Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Monday, December 31, 2007

Top 10 Challenges Facing the US in the Middle East, 2008

10. Helping broker a deal in Lebanon between the March 14 Movement and the Shiites so that a new president can be elected and a national unity government can be formed.

Lebanon's economy was badly damaged by the Israeli war on the poor little country in summer of 2006. Tourism is a big part of that economy, and is being hurt by the continued political instability. Given historically high oil prices, Iran will probably make $56 billion from petroleum sales this year. That gives it lots of carrots to hand out in Lebanon. If the Lebanese were better off, foreign oil money would not be as important to them. Likewise, the country's poverty breeds social ills. Hizbullah militiamen might be harder to find if there was well-paying work for young men in the south. The dire poverty of Palestinians in camps such as Nahr al-Bared near Tripoli has made them open to predations by Mafia-like groups linked to al-Qaeda. Just a couple of weeks ago, Lebanese security broke up a plot to blow up churches in Zahle on the part of a small group of jihadis. An economically flourishing Lebanon would be less likely to be beset by these ills. The Levant is not that far away from the US or its major interests, and it is very unwise to allow the pathological situation in Lebanon to fester. A prosperous, healthy Lebanon is good for US security and is less likely to become the cat's paw of regional powers hostile to US interests.

9. The US should exercise its good offices to encourage continued dialogue between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The capture of Baghdad by the Shiites and the ethnic cleansing of most Sunnis from it have set the stage for a big Sunni-Shiite battle for the capital as soon as the US troops get out of the way. It is absolutely essential to Gulf security, and to American energy security, that Saudi Arabia and Iran not be drawn into a proxy Sunni-Shiite war in Iraq. Keeping in close contact with each other and with Iraqis of the other sect is the best way for them to avoid a replay of the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s. Those in the Bush administration who dream of an Israeli-Saudi alliance against Iran are playing with fire, a fire that is likely to boomerang on the US. If the Persian Gulf goes up any further in flames, the resulting unprecedentedly high petroleum prices will likely finally produce a bad impact on the US economy. Instead, the US should be attempting to bring Iran in from the cold, now that the NIE has absolved it of nuclear-weapons ambitions.

8. Congress should expand funding for, and guarantee the future of, the Combatting Terrorism Center at West Point. Its researchers do among the very best jobs of analyzing the writings and activities of the Salafi Jihadis, and so of combatting them. Few government institutions are as effective. If the US government were serious about the threat of terrorism, I would not even have to make this plea. Of course, if Bush and Cheney had really cared about the threat of al-Qaeda, they would have gone after it and gotten Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri rather than rushing off on a fool's errand in Iraq.

7. The US must repair its tattered relations with Turkey. Turkey has been a NATO ally for decades and Turkish troops fought alongside American ones in the Korean War. Turkey stood with the US in the Cold War and gave the US bases on its soil. As a secular country, it is an ally in the struggle against the Salafi Jihadis, for which even religious Turks have contempt. Turkey has among the more promising economies in the Middle East, among non-oil states, and is attracting billions in foreign investment. The US has for some strange reason stiffed Turkey several times in the past decade. The Clinton administration promised Turkey a billion dollars in restitution for the monies it lost during the Gulf War, and then Congress refused to appropriate the money. More recently, the US has unleashed a virulent and violent Kurdish nationalism by allying with Massoud Barzani in Iraq. Barzani in turn has given safe harbor to guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), who have been going over the border and killing Turks, then retreating to Iraq. The Bush administration has tried to resolve this probably by helping the Turks bombard PKK positions inside Iraq, but that is not ideal. Instead, the US should put economic and other pressure on Barzani to expel the PKK from Iraq.

6. The US must keep the pressure on Pervez Musharraf to hold free and fair, early elections in Pakistan. The elections probably cannot be held on Jan. 8, as planned, because of the extensive turmoil and destruction of polling stations and ballots during the past few days. But they should not be postponed past March 1. Musharraf's own legitimacy has collapsed, and he is in danger of becoming a Shah of Iran figure, hated by his own people and driven from office. Such a scenario could be very bad for the United States. That is why Joe Biden is right and John McCain is wrong when the latter warns against dumping Musharraf. Why cannot the American Right learn that backing the wrong horse is often worse than not having a horse in the first place?

5. The US and NATO have to stop doing search and destroy missions in Afghanistan. The Pushtun tribespeople are never going to put up with tens of thousands of foreign troops in their country, and, indeed, in their underwear drawers. Search and destroy missions just multiply feuds with local people. The NATO and US military missions in Afghanistan have to be redefined so that they are not simply putting down tribes for the central government. The best Afghan central governments have ruled by playing the tribes off against one another, not by trying to crush them. The solutions in Afghanistan are political and economic. More reconstruction needs to be done. Farmers need aid to be weaned off poppies. Forced eradication of poppy crops appears to be behind a lot of the "Taliban resurgence," which actually often looks to me from a distance like angry farmers taking revenge for the destruction of their livelihoods.

