Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Gul: A Partitioned Iraq Means "Endless War"
Bombings, Killings in Baghdad Leave 50 Dead


Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul is warning the US not to just leave Iraq in chaos, allowing a civil war that leads to partitioning the country-- a situation that he says will lead to "endless war." Gul is right about all that. If Iraq breaks up, it will undo the post- WW I Lausanne settlement altogether and open all the cans of worms in the Middle East at once. He says it might draw Turkey into Iraq. But it would also draw Iran and Saudi Arabia in.

Bombing of a Shiite mosque in Mosul during the beginning of the month of Muharram, the most sacred 10 days of the Shiite ritual calendar: Not good.

McClatchy wire service reports that 27 bodies were found in Baghdad on Friday.

In the western Baghdad districts of Shurta, Khamsa, Rai and Muwasalat, Iraqi police and guerrillas fought running street battles.

Guerrillas detonated a bomb at Alawi al-Hilla in downtown Baghdad, killing 2 Iraqi soldiers and injuring 14 other persons.

Clashes in and around Muqdadiyah in Diyala Province east of Baghdad left several people dead and dozens injured. In Barwana and Thiyaba villages outside the city took deadly mortar fire.

Reuters reports on political violence on Friday in Iraq. A bombing of the Ghazil pet market in Baghdad killed 15 and wounded 55.

Another bombing near a Shiite mosque killed 2.

Another US GI was killed at Fallujah.

There were other assassinations and bombings around the country.

Bush says US troops are authorized to "kill or capture" suspected Iranian intelligence agents operating in Iraq. Thousands of Iranians go in and out of Iraq as pilgrims to the Shiite holy sites, so personally I'm skeptical you can know which ones are spies. And, like, it wouldn't be good to kill the pilgrims. Might cast the US in a bad light with the Shiites and all that. I'd say this man is looking for a pretext for another war.

Plus, when you look at where US troops are being killed, it is in Sunni Arab al-Anbar Province, and Sunni Arab Salahuddin, Diyal, Mosul, and West Baghdad. Those Sunni guerrillas are not being helped by Iran. They are being helped by Sunnis in countries allied to the US.

And then, the US hold over 10,000 prisoners swept up on suspicion of insurgent activity in Iraq. What number of them is Iranians? Slim to none. More Syrians and Jordanians and Saudis by far than Iranians.

So if 99 percent of the problem is with the Sunni Arabs of Iraq, why all this big talk about Shiite Iran?

Because this man is looking for a pretext for another war.

Tom Engelhardt says that the rural areas of the US are paying the price of the Iraq War.

AP is reporting new details on the killing of 5 US troops in an operation that began at Karbala a few days ago. The troops were helping plan security precautions to stop Shiite pilgrims being blown up during the Muharram commemorations of the martyrdom of the Prophet's grandson, al-Husayn. Guerrillas dressed in US uniforms and speaking English showed up, infiltrated the building, killed a GI, and captured 4 others, taking them to Mahawil in Babil province, and then executing them there.

Mahawil, a mixed Sunni-Shiite city, is a Sunni Arab guerrilla arena of action, and it now seems likely to me that this was a Sunni Arab operation aimed at harming security arrangements. Shiite Mahdi Army ghetto militiamen don't know English. If I were in charge of Karbala, I'd put extra extra security around the city for Tuesday's Ashura commemoration of Imam Husayn's martyrdom. The only thing I can't figure out is that it clearly was an inside job, and so how would there have been Sunni Arab guerrilla sympathizers at this police and army meeting at Shiite Karbala. Maybe mixed units were involved?

This is a good roundup of the week's events in Iraq. That only 160 of 275 members of parliament were present for the vote on al-Maliki's security plan is incredible. That is barely a quorum (a simple majority is 138) for perhaps the most important vote parliament will take this year.

9 Comments:

At 6:05 AM, Blogger Jaraparilla said...

If the Turks are really worried about the regional prospects of war following a complete US withdrawal, why don't they start peace negotiations NOW with all the major players? Why doesn't the Arab League set up a conference to discuss post-US Iraq, provide a plan for a US exit, and get pledges on the table from all parties?

It seems to me that nearly every government in the Middle East has a lot to lose from further instability in the region, except perhaps the Palestinians.

OTOH I can see how ordinary folk who have always been denied a fair share of their countries' oil wealth might see this as an opportunity to topple autocratic regimes, like the Saudis...

The supreme irony would be if today's chaos somehow led to increased democratization in the region: the neocons would no doubt claim credit, albeit real democracy is a million miles from the corporatocracy version they have in mind.

 
At 8:17 AM, Blogger Tupharsin said...

My wife, who's not particularly interested in "geo-politics" etc. - and whose "reads" tend to be more sixth-sense and less "analytic" said of Bush the other day - and I don't think she's aware of the sobriquet's widespread use on the internet - "he's got a sad, haunted look about him of late - like a chimp destined for the moon."

I think she's right. And here's part of the reason why.

He's taken his decision - or it's been taken for him but he's the guy standing over the broken vase in the Pottery Barn. In short, he knows he's going to go on wallpapering this country with grief. And drowning the Middle East in it.

