judd at August 16, 2007 6:17 PM
The author's clarity of thought is exposed by his opening sentence, in which he tells us that the Iraq war began as soon as the Iraq war had been over.
His analysis is further marred by his omission of final victory as a possible outcome of the Iraq campaign. Keep in mind that the confusion of the enemy may be shepherded so as to lead them to the consciousness of civilizational failure. That in turns leads to a self-awareness of the need for reformation, and then the walls of the spiritual jailhouse come tumbling down like those of Jericho.
Posted by: Lou Gots at August 16, 2007 8:05 PMI would have thought that the headline on this post would be "There is no Iraq." This is just pointing the Sunnis towards the all-but-inevitable conclusion that what they need is de facto independence in a relatively small Sunni state loosely federated with Shiastan and Kurdistan, at which point we'll have three largely peaceful new states.
Posted by: Ibid at August 16, 2007 8:08 PMWhy should the Shi'a cede them such a state?
Posted by: oj at August 16, 2007 8:27 PMThe chance for a Sunni-led mini-state may have already passed, are there are fewer Sunni-majority areas than there were. Besides, such partitions rarely work out well. Better that the Sunnis wise up and realize they'll not be dominant anytime soon, and the Shiites realize that sectarian cleansing isn't in their long-term interest.
Posted by: PapayaSF at August 16, 2007 11:04 PMWhy should the Castellanos cede the Catalans such a state? Or the Turks cede a state to the Kurds?
Posted by: Ibid at August 16, 2007 11:07 PMThe Kurds demand Kurdistan. The Catalans the Catalan. The Sunni Arabs are demanding a hunk of Shi'astan.
Posted by: oj at August 16, 2007 11:23 PMPontiac and his followers demanded the old Northwest once; Tecumseh, Osceola and the rest the Southeast: their idea.
As for the Sheite, Sunni issue, consider how, as the jailhouse shambles into the yawning dustbin, the partisans of the Caliphs, of the old mob bosses, i.s., the Sunnis, are the soonest to perish.
Posted by: Lou Gots at August 17, 2007 4:50 AMLou made the point. The next step of the "surge" is to knock off the nutjob Shi'ites (the Mahdi and the gangs in Basra) so that the Shi'a who will govern can do it without interference. Check out Michael Totten's latest dispatch for an update on Mookie and his goons in Sadr City.
Posted by: ratbert at August 17, 2007 6:52 AMThe Shi'ite similarity to Christianity is why they'll endure when the Sunni don't--barring Reformation.
Posted by: oj at August 17, 2007 6:55 AMWho do you think is going to kill the Sunni after we deal with al Qaeda?
Posted by: oj at August 17, 2007 8:35 AMOJ is right about the golden opporunity of intel on the Sunni insurgent groups, but the more likely scenario is that if we expel Al Qaeda, and have a deal with the Sunnis, then we crush the Iranian interests in Iraq - aka the Mahdi Army. At that point, we'll have the Kurds, secular Shi'ites, Al Sistani, and the Sunnis more or less on board. Mookie may or may not allow the most violent followers to be crushed so he can remain a political player. If he does, we have a peace good enough to retain American credibility in the region. If he fights instead, more violence.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at August 17, 2007 11:06 AMWhich would be everyone but 70% of the country, making it a moronic plan.
Posted by: oj at August 17, 2007 1:08 PM