4. The US must facilitate provincial elections in Iraq. They are arguably more important than any other step. They would solve a number of important problems.

The Sunni Arab provinces of Al-Anbar, Salahuddin, Ninevah and Diyala have unrepresentative governments (Diyalah, 60% Sunni, is ruled by the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a hard line Shiite group!) The Sunni Arab parties declined to run in January, 2005, and there have been no subsequent provincial elections. Representative Sunni provincial governments could negotiate from a greater position of strength with the federal government of Shiite Dawa Party leader and prime minister Nuri al-Maliki. Some of the Awakening Councils members, who are self-appointed, might get elected and so gain greater legitimacy.

Without legitimate provincial governments in the Sunni Arab provinces, it is hard to see how the US can hope to withdraw troops and turn over security to locals, as Gen. Petraeus had planned to do in Mosul this year.

In the south, Basra needs new elections because its provincial government saw a major division this year, leading to an ISCI-led vote of no confidence in the governor, who is from the Islamic Virtue Party. But then the governor refused to step down! Ineffective governance in oil-rich Basra, which contains the country's only major ports, is bad for the whole country. In some other southern provinces, such as Diwaniya, a more representative provincial government might make for more social peace.

What I am saying now is not new, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Gen. Petraeus have repeatedly called for such elections. I am saying, now is the time to make a big push for them. If the US starts drawing down troops this year, it will make it harder to hold elections, since the Iraqi security forces probably cannot keep the voters dafe. If the US leaves behind the current provincial governments, as with Diyala, Diwaniya and Basra in particular, it is probably leaving behind provincial civil wars.

3. The US Congress must allocate substantial funds, on the order of $1 billion or more, for Iraqi refugee relief in Syria and Jordan. UNO relief funds are running out. Iraqis' own savings are running out. Children are not in school and are going hungry. People are being exploited, including young girls forced into prostitution. A majority of the 1.5 million Iraqis in Syria went there in 2007, and almost all of them have been forced out of Baghdad and other areas because of the political instability that the United States unleashed in their country. The surge is being touted as a victory in the US press, but it seems to have displaced 700,000 Iraqi civilians! The US is spending $15 billion a month on the Iraqi and Afghanistan Wars. It can afford $1 billion a year for refugee relief. This is our responsibility. How future generations of Iraqis view the United States will in part depend on whether we do this. I ask all Americans to write your congressional representatives and press them on this humanitarian issue.

2. The Bush administration should expend all of its remaining political capital in the region to have the Israelis return the Golan Heights to Syria. The Golan was captured in 1967. By the United Nations Charter, countries may not permanently grab the territory of their neighbors. The Syrians will have to agree to keep the Golan a demilitarized zone, with UNO blue helmets patrolling as a safeguard. In return, Syria would have to agree to cease backing Palestinian militants and would have to play a positive role in creating a Palestinian state. Damascus would also have to work to restore social peace in Lebanon. Such a deal might help to detach Syria from its alliance with Iran. That in turn would weaken Hizbullah. This deal would be good for Israeli security, and if it helped speed up the creation of a Palestinian state, might even keep Israel from falling into the Apartheid situation that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert recently said he fears.

1. The US must insist that the Israeli siege of Gaza must be lifted. A third of Palestinians killed by Israel this year were innocent civilians. The agricultural sector is being destroyed because farmers cannot export their goods owing to the Israeli blockade. Food, water, essential medicines are all being denied to civilian populations, including children. If Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is so worried about Israel being seen as an Apartheid state, he should release Gazans from their penitentiary and stop deploying collective punishment against civilians.

19 Comments:

At 6:01 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brilliant list. KUTGW.

 
At 11:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent. Thank you.

Regarding #4, the provincial elections in Iraq have been seen by the US as a bad move. US allies have a lot of power there, and they will certainly lose big time.

These allies have also been losing US support though, so it is a delicate balance: the US military also sees the benefits you mention.

There are planned changes for the election law and commission. The Iraqi parliament can drag its feet to delay the elections, which is what has been going on.

The other problem is the lack of security. This favors armed groups who can defend their candidates.

A way out is to have elections for interim councils, using existing legislations if necessary, with the proper elections to coincide with the national poll in December 2009.

Safeguards against theft are doubly important. They protect the public purse, and also make the posts less attractive to the crooks. The ruling groups are trying their hardest to pull Iraq out of the UN chapter 7 rules, which inclue overseeing Iraq's finances. The chapter 7 rules must stay if for this reason alone.

