Will Iraq Start to Unravel?
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 02-11-2004 - 1:44pm |
Kurdish calls for autonomy are generating fears of ethnic conflict that could complicate U.S. exit plans.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040216-588398,00.html?cnn=yes
If you want a glimpse into the challenge the U.S. faces as it tries to prevent Iraq from coming apart, consider the plight of Salim Izzat. Five months before the U.S. invasion last March, Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime ordered Izzat to vacate his farm outside the northern-Iraq town of Dibagan, 50 miles southeast of Mosul. The command was part of the regime's systematic, 15-year-long campaign to populate the predominantly Kurdish reaches of northern Iraq with ethnic Arabs. Kurds like Izzat were pushed out of their homes by force; dissenters, including Izzat's brother, were executed. A few days before the war, most of the Arabs who had taken up residence in Dibagan left town, but not before they demolished houses, ransacked shops on the main street and plundered every scrap of metal that would move. Izzat's Arab tenants razed his crops, stole more than 200 chickens and ran off with his life savings. Now Izzat lives with his wife and nine children in a crumbling three-room guardhouse in a parking lot in Dibagan; every day a policeman comes to tell him he has to move off city property. Izzat isn't ready to forgive the people he blames for his predicament. "I hate the Arabs," he says.
Ethnic grudges die hard in Iraq. In towns like Dibagan all across the country, long-simmering disputes between Arabs and Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'ites, and even secular and religious Iraqis are bubbling to the surface—all of which has complicated the U.S.'s plan to transfer power to a new Iraqi government by June 30 and raised questions about whether Iraq will remain whole after it does. And so it was not entirely surprising that the Bush Administration last week scrambled for help in sorting out the mess. In a meeting at the White House, President Bush asked U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to come up with a plan for Iraqi self-rule that the country's squabbling factions could accept. A U.N. team arrived in Iraq last week to evaluate the coalition's plans for transition and assess the feasibility of holding broad-based elections before the June 30 deadline. The elections have been demanded by Iraq's top Shi'ite cleric, Grand Ayatullah Ali Husaini Sistani, but are resisted by U.S. officials, who say a general vote cannot be held safely. The intrigue deepened last Thursday when Sistani's bodyguards said the cleric had escaped an assassination attempt outside his home in Najaf. Sistani aides later told U.S. military officials that accounts of the purported attack had been fabricated.
Still, the rumors seemed to underscore fears that the country could quickly slide toward chaos. Retired General Anthony Zinni, the former top commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, told TIME that foreign jihadists are trying to incite a civil war in Iraq. "They want Iraq to come apart," he says. "They want the U.S. to fail, and they want to see it become three theocratic states. They don't want to see Iraq hold together as a democracy." Says Herro Kader Mustafa, a Kurdish-American coalition official in Mosul: "We are doing our best to make sure things don't erupt."
Nowhere is that task more delicate than in northern Iraq, home to most of the country's 4 million Kurds. The area has been among the nation's most peaceful since the overthrow of Saddam, but that calm was shattered on Feb. 1 when a pair of suicide bombers detonated themselves in the offices of the two main Kurdish political parties in the city of Arbil, killing more than 100. The attacks raised fears that the violence plaguing the rest of Iraq might now routinely spill into the Kurdish areas and might have strengthened the Kurds' determination to defend the autonomy they have enjoyed since 1991, when the U.S. established a no-fly zone in northern Iraq to protect the Kurds from Saddam. The U.S. has assured the Kurds that the new government in Baghdad will allow them to maintain their own parliament and security forces. But many observers believe such a federal structure is only the first step toward the Kurds' ultimate goal: independence. "The Kurdish problem is the most difficult for Iraq's long-term territorial integrity," says Phebe Marr, a veteran Iraq expert retired from the Pentagon's National Defense University, "because they are really separatists."
