by Patrick Lang (bio below)
“Iraq’s most powerful Shiite politician has just dealt a huge blow to American-backed efforts to avoid civil war through the creation of a new, nationally inclusive constitutional order. That leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, has turned his back on the crucial pledge, made before last October’s constitutional referendum, that the new charter would be open to substantial amendment by the newly elected Parliament. Instead, Mr. Hakim, who runs the dominant, Iranian-supported fundamentalist party, now says no broad changes should be made. In particular, he defends the current provisions allowing substantial autonomy for the oil-rich Shiite southeast.
The vote count from last month’s parliamentary election is not yet complete. But it is already certain that the Shiite religious alliance, in which Mr. Hakim is the most important leader, will hold enough seats to block any constitutional changes it doesn’t like. The only recourse is to persuade Mr. Hakim to respect that earlier pledge.
Mr. Hakim’s latest position is
a prescription for a national breakup and an endless civil war. It is also a provocative challenge to
Washington, which helped broker the original promise of significant constitutional changes.
On the basis of that promise, Sunni voters turned out in large numbers, both for the constitutional referendum and for last month’s parliamentary vote. Drawing Sunni voters into democratic politics is vital to creating the stable, peaceful Iraq that President Bush has declared to be the precondition for an American military withdrawal. The most unacceptable defect of the new constitution for Sunnis is its
provision for radically decentralizing national political and economic power, dispersing it to separate regions.
In a quirk of geology, most of Iraq’s known oil deposits lie under provinces dominated by Shiites or Kurds, while the Sunni provinces of the west and north are resource-poor and landlocked. Iraq as a whole is rich enough to support all of its people relatively comfortably. But a radically decentralized Iraq would leave the Sunnis impoverished, aggrieved and desperate, driving them into the arms of radical Sunni groups in neighboring lands.
Although Sunnis are a minority in Iraq, they are an overwhelming majority in the Arab world. An irreconcilable split between Iraq’s Shiites and Sunnis would leave the Shiites even more dependent than they are now on Iran and American troops.
Constitutional changes are needed in other areas as well, especially in regard to women’s rights and the overly broad prohibitions against former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. But decentralization is the most dangerously explosive issue right now. Mr. Hakim seems perversely determined to inflame it.” NY Times
———————
It was sadly obvious from the time of the First Gulf War that intervention in the internal affairs of Iraq would lead to this point.
A systematic de-stabilization of a major country at the heart of the Arab World in which a minority (Shia) in the rest of the Arab World is a majority locally could only lead to civil war. Is it surprising that the Shia Arabs of Iraq, having been empowered by us should now insist on retaining that power? Is it surprising that this minority majority looks to its coreligionists to the east for support? Not surprising.
The New York Times now perceives the threat of an Iraqi/Iranian bloc at the the head of the Gulf. Who wrote the editorial? Surely it was not David Brooks.
Pat Lang
Col. Patrick W. Lang (Ret.), a highly decorated retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces, served as “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism” for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and was later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service. Col. Lang was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point. For his service in the DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.” He is a frequent commentator on television and radio, including MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann (interview), CNN and Wolf Blitzer’s Situation Room (interview), PBS’s Newshour, NPR’s “All Things Considered,” (interview), and more .
Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Recommended Books || More BooTrib Posts
Novel: The Butcher’s Cleaver (download free by chapter, PDF format)
“Drinking the Kool-Aid,” Middle East Policy Council Journal, Vol. XI, Summer 2004, No. 2
I had referenced this same article on Wednesday, saying this;
, but of course it wasn’t in a legitimate open thread and hence got no real notice.
I am pleased to see that my understanding of this event does seem to mirror what Pat Lang’s more experienced view of such things suggests in his diary here. The advent of full on civil war seems now inevitable.
I still say US should get the fuck out of there. IMO, all that is really going on is a war for oil.
If it were a war for a oil, it could be said to be somewhat rationale. It isn’t. It’s simply madness. Human madness.
Looks like there will be an attack on Iran, only this time Germany Britain and the US. among others will be supportive of it.
Things appear to be getting worse and there is no reason for hope.
The US thinks it must attack Iran to keep Iran from controlling Iraq. This is just going to go on and on.
And on. I really didn’t want to believe it at first. The thought is scary as hell. So many lives will be wasted. Some people that I know have friends and family in that part of the world, but they do not know exactly where…The US is never getting out. We’re fucked!
whats happening in the US is apparently happened and or happening in Europe.
They are allowing torture, investigating those who expose it…instead of the torture and forcing Iran to try to become Nuclear.
Iran has no choice but to try and become Nuclear.They are going to be attacked no matter led by paranoid provinicalists, small town minded people of the US.
I had hope Europe would steer the US away from this. Merkel is awful. Why did they allow her in?
Did the South win the Civil War? Will the US be defeated ideologically by Germany fifty years later?
How strange….
Definitely strange…Everything that has happened during this admin had a purpose. The ultimate purpose is to expand the invasion of Iraq to other countries…A US led invasion of all of the Middle East…No other name to call it…INVASION. And someway, somehow it will all be justified to the MSM and the guillible public will swallow whatever is spoon-fed to them. gwb will use the War Powers Act as a rationalization to do whatever he damn well feels like.
The anti-abortion stuff re: that nutcase appointee? All a scam–the War Powers Act. Distractions, distractions, and more distractions by this administration so no one would focus on what’s really going on.
It is so wierd to be sitting at a computer and know what’s coming. But, the net is all that is left, for now. Hell, did anyone ever imagine a Diebolded election?