 
At 12:02 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

I fear that #6 (Pakistan) betrays, in reverse, the Bush Imperial mindset.

So does Andrew Bacevich


Faced with the prospect of "losing" Pakistan, what should the world's sole superpower do? Despite Musharraf's flaws, should Washington back him to the hilt as the only alternative to chaos? Or should Bush commit the United States without reservation to building a strong democracy in Pakistan?

To pose such questions is to presume that decisions made in Washington will decisively influence the course of events in Islamabad. Yet the lesson to be drawn from the developments of the last several days -- and from U.S. involvement in Pakistan over the course of decades -- suggests just the opposite: The United States has next to no ability to determine Pakistan's fate.

How the crisis touched off by Bhutto's assassination will end is impossible to predict, although the outcome is likely to be ugly. Yet this much we can say with confidence: That outcome won't be decided in the White House. Once again, as Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, "events are in the saddle, and ride mankind," with those events reducing the most powerful man in the world to the status of spectator.

 
At 1:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The WaPo (Arkin) writes on 12/26/07 that: "Beginning early next year, U.S. Special Forces are expected to vastly expand their presence in Pakistan, as part of an effort to train and support indigenous counter-insurgency forces and clandestine counterterrorism units, according to defense officials involved with the planning."

Its hard to square US troops moving into Pakistan with Prof. Cole's list.

 
At 2:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

look at some of the changes that have happened to Baghdad. Civilization there has changed radically and the commercial zones are dead.
http://www.op911.net/Sadr%20City1.pdf

 
At 8:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Juan i dont think its fair to describe the lebanese opposition as just a shia one. Without Aoun the opposition is severly weakened.

The opposition is mutli faith and this is the strength of them. Unfortunately for them and to add to the confusion, the govt, despite being largely sunni, is also multi faith.

The situation pits sunni v sunni shia v shia and christian vs christian. And Walid Jumblatt vs anyone the american sik him against.

 
At 9:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The US must repair its tattered relations with Turkey.

Some senator must depose Sybil Edmonds in the Congressional Record just as Mike Gravel read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record more than thirty-five years ago. What she has said already, speaking through her gag, is enough to put Turkey at the center of all things wrong in the Middle East and we the people must be informed of it.

The US must keep the pressure on Pervez Musharraf to hold free and fair, early elections in Pakistan

The US must walk away from the military in Pakistan, cutting appropriations to zero. Just as we must walk away from the military in Israel, cutting apporriations to zero. Just as we must walk away from all who refuse to sign the nuclear non-proliferation agreement, cutting their appropriations to zero.

The US Congress must allocate substantial funds, on the order of $1 billion or more, for Iraqi refugee relief in Syria and Jordan.

The only way to get funds to attempt restitution of any sort in the Middle East is the end the war now and bring all American troops, uniformed and the hired Xtian Taleban crusaders from Blackwater, back home.

The Bush administration should expend all of its remaining political capital in the region to have the Israelis return the Golan Heights to Syria.

Well... wishing is free. "The Bush administration should expend all of its remaining political capital in the region to have the Israelis return to within the Green Line, the 1967 boundaries of Israel and the US should stop funding Israel's perpetual war of expropriation against its neighbors." And I wish to win the power ball lottery in 2008, too.

The US must insist that the Israeli siege of Gaza must be lifted.

The Israeli siege if Gaza resembles nothing more than it resembles the Nazi siege of the Warsaw Ghetto. That alone should bring the Israelis to their feet demanding its end now, before it ends the same dreadful way as did the Nazi siege of the Warsaw Ghetto.

And make no mistake, it is not an Israeli siege alone. It is a US/UK/EU/Israeli siege.

 
At 10:32 PM, Blogger Dancewater said...

“The US should exercise its good offices to encourage continued dialogue between Iran and Saudi Arabia.”

This has got to be a joke right? All I see is undermining of dialog between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

“The US must repair its tattered relations with Turkey.”

So, how much help can the US government give to Turkey in their goal of bombing Kurdistan before the Kurds decide to get some revenge on the US? And, if one of the survivors of the Turkish bombings comes to the US in 20 years and blows himself or herself up, will you blame it on the “they hate us for our values” line of crap?

“The US Congress must allocate substantial funds, …. For Iraqi refugee relief…..”

Well, I totally agree with this position. And with your positions on Gaza.

 
At 11:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Given the United States' consistent talent for meddling in a bad situation and making it unimaginably worse - a talent which has always existed, but has definitely reached a new peak with the Bush regime - I would say that the best thing for the United States to do is to stay out of other countries' business.

At the very least, given the spectacular reverse Midas' touch of the Bush regime, for 2008 at least the U.S. government should not be allowed to so much as LOOK at another country.

