US media, political analysts and people are engrossed in their debate about the scope and future of US involvement in Iraq. Different alternatives are proposed and discussed or disagreed upon. In this article we will review the current situation and also suggest some alternatives.
But before we comment on the prevailing condition in Iraq, it is important to analyze history of Iraq and find some parallels. History provides a very important benchmark to understand the behavior and attitude of a nation. In the modern history Iraq can be compared to Afghanistan in terms of psychology of its people and its geo-political position in their respective regions. Afghanistan for thousands of years, served as a gateway for ambitious Central Asian leaders to invade rich lands of India. The people of Afghanistan were used to armies marching through their land and so, maintaining weapons became a way of life for them. In the last century when Russia invaded Afghanistan the Mujahideen, as they were referred to by USA, raised arms against this invasion and ultimately forced their withdrawal in haste. Although no one expected peace to return to Afghanistan immediately after its independence, but it was also unexpected that a civil war would break out between the warlords for control of Afghan government. This war lasted for almost a decade.
Iraq, or Mesopotamia as it was called in history, was also at cross roads between the expanding Islamic empire from Arabia and Christian dominated west sharing its border with Turkey. Iraq was carved out of the larger Middle East after the defeat of Ottoman Empire in the First World War but it was never a totally Arab country in its ethnic make-up. It shared borders with Shiite majority Iran & Syria on one side and on the other had a substantial Kurdish population who never totally felt being part of the Iraqi nation. Former strongman Saddam Hussain under his iron fist was able to maintain a unified Iraqi identity until he was removed by the US invasion Iraq. His removal from power also eliminated the glue that held the society together and created a vacuum that is largely responsible for the civil war like situation. US policy of allowing the dismantling the Iraqi army and removal of Baathist from government institutions has created a void that is also playing its part in the current chaos.
In this quagmire many proposals are discussed for a US exit strategy. One proposal put forward by many Iraqi leaders and intellectuals is the complete pull out of US from Iraq. This is a mistaken idea and would certainly result in the same chaos and civil war witnessed by us in Afghanistan. All the news reports suggest that there is a wedge created in Iraqi society on sectarian and ethnic lines. The interim constitutional framework also supports these divisions.
The other proposal discussed in the media is removal of US troops from the cities to suburbs and out of public eye. This in a way might provide more opportunity to insurgents to plan their ambush on US troops and avoid Iraqi deaths that will provide them greater public support. This will also ignite the media debate whether US has long-term designs to stay in Iraq to exploit its oil resources.
The third proposal debated is the announcement of plan to gradually reduce US troops levels in Iraq. Bush administration is not willing to announce this time frame as it would be considered acceptance of failure and could also strengthen insurgents in gaining support from the locals. The administration might also be using this as a political wild card and wait for the right time to announce this schedule close to 2006 congressional elections to support Republican candidates.
The proposal we would like to propose is based on the theory that democracy in Iraq and Middle East should be a global objective rather than just part of US foreign policy. The reality is that the “Coalition of the willing” has all but disappeared leaving the burden on US shoulders. Italy, Poland, Ukraine, Denmark, Norway, Philippines, Thailand and New Zealand have all either pulled out of the coalition or announced plans to withdraw their troops by end of 2006. This has also created an impression that US is the occupier of Iraq for its oil rather than a liberator of the people for promotion of human liberty.
It is important that US should globalize this issue by engaging United Nations (UN), NATO and Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC). The ground reality is the Iraqi forces are not trained enough to assume the responsibility of maintaining the law and order in the country. A military force should be created immediately under OIC banner and UN guidance to gradually replace US forces. This largely Muslim force will be in a much better position to defuse insurgents and bring them into the political process. In order to gain widespread acceptance among Iraqi people this international force should be commanded by Iraqi commanders brought back from retirement.
The question of Saddam will haunt US for a long time. There is also a discussion in Iraq to bring back the old strongman. All of us remember the Nuremberg trails where Nazi war criminals were tried. Saddam should be brought to the international court of justice for crime against humanity and tried as a war criminal. There is no easy solution to a complex problem. But it is important that US form a strategy that is acceptable not only inside but internationally. Any failure to do so quickly could result in further loss of US credibility, lives and capital.
Should US pull out of Iraq? US media, political a…
December 16, 2005 at 10:44 pm · Filed under Political Commentary
Should US pull out of Iraq?
