The growing mess that is Iraq

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Mendalla

Mendalla

Happy headbanging ape!!
Pronouns
He/Him/His
Things are deteriorating in Iraq. Badly. It was long suggested that only Saddam Hussein as a strongman was holding the place together and the evidence is growing that was correct. I heard at least one commentator yesterday suggesting we're headed for a three state Iraq, one for the Sunnis, one for the Shiites, and one for the Kurds. Which will cause a whole slew of other headaches, what with ISIS trying to use Iraq as a base for their campaign in Syria and vice versa, the presence of an independent Kurdistan in Iraq being a possible provocation for the Turks, and likely ongoing fighting to determine the borders. There is talk of Western intervention, but that's what got us here in the first place. I'm sure Harper and others may see ISIS as another evil fundamentalist Muslim threat to be crushed but they are there because of discontent among Sunni Iraqis with the new Shiite dominated regime (Shiites are the majority sect in Iraq). I'm thinking we confine the intervention to securing relief for refugees from the fighting and diplomatic efforts to sort it all out and keep our armies out of it. OTOH, if Iran and the Saudis and other Muslim countries in the region are intervening overtly or covertly, does that mean we need to counterbalance those influences with some intervention of our own? Like so many issues in the Middle East, it's just too complicated and simplistic solutions like military invasions likely won't do more than complicate it more.

Thoughts?

(Yes, I thought it was time to have a real thread going in Global Issues)
 
I honestly don't know enough to even suggest a solution. I agree it's a mess, and I note that the people in high places who say they have a solution, or that they solved the problem, also don't understand. They just insist they do.
 
As Canadians, the only appropriate roles including doing what we can to restrict arms flowing to the conflict, though we cannot do much directly, and to provide support for the people hurt by this conflict to some extent. Like Mosri in Egypt, Maliki has set himself up to be removed through his arrogance and prejudices. I believed about 10 years ago that it was no longer appropriate to support a nation called Iraq. I thought we needed 4 independent entities: Kurdish, Shiite, Sunni, and an ecumenical entity centered on Bhagdad where people of different ethnicities were happy living together.
 
I was watching some old You Tube videos of George Galloway mostly talking about U.S. and British involvement in Iraq. He was being vilified in the North American and Brit press at the time, but in view of the things that we are seeing in Iraq now, his comments appear pretty germaine. Another commentator whose comments might be looking pretty accurate right now would, I'm guessing, be Wondercafe's very own "graeme".
 
A very germane question is how the whole mess fits into the bigger picture of post-colonial Middle Eastern politics. It is not happening in isolation and the roots can be traced back to the colonial era when the shotgun marriage of cultures first occurred. After all, Iraq is the country where Saddam went from the Americans' bulwark against Iran to public number number 1 in about two (maybe 3) decades. Assad in Syria is also a product of Cold War era political shenanigans (or at least his father was). Even Iran would be a very different place if the West had not mucked about it in its politics. The new governments in Iraq and Afghanistan were both installed by the West and both look poised to fall or at least become something different from what we expected. Perhaps it is time for us to lay hands off and let them figure it out for themselves.
 
One of the most disturbing aspects of ISIS is how they seem to be trolling the world by posting on twitter picture of the thousands of people they have executed so far. Including many pictures of men and teenage boys that they have publicly crucified/ They have announced that in the new state of Iraq crucifixion will be the main form of punishment for all male criminals.
 
The conflict is characterized as a religious one and certainly the Shia and the Sunni are doing what they have already done before (although to a non-Muslim, differentiating a Sunni from a Shia is like differentiating a Methodist from a Presbyterian). On the other hand, it appears that the underlying fight is about who gets to control the sale of oil (the central government or the outlying provinces... (think Alberta vs. Ottawa). I personally think that, at bottom, it is about the oil.

I'm not sure whether it really matters here in the west. No matter who controls the sale of oil in Iraq it will need to be sold into the world market (or else it is worthless). I think attempts to intervene are not advisable and have contributed greatly to present problems.
 
Last edited:
I don't have much to say that hasn't already been said, except remaining kind of gobsmacked that some of the most accomplished and powerful people in the US (and to a lesser extent, the world - the UK etc.) thought invading Iraq was a good idea in 2003. My (then-)boyfriend (now husband) and I thought we must be nuts to think it was a bad, destabilizing idea. Turns out a couple of 20 year old university sophomores had it better figured out than the POTUS and his team. And looking at the situation today, God how I wish we were wrong.
 
qwerty said:
The conflict is characterized as a religious one and certainly the Shia and the Sunni are doing what they have already done before (although to a non-Muslim, differentiating a Sunni from a Shia is like differentiating a Methodist from a Presbyterian). On the other hand, it appears that the underlying fight is about who gets to control the sale of oil (the central government or the outlying provinces... (think Alberta vs. Ottawa). I personally think that, at bottom, it is about the oil.

I'm not sure whether it really matters here in the west. No matter who controls the sale of oil in Iraq it will need to be sold into the world market (or else it is worthless). I think attempts to intervene are not advisable and have contributed greatly to present problems.
Click to expand...


Actually, Sunni versus Shia is further apart than Methodist-Presbyterian. It goes back to a dispute over the line of succession to the Prophet and is actually a fairly major split more along the lines of Protestant-Catholic or Catholic-Orthodox. Methodist-Presbyterian would be more akin to the relationship between, say, Ismailis (a Shia sect to which my Muslim friends belong) and Zaydis, another related Shia sect. The conflicts between these branches of Islam (and between the sects within each) are as real and bitter as the ones that raged between sects of Christianity during the Reformation and Counter-Reformation era in Europe so I would not minimize their role here.