The U.S. is worried that Kurdish hopes for greater autonomy could spark clashes with Arabs living in northern Iraq, especially if the Kurds claim control over Kirkuk, an ethnically mixed city in an area prized for its vast oil reserves. The prospect of an oil-rich, autonomous Kurdish state also frightens Iraq's neighbors—Syria, Iran and Turkey—all of which have large, restive Kurdish populations that might be emboldened and financed by wealthy Iraqi Kurds. Turkey, which has fought a 15-year war against Kurdish separatists, has threatened to send its army into Iraq to prevent the Kurds from attempting to secede. In a press conference in January, the deputy chief of staff of the Turkish army, General Ilker Basbug, warned that "Iraq's future might be very bloody if there was a federal structure, especially based on ethnicity."
The U.S. has so far been able to ward off sectarian violence between Kurds and Arabs. "There isn't obvious ethnic hatred in the north," says Mustafa, the U.S. official in Mosul. "But there is a real conflict that political parties are exacerbating with their attempts to manipulate public opinion." Some locals say Kurdish authorities have incited ethnic hostility by giving benefits to their kinsmen. Nasser Rahim Jusef, a Turkish employee of the Northern Oil Co., says the former regime's program of "Arabization" is being replaced by "Kurdization": at the expense of other ethnic groups, Kurds are being recruited back into jobs Saddam's regime pushed them out of. "The oil business needs to be a meritocracy," says Jusef, who has worked at the company for 28 years, "not one based on racial discrimination."
Yehya Assi Mahmoud, an Arab attorney in Kirkuk, says he saw Kurdish militias seize 28 Arab homes in his village of Shaheed last April. In June he quit the city council to protest what he considered to be American favoritism toward the Kurds; now he fears that the coming transfer of power will result in wide-scale reprisals by Kurds against their Arab neighbors. "If the U.S. left now, Kurds would move in to ethnically cleanse the remaining Arabs in Kirkuk," he says.
Kirkuk may be the most combustible place in northern Iraq. The city is fairly evenly divided among Arabs, Kurds and ethnic Turkomans. Kurdish leaders want the city and its environs, which hold some 40% of the country's oil reserves, to be part of Kurdistan within a federal Iraq. That way, says a U.S. official in Kirkuk, the Kurds hope to secure a sustainable source of oil income for themselves in case a new government in Baghdad proves incapable of running the country once the U.S. hands over power. U.S. and Iraqi officials fear that Kurdish authorities may try to run Arabs and Turkomans out of Kirkuk and move Kurds south into the city, then hold an independent referendum to decide whether Kirkuk should join Kurdistan. Says Rogar Ali, a political adviser to the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (P.U.K.), one of the two large Kurdish political groups: "Elections will decide the destiny of Kirkuk and other Kurdish areas."
For their part, the Kurds say autonomy is their only safeguard against the possibility of oppression by Iraq's Arab majority. And as mostly Sunni Muslims, the Kurds fear domination by a directly elected Shi'ite government. While the perpetrators of the suicide bombings in Arbil are unknown—some Kurdish officials suspect loyalists of Saddam's regime, whereas others finger foreign terrorists from Ansar al-Islam, a radical Islamist outfit linked to al-Qaeda—the attacks served as a grisly reminder to the Kurds of the ruthlessness of their enemies. At the P.U.K. headquarters, where a suicide bomber blew up more than 50 partygoers on the first day of the Muslim feast of 'Id al-Adha, colorful streamers still hang from charred walls pockmarked by shrapnel and bits of human flesh. There had been so much carnage to remove, the cleanup crew had missed a severed right hand that still lay on the floor, between an overturned couch and a stereo speaker. Across town, at the headquarters of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, Shwan Hala Salih surveyed a similar scene of devastation. His cousin had been killed in the blast. "Terrorists are of many kinds," he said, holding a hand-colored photograph of his relative. "Most are enemies of the Kurdish people."