US media, political analysts and people are engrossed in their debate about the scope and future of US involvement in Iraq. Different alternatives are proposed and discussed or disagreed upon. In this article we will review the current situation and also suggest some alternatives.
But before we comment on the prevailing condition in Iraq, it is important to analyze history of Iraq and find some parallels. History provides a very important benchmark to understand the behavior and attitude of a nation. In the modern history Iraq can be compared to Afghanistan in terms of psychology of its people and its geo-political position in their respective regions. Afghanistan for thousands of years, served as a gateway for ambitious Central Asian leaders to invade rich lands of India. The people of Afghanistan were used to armies marching through their land and so, maintaining weapons became a way of life for them. In the last century when Russia invaded Afghanistan the Mujahideen, as they were referred to by USA, raised arms against this invasion and ultimately forced their withdrawal in haste. Although no one expected peace to return to Afghanistan immediately after its independence, but it was also unexpected that a civil war would break out between the warlords for control of Afghan government. This war lasted for almost a decade.
Iraq, or Mesopotamia as it was called in history, was also at cross roads between the expanding Islamic empire from Arabia and Christian dominated west sharing its border with Turkey. Iraq was carved out of the larger Middle East after the defeat of Ottoman Empire in the First World War but it was never a totally Arab country in its ethnic make-up. It shared borders with Shiite majority Iran & Syria on one side and on the other had a substantial Kurdish population who never totally felt being part of the Iraqi nation. Former strongman Saddam Hussain under his iron fist was able to maintain a unified Iraqi identity until he was removed by the US invasion Iraq. His removal from power also eliminated the glue that held the society together and created a vacuum that is largely responsible for the civil war like situation. US policy of allowing the dismantling the Iraqi army and removal of Baathist from government institutions has created a void that is also playing its part in the current chaos.
In this quagmire many proposals are discussed for a US exit strategy. One proposal put forward by many Iraqi leaders and intellectuals is the complete pull out of US from Iraq. This is a mistaken idea and would certainly result in the same chaos and civil war witnessed by us in Afghanistan. All the news reports suggest that there is a wedge created in Iraqi society on sectarian and ethnic lines. The interim constitutional framework also supports these divisions.
The other proposal discussed in the media is removal of US troops from the cities to suburbs and out of public eye. This in a way might provide more opportunity to insurgents to plan their ambush on US troops and avoid Iraqi deaths that will provide them greater public support. This will also ignite the media debate whether US has long-term designs to stay in Iraq to exploit its oil resources.
The third proposal debated is the announcement of plan to gradually reduce US troops levels in Iraq. Bush administration is not willing to announce this time frame as it would be considered acceptance of failure and could also strengthen insurgents in gaining support from the locals. The administration might also be using this as a political wild card and wait for the right time to announce this schedule close to 2006 congressional elections to support Republican candidates.
The proposal we would like to propose is based on the theory that democracy in Iraq and Middle East should be a global objective rather than just part of US foreign policy. The reality is that the “Coalition of the willing” has all but disappeared leaving the burden on US shoulders. Italy, Poland, Ukraine, Denmark, Norway, Philippines, Thailand and New Zealand have all either pulled out of the coalition or announced plans to withdraw their troops by end of 2006. This has also created an impression that US is the occupier of Iraq for its oil rather than a liberator of the people for promotion of human liberty.
It is important that US should globalize this issue by engaging United Nations (UN), NATO and Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC). The ground reality is the Iraqi forces are not trained enough to assume the responsibility of maintaining the law and order in the country. A military force should be created immediately under OIC banner and UN guidance to gradually replace US forces. This largely Muslim force will be in a much better position to defuse insurgents and bring them into the political process. In order to gain widespread acceptance among Iraqi people this international force should be commanded by Iraqi commanders brought back from retirement.
The question of Saddam will haunt US for a long time. There is also a discussion in Iraq to bring back the old strongman. All of us remember the Nuremberg trails where Nazi war criminals were tried. Saddam should be brought to the international court of justice for crime against humanity and tried as a war criminal.
There is no easy solution to a complex problem. But it is important that US form a strategy that is acceptable not only inside but internationally. Any failure to do so quickly could result in further loss of US credibility, lives and capital.
Permalink