This is more than strange…
While it is true that the invasion of Iraq had as one purpose setting the stage for getting direct American control of other Middle East nations, it is clear that the invasion has not worked. We can’t even control Iraq, the nation where we are concentrating all our military forces – and as a side effect, demonstrating the inability of the so-called Superpower to actually take over even such a small nation as Iraq.
Most people overrate the effects of military firepower to control the enemy. Aviators seem to me to be especially prone to this, probably since they know how many tons of TNT they dropped. [Rumsfeld was an aviator.] Distruption does not, by itself, lead to control. It has to be followed up by boots on the ground. Rumsfeld was out to prove that this is an outdated idea. In fact he proved that it is as important as it ever was. Bush and the Neocons gambled, grabbed hold of the tarbaby, … and lost. We are left trying to let loose of the damned sticky tar baby, having nothing positive to show for the gamble.
I’ll disagree that this is strange. This is the usual result of an extremist right-wing government. I had hope that the moderate Republicans could control their extremists, but the extremists won. The key was the politicizing of the right-wing fundamentalists, and I really didn’t see that coming. Nor did I realize how far gone Cheney was.
This and for some reason it stook out in my mind.
“All the stupid ones are dead,” said Capt. Jamey Turner of Baton Rouge, La., a brigade commander in Beiji.
That goes for the Americans as well. That’s why the military is making a feeble effort to show how much they hate Bush.
The military is probably scared shitless. Anything more than a feeble effort and gwb is so nuts he may push the button…
IMO, all that is really going on is a war for oil
Street Kid, you’re so close to hitting the nail’s head.
Here’s my take: Both Iraq and Iran are joined. Can we say as in coins? One being tails, the other heads. You decide. It’s the war of Petro-$dollars vs. Petro-euros – the supremacy of US$ remaining the world’s reserve currency or face devastation of US economy and all that implies.
Under reported is the fact that Saddam decreed (if memory serves) in mid 2002 payment of Iraqi oil in euros. Indonesia chimed ditto. US said he had WMDs and Iraq needed democracy at the point of the gun.
Now we have Iran’s Oil Bourse set to launch in March 2006. Payment in euros please. Odd, isn’t it that many are opining end of March as the timeline for a strike to stop Iran’s goal to join the nuclear club? What is not being reported on this side of the pond is that Iran, a member of the NPT, does have the right to pursue nuclear research for energy. And further they did remove the seals in the presence of IAEA inspectors.
See a useful article “NPT explained” here. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2645379.stm
US is eagerly calling for Iran to be referred to UN for sanctions. What sanctions? Oh, how we forget. Iran survived the sanctions placed against it during the Iran-Iraq war; won their revenge and seems to be doing very well under continued US sanctions. Ask big Dick and Hal.
Imho, as Iraq before it, this Iran ruse is quite a diversion from the GOP/Abramoff/NSA facts at home. And, we seem bent on defeating the victor of our Iraq debacle – Iran.
Not lost is the irony of the Iraq misadventure. While US is occuppied spending perhaps a trillion or two democratizing Iraq and losing out big time, China is quietly bagging existing and future world oil resources – in Canada, South America, Africa and Central Asia.
In 2005 China was very busy with several buy-ins, buy-outs or long term contracts paid for with infrastructure development aid. And look who are partnering with China in many of these deals? India, Iran and Russia. Screwed royally by King George we are.
Thought about this before I crashed last nite and here is my take:
It is soley an economic war with people out to cover their asses and hope to come out of this on top. Look at the Haliburton contracts for the “rebuilding” of Iraq. Rebuild a destroyed country for the sole purpose of the obtaining control over the oil reserves. Corporate America wins there. Also remember hearing from an econ prof (when I was an undergrad) that history shows that a war does stimulate the economy. Now something else that I heard/read from someone/somewhere (can’t remember when or who): troops in Iraq are not counted in the unemployment figures. (no idea of where find that info or to link to that one)
Questions:
And I followed the link you provided and discovered:
>this Iran ruse is quite a diversion from the GOP/Abramoff/NSA facts at home.
Yeah. Is it possible that the facts will bring people down and put an end to the grand plan?
While US is occuppied spending perhaps a trillion or two democratizing Iraq and losing out big time, China is quietly bagging existing and future world oil resources – in Canada, South America, Africa and Central Asia.
In 2005 China was very busy with several buy-ins, buy-outs or long term contracts paid for with infrastructure development aid. And look who are partnering with China in many of these deals? India, Iran and Russia.
Infastructure development aid? Wonder where that came from?
Is everything justified w/in the neocon mindset? I am afraid that it is…
WTF do we do now?
WTF do we do now?
How about instead of another war party, we hold an Impeachment right after mid-term elections?
After all King George has taken a bushcutter.. erm, slip of the typing ya know, a brushcutter to our Constitution and he did bushwhack us into opening the largest pandora’s box -Iraq – that his friends, the Saudis, advised against doing.
Everything hinges on the mid-terms…Seems like we just have to keep at it until then, no matter how tough it gets. And hope to hell that nothing happens in Iran before then.
We’re fucked!
haven’t we known this for a long time now? I think we all could see this from the get go. I had high hopes for the future, but that is now gone out the window forever. I/We could see this happening from the get go, even before the war and how it was done. Anyhow, I agree with you, alohaleezy.
.
A diary by Patrick Lang with RED highlighting appears to be more than it is in reality: a simple OpEd of the NYT with little factual content.
Truly a disappointment!
“Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
▼▼▼ READ MY DIARY ▼