 
At 12:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank You Juan Cole
for taking the time and effort to publish this blog each and every day.
Heres hoping 2008 will bring more joyful news reporting.
A grateful daily reader.

 
At 12:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Professor, about your recommendation 2, the Golan Heights.

So, Syria "gets back" its territory, BUT on condition: 1. That it make it demilitarized, with UN supervision. (I suppose in exchange Israel would demilitarize its border with Lebanon, to a depth of 10 km.) 2. That Syria cease backing Palestinian militants. 3. That it also promote a Palestinian Bantustan. 4. That it also promote "social peace" in Lebanon (that is, as understood in Jerusalem and West Jerusalem, as in Irak) 5. That Syria distance itself from the current winner in the region, Iran.

Professor, you may intend this for some circles you have in mind. But outside those circles, what's left to add? That Syrian Security feed info to Jerusalem? That Assad join Abbas as a fully-owned collaborator?

As for the "Palestinian state". You write of the Golani conquests, but what of the West shore of the Jordan river, which Israel has been holding for the same forty years, and tighter too? As long as the real-world border of Israel is to the East of a purported Palestinian state, in the best of all possible worlds this state would still be a Bantustan. In the real world it would be much less, as it would still be split five ways, still be stripped of its resources and still have its "citizens" forbidden from participating in the surrounding economy of the master state.

 
At 2:19 PM, Blogger Capt. Jean-Luc Pikachu said...

wrt #5, the United States has a wonderful way of taking care of this, if they'll only fund the program!

 
At 5:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

RE: #1, Kadima is nothing more than the quasi-liberal wing of the Likud, those who like to feel guilty about Apartheid and other Solutions to the Palestinian Problem, but support it anyway (sort of like DNC Demos who are really Republicans who pretend to care), so there will never be any positive movement forward on the Palestinian issue from that front. Kadima, Likud, and the whacky right wingers won't be satisfied until Palestinians are pushed into the sea, removed, or exterminated.

 
At 11:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A couple of thoughts:

1. Should Syria be required to establish full peace with Israel as part of any Golan return? You appear not to require this.

2. The comment poster who compared Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto clearly has little understanding or knowlege of Poland under the Nazi occupation or the Warsaw Ghetto. If he did, he would not make the kind of comparison he did. I won't question motives, but just say that, sadly, knowlege of history is not what it should be.

 
At 5:19 AM, Blogger Visible said...

Well written and well reasoned in many ways but I have to take exception with certain inferences on your part. It would behoove you to look into what Hizbollah is and where it came from before you denigrate it into some sort of terror organization. The Israelis are the terrorists.

I won't address some of my other misgivings because it would take too long but I will say that all the so called terror problems presently in operation are either connected to fascist activity on the part of Washing-London and Tel Aviv or actually perpetrated by them. Until those who profit from the appearance of terrorism are brought to heel there isn't going to be any positive results whatsoever.

 
At 9:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

to anonymous above,

Regarding the Warsaw Ghetto comparison,

Is it not enough that more than a million people are being militarily imprisoned based on the fact that they are of the "wrong" ethnicity?

MUCH More importantly, how long did the Ghettos in Warsaw last? The situation in the Gaza and the other occupied territories has been going on for more than FOUR DECADES.

In that respect, the situation is MUCH worse.

Precisely how bad must it be before you admit that it is a moral and humanitarian disaster without a current parallel in the world today? Prime Minister Olmert is begining to see this in that he is comparing it to south Africa.

Like the warsaw ghettos, any person with a conscience must agree that the settlements and the occupation MUST end as soon as Possible, if not primarily for the horrors they unfairly reign down on the Palestinians daily, then for the blowback terrorism they have inspired against Israel and the US (including 9/11).

 
At 11:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: #2. Be it through the Bush administration or its successor, the US should—at a minimum—withhold all direct aid to Israel, pending an unconditional return of the Golan Heights to Syria. After all, “by the UN Charter, countries may not permanently grab the territory of their neighbors.”

The unconditional loyalty of the US has allowed Israel to behave like a belligerent superpower, instead of the beholden ward thereof. America’s failure to act as a fair and honest broker in the Middle East has begotten derision and contempt throughout the region, and the recent tendency to present as a corrupt bully, obliging a petulant ally, is the chief impetus for global terror.

It is therefore incumbent upon the US to insist with the same uncompromising resolve that is applied to other unauthorized nuclear powers and/or human rights violators, that Israel comply with its basic international obligations.

 
At 12:00 PM, Blogger Doğan said...

Excellent. Thank you.

 
At 5:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

JC: "might even keep Israel from falling into the Apartheid situation"


IMHO one (secular) state is the only solution which can last. Great list and thanks...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home