The shock of such a brutal atrocity is likely to bolster calls for revenge. Yet in towns where Arabs and Kurds have lived together for generations, members of both groups say they are determined to stay. In Mukhmur, 30 miles south of Arbil, locals have painted over the portrait of Saddam with a picture of an Arab and a Kurd holding a flagpole. Hanging together above the two men are the Kurdish and Iraqi flags, and above these fly the American and British flags. Naffisa Abdullah, an Arab woman dressed in a black head scarf and a navy blue aba, says she will resist any attempts to force her out of her home. "I consider this area my native place," she says. "We just want to have a good life and get along with each other."
Such sentiments seem wishful in a land where so many still have grievances to settle. In Arbil last week, Hajji Maluwd, 62, a mechanic, walked in the funeral procession for a Kurdish leader who was killed in the 'Id bombings and ran down a list of personal demands: he wants his demolished home rebuilt, and he wants to move back to the land that Saddam's regime took away. At the same time, Maluwd doesn't think a civil war will erupt between the Kurds and the Arabs, and he says he's willing to wait for his house and his land and let democracy work. Gesturing his cigarette at the procession of Kurds mourning the death of a fallen leader, he says, "We've walked in too many of these." Iraq's only hope is that many more of his countrymen feel the same.
What does it take to hold national elections in Iraq?
>"Some Iraqis do not understand why the 30 June date has become sacred. They suspect it has more to do with the American democratic process than their own."<
Quote from............
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3416793.stm
In one of the bloodiest 24 hours since the war in Iraq ended, a second suicide bomber has killed dozens of Iraqis working for the US-led coalition.
Up to 47 people died in the latest attack - a car bomb detonated outside an army recruiting centre in Baghdad.
On Tuesday, a similar attack at a police recruitment centre south of Baghdad killed at least 50 people.
The US military said the bombs bore the hallmarks of al-Qaeda or its affiliate group in Iraq, Ansar al-Islam.
More.............
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3478339.stm
Witness sensed something was wrong before bomb attack.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/02/11/sprj.nirq.blast.reut/index.html


Pages
It took a LOT longer than a couple months to establish the U.S. government, and we were not fearing a tyrannical madman like Saddam and his henchmen.
This new War on Terror and all that it entails IS world war 4. We are spoiled and naive to think that any battle as important as liberating Iraq in this war should be hurried. Establishing a free and democratic country in the middle east is not only possible but necessary to fight the war on terror. Gutting the former regime tells terrorist organizations that they will have fewer hiding places in the future.
Other nations will see the freedom and ensuing prosperity of the Iraqi people and they will want it too. Freedom is a human need, and it is our obligation to the Iraqi people to see this through, for their wellbeing and the world's safety.
~W IN04~
BLACK DAY FOR BLAIR IN MOUNTING MAYHEM.
CHAOS IN IRAQ.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/content_objectid=13952012_method=full_siteid=106694_headline=-BLACK-DAY-FOR-BLAIR-IN-MOUNTING-MAYHEM-name_page.html
YESTERDAY was a black day for Tony Blair.
With news of another 23 deaths in Iraq, the Prime Minister may shortly be peering into the dark abyss of political disaster.
It is now 10 months since hostilities in Iraq were officially deemed over. Yet his problems are far from over.
It is a stark situation - not just on the political front but at military level.
The coalition has failed to find WMDs, fatalities both civilian and military are rising and the horrifying prospect of a civil war draws ever closer.
Yet the choices in front of President Bush and Mr Blair are equally as stark.
Withdrawal of troops is simply not an option. We plunged Iraq into this chaos - to walk away now is utterly unpalatable.
But rebuilding a nation takes time, money and a huge amount of manpower - and as the pounds and casualties mount, time is not on either leader's side.
So what is the solution?
First, the US must recognise an Iraqi life is as important as an American life. Then maybe the Iraqis will not be left as vulnerable as they are.
Those loyal to the memory of Saddam Hussein are all too aware their countrymen are easier targets than US soldiers bristling with firepower.