He has to do the neocons' bidding. Not that it comes in the shape of "Do this" "Do that". It's that he's so far stepped in blood that returning were as tedious as go o'er. (The line's from Shakespeare's Scottish play.) And the fact is that returning - at his present juncture - looks even more tedious than going o'er. Because that why lies his having to admit that he got it wrong, that it was all for naught, that it was one almighty cock-up. His cock-up. That 3,000 American kids are dead and thousands wounded for nothing. That we're poorer and less safe than before. Whereas pressing on, well, there's at least a sliver of hope - to his way of thinking - that it might somehow magically come good. Those are his choices. So it's no wonder that he's plumping for the course of action he's plumped for.

We desperately need to have a dissenting voice in the innermost councils of our government. As you often get in supreme court decisions. A voice arguing why this isn't a good idea. And both the assenting and the dissenting opinions should be written up and published. And let the "decider" - or one of his lackeys - write up a final report on every decision that office takes on matters of national importance: this is what the "pro" side of my administration advocated and why; this is what the "nay" side advocated and why; and this is the decision I took - and why.

That sort of achingly obvious clear-sightedness and openness would be a major safeguard against our getting into this kind debacle in the future.

 
At 9:52 AM, Blogger Vigilante said...

Obviously our American Congress did not have full attendance during our civil war, either.

 
At 10:48 AM, Blogger Natalie said...

The impending regional devastation is obvious no matter what the US does - pull out, stay in. The question really is about the scale and extent of the conflagration. Before this whole episode is over, how many countries will have actively campaigned in the "Iraq theater" and how many of their soldiers will have died? What is more important, how many Iraqi and other civilians will have been killed? I am interested in your estimate, Dr. Cole.

 
At 12:28 PM, Blogger Dr. Mathews said...

Because this man is looking for a pretext for another war.


I keep telling myself that he can't be that foolish. Maybe it's all bluster?...

 
At 3:10 PM, Blogger igblog said...

Isn't it obvious by now that Iraq needs a bicameral legislative body? The present arrangement leaves the Sunnis powerless. The country should be divided into provinces equally divided between Sunnis and Shiites. Two senators should be elected from each province. The same arrangement as the US essentially. This would give the Sunni equal influence and allow more equitable power-sharing.

 
At 3:26 PM, Blogger Da' Buffalo Amongst Wolves said...

The Buffalo needs to speak to the issue of America killing Iranians in the name of Iraq, and how that came about:

A while back, Dennis Kucinich memo-ed Donald Rumsfeld requesting information on U.S. sponsored death squads (SOGs) in Iraq, ie. the groups who would be identifying and targetting Iran’s citizens, military attaches and diplomats in Iraq. No one in his own party backed him, save one or two brave free-thinkers.

He was stonewalled by the Pentagon… not even an auto-reply vacation email from Rummy.

Rumsfeld’s gone, but the policy of belligerence toward Iran continues.

So does Congreman Kucinich’s belligerence toward the Pentagon and the current administration:

“The degree to which this President continues to take steps to go to war against Iran without consulting with the full Congress is the degree to which he is increasingly putting himself in jeopardy of an impeachment proceeding,” [source]

So will it be Hillbillary Clinton, or the guy with the nice teeth and party-line voting record (Obama)?

That’s going to be the most likely choice of presidential candidates among the liberals and so-called progressives at the next Democratic National Convention.

Not good enough! No more political hacks!

I say: The Pentagon levitates in March and we drive out the evil within.

Next on the Voodoo To-Do:
Implode the Democratic National Convention in 2008. (no link yet…)
Will they have it in Pelosi-ville… San Francisco? FauxNews would love that!

As with Vietnam, and any other recent war that comes to mind, the Democrats are just as responsible, culpable, for the mayhem done… In our names, and despite apologia to the contrary, fully aware of their own participation in the murder of civilians around the world in the name of ‘democracy’.

Put peace in the White House, force Dennis Kucinich’s nomination on the Democratic machine or destroy the party… It’s time for them to change, or disintegrate in their own meaninglessness.

–The Buffalo in da’ midst

 
At 10:38 PM, Blogger Hans Wall said...

Professor Cole,
I am afraid your assessment of a possible attack on Iran might be true. Beside neo-con hubris Joseph A. Palermo sees "end times" enthusiasts at work: Bush, Iran, and Armageddon
Things will turn from horrific to catastrophic in the Middle East. But Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and other "end times" enthusiasts will be creaming themselves with visions of the apocalypse.

The testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 18 January 2007 by Lt. Gen. William E. Odom makes excellent reading. Looks like the General knows his Clausewitz. Kudos to Jonny Bakho for bringing it up.

 
At 12:31 PM, Blogger Murteza ali said...

The shias guards at kerbala musta had a hand in the attack. Theres no way an iraqi, no matter how well spoken he is at english, could pass for a American.

It could have been a mixed group of shia and sunnis who co-ordinated the attack.

Its sad knowing they were trying to protect the shias from the sunni death cultists who attack religious pilgrims. For once the US troops were doing good in iraq, and paid for it with their lives.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home