The bigger problem is that there is more than religion at play. There is also ethnic tension (Kurds versus non-Kurds, for instance, and ethnic Persians/Iranians in the South near Iran).

The oil is in play to the extent that whoever controls the oil wins and all groups, both ethnic and religious, want that power. It is more an aggravating factor than a cause IOW.
 
I would say ethnic (racism) and the control of oil (money) are the main factors. Religion as usual is just a tool being used to get men to committ the mass murder that is required in wars.
 
It always amazes me how the human race continues to use war as a means to resolve issues. Why do humans insist on dominating and controlling others? In the end what will come out of this situation? A war that will go on and on until all sides come to some sort of agreement or is the whole motivation to dominate/eradicate the other?
 
I have to disagree with Alex here. Religion is not being manipulated or used as a tool, it lets itself be used as part of its own agenda. The Islamists may not be representative of Islam, but they represent a strain in that faith that goes back a very long way taken to a new extreme. Take away Islam and they lose much of their motivation for what they do. You have just another nationalist movement that is unlikely to go to the extremes we see taken in the name of Allah by the Islamists. Same here in North America. Fundamentalist Christianity is not being used by the political right, it has its own agenda that is furthered by backing the political right. I am not saying all religion is responsible for all the grief in the world, but it is clearly more than just a tool; it plays a deep motivating role in many conflicts and political situations. I am not saying this is right or that all religion is bad because some religion operates in this way but that dismissing religion as a motivating factor or even a cause in some of these conflicts is missing a major factor that will need to be dealt with in any settlement.
 
3 times this week, I've seen reruns of different documentary style shows that talked about Kurds and their hopeful & grateful culture, how promising their lives are since the previous wars died down and they were given some autonomy. Now, when I watch the news, it has faces and places that seem recognizable, and I feel sad. How is it that moderates are always sideswiped by extremists? It has been said that common sense prevails, but too often, that is proven wrong, or comes at too high a price for slow awakenings.
 
the squeaky wheel gets the grease...moderates don't squeak, by definition

our neurologies are set up so as to notice & pay attention to changes, differences, bad memories seem to have more importance/last longer than good...

humanity is on a planet where now all our different cultures & ways of living can not be like it was in the past, not affecting each other and out of the set that includes all the potential ways of living, not all of them are valid and not all of them are able to coexist

which means that if the global we has this technology that can give everyone even more power, ability to affect their lives (and, thereby, the lives of others), what do we do aboot the ones that shouldn't be given this power? that would abuse it?

do we morally educate our youth? do we create some kind of angelic UN that will enforce these universal human rights?

has this been going on for as long as humanity has been going?

have the jews already been through this in their long, ancient history? just look at the parts of the bible where they do simply horrific things, like genocide (to survive)?

will humanity be able to escape the horrors of history? can we do all this without committing monstrous acts?

or will we continue to have periods of relative stability, followed by periods of instability, new barbarians storming the ruling classes' towers?

i'm an optimist
 
Last edited:
ISIS is made up of fanatics who want to reconstruct the Caliphate (abolished by Turkey in the 1920s). Fighting along with it in its lightening advance in Iraq are other Sunnis who resent the Shiite government. A marriage of convenience. There is a good summary here: http://www.rferl.org/content/iraq-sunni-anger-causes/25432218.html

It is not about oil for the Shia and Sunni Arabs, but there is an oil conflict with the Kurds, who are largely Sunni but are not Arabs (they are related to Iranians, at least their language is). The Kurds have oil fields in their autonomous region and they have just now completed their first sale without Baghdad's consent. They have a pipeline to Turkey, where it can be loaded onto tankers. Baghdad, and the US, have made threatening noises about anyone who buys this oil. So far, one confirmed tanker load has been unloaded in Israel. What can Baghdad to do Israel? They already hate them and refuse to recognize them, so they have no leverage.

As for the causes, there are many but the borders drawn post WW I (by the British and French) did not take ethnic groups or sects into considerations. The Kurds really lost out, not getting a state at all. They are the largest ethnic group in the world without their own state.

There are also Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Syria. The Sunni-Shia split goes right back to the very beginning, after Mohammed died: the Shia believed the next spiritual leader must be a descendent of Mohammed, while the Sunnis thought his companions could qualify.

The great battle was fought in Karbala, in what is now southern Iraq.

It is very hard to say what outsiders can do. Not much I would say.

This has been building for some time, ever since ISIS got a grip of part of Syria. They have been raiding parts of western Iraq for quite a few months now, but until recently, did not take any major cities. So far the Kurds are keeping them out of their area and let us hope that remains the case. One could argue for making sure they have enough arms.

There are also Christians living in the area, who have fled in terror, mostly to Kirkuk, the big city that the Kurds currently control.

ISIS in unbelievably brutal. It is just mind boggling. In addition to their much publicized executions, they are also destroying old monuments and tombs. These are against their very strict interpretation of Islam, that came out of Saudi Arabia and is called Wahabbism. The Saudis have also destroyed much in Mecca for the same reason. Grave worshipping, they fear.
 
Thanks, Inanna, I likely won't have much time to comment, but due to my blogging, I have been following the Middle East in detail. Thought I would throw in my 2 cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top