Iraq - Back to square one.
Ahmed Hany
September 03, 2009
The upsurge of violence in Iraq in the past few weeks reached to annoying level. This violence is due to faults from both the government and the occupation forces. The American withdrawal from Iraqi cities to the military bases should have done after more coordination. The Iraqi security forces should have better planed to take full responsibility.
The Iraqi vice president accused his own security forces of being infiltrated by agents of the terrorist groups. If this is true then why did the Prime Minister Al Malki take the decision of removing the concrete blockers from street? His decision just helped the suicidal bombers to move freely between one of neighborhoods to another in Baghdad.
Did the American withdraw after they had well trained the security forces? President Obama announced that he would withdraw from Iraq and focus on Afghanistan. He said that the Americans chose to fight in Iraq during Bush administration but they were obliged to fight in Afghanistan after September 11. However the Americans after destroying the country´s security forces and infrastructure they should have ethical responsibility about helping the country to be able to safeguard itself. There is a possibility that these attacks are directed against the American project of withdrawal. If the American army reentered the Iraqi city many will see that as regression of Obama´s promise. This will increase the internal pressure on Obama´s administration not to withdraw from Iraq soon for fear of providing a good front for Al-Qaeda. Priorities of the American foreign policy may change. This serves the Neo-Cons and Israel.
It is known that the US cannot attack Iran while occupying Iraq or the American army in the Arab country will be in the reach of Iranian ground-to-ground missiles. This put restrictions on the American maneuvers when they deal with the Iranian nuclear file. However if the Americans could withdraw from Iraq they would remove one of the most important restrictions on their military decisions. Their armies are in the Gulf and Afghanistan also. But if Iran targeted the army in Afghanistan that is a part of NATO, Iran would be declaring war on NATO not on the US. If Iran targeted the Gulf States where there are many American bases then Iran would be declaring war on the Arab system beside the US. Therefore, there is an Iranian interest to block American withdrawal from Iraq.
The sectarian system that the Iraqi constitution stated failed to build security that is a prerequisite for democracy. The Sunnis there see this system deprive them from being equal to others. In fact Saddam killed and arrested people from all faiths and sectarian groups. His vice was a Kurdish and seventeen of his thirty ministers were Shiite. Al Malki who was an advocate of the sectarian system has changed his views when he became in power after he discovered that this system would lead to empowering separatists in the north and leading the entire country to civil wars. Yet he still staunchly opposes to talking to Baathists. There are rumors that the American talked to them and asked him to take this step. Baathists committed mistakes or some of them were just members in the Baath party to get some benefits. However politicians may be more pragmatic and should be able to take courageous decisions for the sake of the higher interests of their countries. The secularist Baathists may counteract the influence of scholars that did not succeed to have a common vision about the future of their country if Al Malki succeeded to engage them again in the political life.
It is impossible for the Iraqi army now to fully control borders without cooperation with its neighbors. This needs well balanced policies. In fact this needs cooperation between countries with different agendas in the region and in Iraq. Therefore, a national conference should gather all faiths, sectors, nationalities and tribes in Iraq to agree about a new constitution and to insist on living together and not to apply any non Iraqi agenda. History tells that Iraq never found security except when its rulers had a vision about its role as a guard of the eastern Arab gate.
The war against terrorism in Iraq should include exposure of those that train terrorists and finance them. The persons, groups or countries should be criminalized internationally. Losing this battle opens the doors for two exit scenarios. The first is the return of the American army until good Iraqi security forces exist. The second is a military coup with the return of dictatorship and perhaps Baathists. The last scenario was one of scenarios of the report that the American Defense Secretary shared in its writing few years ago.
The Iraqi vice president accused his own security forces of being infiltrated by agents of the terrorist groups. If this is true then why did the Prime Minister Al Malki take the decision of removing the concrete blockers from street? His decision just helped the suicidal bombers to move freely between one of neighborhoods to another in Baghdad.
Did the American withdraw after they had well trained the security forces? President Obama announced that he would withdraw from Iraq and focus on Afghanistan. He said that the Americans chose to fight in Iraq during Bush administration but they were obliged to fight in Afghanistan after September 11. However the Americans after destroying the country´s security forces and infrastructure they should have ethical responsibility about helping the country to be able to safeguard itself. There is a possibility that these attacks are directed against the American project of withdrawal. If the American army reentered the Iraqi city many will see that as regression of Obama´s promise. This will increase the internal pressure on Obama´s administration not to withdraw from Iraq soon for fear of providing a good front for Al-Qaeda. Priorities of the American foreign policy may change. This serves the Neo-Cons and Israel.
It is known that the US cannot attack Iran while occupying Iraq or the American army in the Arab country will be in the reach of Iranian ground-to-ground missiles. This put restrictions on the American maneuvers when they deal with the Iranian nuclear file. However if the Americans could withdraw from Iraq they would remove one of the most important restrictions on their military decisions. Their armies are in the Gulf and Afghanistan also. But if Iran targeted the army in Afghanistan that is a part of NATO, Iran would be declaring war on NATO not on the US. If Iran targeted the Gulf States where there are many American bases then Iran would be declaring war on the Arab system beside the US. Therefore, there is an Iranian interest to block American withdrawal from Iraq.
The sectarian system that the Iraqi constitution stated failed to build security that is a prerequisite for democracy. The Sunnis there see this system deprive them from being equal to others. In fact Saddam killed and arrested people from all faiths and sectarian groups. His vice was a Kurdish and seventeen of his thirty ministers were Shiite. Al Malki who was an advocate of the sectarian system has changed his views when he became in power after he discovered that this system would lead to empowering separatists in the north and leading the entire country to civil wars. Yet he still staunchly opposes to talking to Baathists. There are rumors that the American talked to them and asked him to take this step. Baathists committed mistakes or some of them were just members in the Baath party to get some benefits. However politicians may be more pragmatic and should be able to take courageous decisions for the sake of the higher interests of their countries. The secularist Baathists may counteract the influence of scholars that did not succeed to have a common vision about the future of their country if Al Malki succeeded to engage them again in the political life.
It is impossible for the Iraqi army now to fully control borders without cooperation with its neighbors. This needs well balanced policies. In fact this needs cooperation between countries with different agendas in the region and in Iraq. Therefore, a national conference should gather all faiths, sectors, nationalities and tribes in Iraq to agree about a new constitution and to insist on living together and not to apply any non Iraqi agenda. History tells that Iraq never found security except when its rulers had a vision about its role as a guard of the eastern Arab gate.
The war against terrorism in Iraq should include exposure of those that train terrorists and finance them. The persons, groups or countries should be criminalized internationally. Losing this battle opens the doors for two exit scenarios. The first is the return of the American army until good Iraqi security forces exist. The second is a military coup with the return of dictatorship and perhaps Baathists. The last scenario was one of scenarios of the report that the American Defense Secretary shared in its writing few years ago.