Sam Hill
2008-07-29 23:39:52 UTC
Iraq is About to Explode
By Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation. Posted July 28, 2008.
With Iraq's internal politics a ticking time bomb -- and Iran wielding
its influence -- neither John McCain nor Barack Obama have a realistic
plan.
While everyone's looking at Iraq's effect on American politics -- and
whether or not John McCain and Barack Obama are converging on a policy
that combines a flexible timetable with a vague, and long-lasting,
residual force -- let's take a look instead at Iraqi politics. The
picture isn't pretty.
Despite the Optimism of the Neocons, which has pushed mainstream media
coverage to be increasingly flowery about Iraq's political progress,
in fact the country is poised to explode. Even before the November
election. And for McCain and Obama, the problem is that Iran has many
of the cards in its hands. Depending on its choosing, between now and
November Iran can help stabilize the war in Iraq -- mostly by urging
the Iraqi Shiites to behave themselves -- or it can make things a lot
more violent.
There are at least three flashpoints for an explosion, any or all of
which could blow up over the next couple of months. (Way to go,
Surgin' Generals!) The first is the brewing crisis over Kirkuk, where
the pushy Kurds are demanding control and Iraq's Arabs are resisting.
The second is in the west, and Anbar, where the U.S.-backed Sons of
Iraq sahwa ("Awakening") movement is moving to take power against the
Iraqi Islamic Party, a fundamentalist Sunni bloc. And third is the
restive Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr, which is chafing at gains made
by its Iranian-backed rival, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq
(ISCI).
Perhaps the issue of Kirkuk and the Kurds is most dangerous. Last
week, the Kurds walked out of parliament to protest a law passed by
parliament to govern the provincial elections. The law passed 127-13,
but it was vetoed by President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd. Juan Cole, the
astute observer, says: "The conflict between Kurds and Arabs over
Kirkuk is a crisis waiting to happen." He cites Al-Hayat, an Iraqi
newspaper, as claiming that not only do the Kurds want to control
Kirkuk, an oil-rich province in Iraq's north, but they plan to annex
three other provinces where Kurds live: Diyala, Salahuddin, and
Ninewa. That's not likely, but they do want Kirkuk, and the vetoed
election law would have limited the Kurds' ability to press their
gains there.
The election law was supported by Sadr's bloc and backed by former
Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and his Iraq National List. Another
nationalist party, the National Dialogue Council, has demanded the
ouster of President Talabani over his veto of the law. Other Iraqi
parties are backing the now-vetoed law, too, which also restricts the
use of Islamic religious symbols by political parties seeking to
corral illiterate, religious voters.
Because of all this, it now looks like there won't be provincial
elections this year at all. The ruling bloc of Shiite religious
parties and Kurdish warlords is split over the crisis, weakening Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and members of the ruling coalition are
trying to patch things up. I don't think they'll succeed. Many Shiites
in the ruling bloc, including ISCI, have criticized the law as
divisive, but as Arabs it's hard for them to endorse a Kurdish
takeover of Kirkuk. ISCI and the Badr Brigade, its armed wing, are
holding parlays to decide what to do. Interestingly, all three members
of the ruling presidential council, including Talabani, the IIP's
Hashemi, and ISCI's Adel Abdel Mahdi, voted to veto the law, putting
ISCI and the IIP on record as supporting the Kurds. Bad for them
politically.
The IIP says that it wants to mediate the crisis. But the IIP is in a
very, very weak position. Having just rejoined the Maliki government,
it is under siege at home in its base in Anbar province, where the
Awakening is flexing its muscle. This could be the second explosion.
The Sunni Arabs are still seething over the divisive Iraqi
Constitution and their continuing exclusion from political power, and
the Awakening movement sees the IIP (correctly) as wildly
unrepresentative. So the Awakening, representing Sunni tribal powers
and former resistance fighters, wants in, at the expense of the IIP.
That time bomb is ticking, too.
The final crisis-to-be is the Sadr vs. Badr one. The Times today
suggests that Sadr is weakening:
The militia that was once the biggest defender of poor Shiites in
Iraq, the Mahdi Army, has been profoundly weakened in a number of
neighborhoods across Baghdad, in an important, if tentative, milestone
for stability in Iraq.
Don't believe it. Sadr's rivals, ISCI, don't have anything like the
popular base that Sadr has. And underneath Sadr is a volatile mix of
neighborhood, local and regional militias, mosques, and economic
fiefdoms that won't yield easily to ISCI and Maliki. Because Sadr's
forces are dependent on Iran, however, for arms and cash, Iran may be
in the driver's seat. Just the other day, the commander of Iran's
Revolutionary Guard Corps crowed that the United States has failed to
install an anti-Iranian regime in Baghdad, and he's completely right.
So Iraq is still poised to explode, and Iran may be in control.
McCain's solution: provoke a showdown with Iran. Obama's solution: try
to make a deal with Iran to stabilize Iraq. I'm not sure either "plan"
will work.
Robert Dreyfuss is the author of "Devil's Game: How the United States
Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam" (Henry Holt/Metropolitan Books).
By Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation. Posted July 28, 2008.
With Iraq's internal politics a ticking time bomb -- and Iran wielding
its influence -- neither John McCain nor Barack Obama have a realistic
plan.
While everyone's looking at Iraq's effect on American politics -- and
whether or not John McCain and Barack Obama are converging on a policy
that combines a flexible timetable with a vague, and long-lasting,
residual force -- let's take a look instead at Iraqi politics. The
picture isn't pretty.
Despite the Optimism of the Neocons, which has pushed mainstream media
coverage to be increasingly flowery about Iraq's political progress,
in fact the country is poised to explode. Even before the November
election. And for McCain and Obama, the problem is that Iran has many
of the cards in its hands. Depending on its choosing, between now and
November Iran can help stabilize the war in Iraq -- mostly by urging
the Iraqi Shiites to behave themselves -- or it can make things a lot
more violent.
There are at least three flashpoints for an explosion, any or all of
which could blow up over the next couple of months. (Way to go,
Surgin' Generals!) The first is the brewing crisis over Kirkuk, where
the pushy Kurds are demanding control and Iraq's Arabs are resisting.
The second is in the west, and Anbar, where the U.S.-backed Sons of
Iraq sahwa ("Awakening") movement is moving to take power against the
Iraqi Islamic Party, a fundamentalist Sunni bloc. And third is the
restive Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr, which is chafing at gains made
by its Iranian-backed rival, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq
(ISCI).
Perhaps the issue of Kirkuk and the Kurds is most dangerous. Last
week, the Kurds walked out of parliament to protest a law passed by
parliament to govern the provincial elections. The law passed 127-13,
but it was vetoed by President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd. Juan Cole, the
astute observer, says: "The conflict between Kurds and Arabs over
Kirkuk is a crisis waiting to happen." He cites Al-Hayat, an Iraqi
newspaper, as claiming that not only do the Kurds want to control
Kirkuk, an oil-rich province in Iraq's north, but they plan to annex
three other provinces where Kurds live: Diyala, Salahuddin, and
Ninewa. That's not likely, but they do want Kirkuk, and the vetoed
election law would have limited the Kurds' ability to press their
gains there.
The election law was supported by Sadr's bloc and backed by former
Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and his Iraq National List. Another
nationalist party, the National Dialogue Council, has demanded the
ouster of President Talabani over his veto of the law. Other Iraqi
parties are backing the now-vetoed law, too, which also restricts the
use of Islamic religious symbols by political parties seeking to
corral illiterate, religious voters.
Because of all this, it now looks like there won't be provincial
elections this year at all. The ruling bloc of Shiite religious
parties and Kurdish warlords is split over the crisis, weakening Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and members of the ruling coalition are
trying to patch things up. I don't think they'll succeed. Many Shiites
in the ruling bloc, including ISCI, have criticized the law as
divisive, but as Arabs it's hard for them to endorse a Kurdish
takeover of Kirkuk. ISCI and the Badr Brigade, its armed wing, are
holding parlays to decide what to do. Interestingly, all three members
of the ruling presidential council, including Talabani, the IIP's
Hashemi, and ISCI's Adel Abdel Mahdi, voted to veto the law, putting
ISCI and the IIP on record as supporting the Kurds. Bad for them
politically.
The IIP says that it wants to mediate the crisis. But the IIP is in a
very, very weak position. Having just rejoined the Maliki government,
it is under siege at home in its base in Anbar province, where the
Awakening is flexing its muscle. This could be the second explosion.
The Sunni Arabs are still seething over the divisive Iraqi
Constitution and their continuing exclusion from political power, and
the Awakening movement sees the IIP (correctly) as wildly
unrepresentative. So the Awakening, representing Sunni tribal powers
and former resistance fighters, wants in, at the expense of the IIP.
That time bomb is ticking, too.
The final crisis-to-be is the Sadr vs. Badr one. The Times today
suggests that Sadr is weakening:
The militia that was once the biggest defender of poor Shiites in
Iraq, the Mahdi Army, has been profoundly weakened in a number of
neighborhoods across Baghdad, in an important, if tentative, milestone
for stability in Iraq.
Don't believe it. Sadr's rivals, ISCI, don't have anything like the
popular base that Sadr has. And underneath Sadr is a volatile mix of
neighborhood, local and regional militias, mosques, and economic
fiefdoms that won't yield easily to ISCI and Maliki. Because Sadr's
forces are dependent on Iran, however, for arms and cash, Iran may be
in the driver's seat. Just the other day, the commander of Iran's
Revolutionary Guard Corps crowed that the United States has failed to
install an anti-Iranian regime in Baghdad, and he's completely right.
So Iraq is still poised to explode, and Iran may be in control.
McCain's solution: provoke a showdown with Iran. Obama's solution: try
to make a deal with Iran to stabilize Iraq. I'm not sure either "plan"
will work.
Robert Dreyfuss is the author of "Devil's Game: How the United States
Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam" (Henry Holt/Metropolitan Books).