It is time the US also acknowledged that fact.
The US also needs to adopt the more successful British approach in Basra.
Patrolling in armoured vehicles does not make for good peacekeeping.
They are easy targets, their movements predictable and they stop soldiers gaining the vital intelligence they achieve by moving around on foot.
In Basra, British troops avoid patrolling in vehicles - it is a lesson learnt from years in Northern Ireland.
Mingling with locals gives soldiers a feel for what is happening - and what is round the corner.
Planting a bomb to kill troops on foot is far harder because you cannot predict which street they will move along next.
The approach on the ground must be one of minimum necessary force.
And there needs to be a clear statement of what the future holds for Iraq.
The situation in Basra at the moment is relatively calm. The situation in Baghdad and the American sector certainly isn't.
If Baghdad fails, then the whole of Iraq fails.
If Iraq fails, the PM's future will, at the least, be uncertain.
cl-Libraone

Iraq went downhill the minute the United States ignored not only its own proposed resolution, UNSC resolution 1441, but the authority on which it was based.
Start to unravel?
Iraq leaders 'against US plan'.
>"Senior US officials consulted by the daily said some council members had selfish reasons for opposing the US plan. By remaining in power until the elections, they would wield unrivalled political influence, allowing them to engage in patronage and skew the balloting rules.
The US officials said holding regional caucuses would allow new political talent to emerge and challenge the former exiles who now control the council and provide a more representative Iraqi administration.
"The Governing Council has been an effective body during this phase, but is it the appropriate body to hand over total sovereignty to?" a senior US official asked. "Is it sufficiently representative? Who is it accountable to? Will it be viewed as legitimate by the Iraqi people?"
Anticipating a UN recommendation for year-end elections, the daily said, US officials in Baghdad and Washington were frantically trying to assemble a set of contingency transition plans for Iraq."<
Quotes from..........
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8715719%255E1702,00.html
Bremer says he has final say on Iraq's basic law.
>"Three US soldiers were killed in separate attacks around Iraq, while US overseer Paul Bremer warned he could veto the country's temporary constitution if it did not fit the American vision of democracy."<
>"According to Pentagon figures, attacks by insurgents have claimed the lives of 261 US soldiers since US President George W. Bush declared major combat in Iraq over on May 1.
Meanwhile, US civil administrator Bremer signaled he was willing to use his power of veto if the US-appointed Governing Council drafted a temporary constitution that challenged the spirit of Western-style democracy.
The Governing Council has been charged with writing the temporary constitution or fundamental law that will govern Iraq until national elections are held.
But many observers believe that some council members are pushing to implement Islamist rule in the post-occupation era."<
>""Our position is clear, and the text that is in there now is as I say. It can't become law until I sign it," Bremer said."<
Quotes from.............
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/71482/1/.html
cl-Libraone

You are not alone. I've read many articles that say the tide is turning in Iraq. From the beginning the US had a narrow window to bring peace. Passions are rising, and if the US doesn't stop trying to dictate turms, civil war is not only possible but probable.
>"civil war is not only possible but probable"<
Civil war was inevitable from the first if the US went into Iraq, IMHO.
cl-Libraone

Civil was always a possibility, but I always hoped it could be avoided. The US has bungled the occupation and continues to pursue its own ends overlooking opposing views.
We are all familiar with Ahmed Chalabi notorious past and influence with the administration. He is of course on the Iraqi Governing Counsel. Following is an article about another member. "U.S. Iraq Appointee a Fraud and a Danger" http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=a9c8ef8fa5a90b9c13f58a840f933f39
Combined with another article in the Washington Postdoes not calm my fears: "Iraqi Panel Pivots on U.S. Plan" Caucuses Rejected For Interim Rule" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46176-2004Feb16.html
Why are "Arabs in U.S. Raising Money to Back Bush" (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/17/politics/campaign/17MONE.html?hp)
The glue is in the US hands, but it is seeping out fast.
Pages