A Divided Iraq Unites Against Partition Plan
Even US Embassy Opposes Resolution
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq’s divided political leadership, in a rare show of unity, skewered a non-binding U.S. Senate resolution approved in Washington, D.C., last week that endorses the decentralization of Iraq through the establishment of semi-autonomous regions.Also on Sunday, the U.S. Embassy joined the Iraqi politicians - both Shiite and Sunni - in criticizing the resolution.
The measure’s advocacy of a relatively weak central government and strong Sunni Arab, Shiite and Kurdish regions has touched a nerve in the Iraqi political arena, stoking fears that the United States is planning to partition Iraq.
“The Congress adopted this proposal based on an incorrect reading and unrealistic estimations of the history, present and future of Iraq,” said Izzat al-Shahbandar, a member of secular ex-prime minister Ayad Allawi’s parliament bloc.
He was reading from a statement also signed by Iraq’s pre-eminent religious Shiite Muslim parties and the main Sunni Arab bloc.
“It represents a dangerous precedent to establishing the nature of the relationship between Iraq and the USA,” the statement said, “and shows the Congress as if it were planning for a long-term occupation by their country’s troops.”
In the U.S. Embassy’s highly unusual statement, it said resolution would seriously hamper Iraq’s future stability.
The non-binding power-sharing measure was approved in Washington on Wednesday, and resentment appears to be building daily in Iraq. Approved by a 75-23 margin, it supports a “federal system” that would create sectarian-dominated regions.
The genesis of the resolution is the proposal by Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., and Council of Foreign Relations president emeritus Leslie Gelb. The pair have been advocates of dividing the country up along ethnic and regional lines.
Backfires in Baghdad
The federalization idea, backed by some Democrats, is one of many proposals floated in the United States, where the public has become disenchanted with the continuing violence in Iraq.
But whatever the intended effect by the Senate lawmakers to wade into the debate, the effort has backfired in Baghdad, where the resolution has been interpreted in light of Iraq’s history of foreign occupation from the Ottoman empire to Britain and America. Iraqi political parties that have been deadlocked for months have rallied to defend the country’s sovereignty and to defeat any effort by another country to shape Iraq’s fate.
“We refuse the resolutions which decide Iraq’s destiny from outside Iraq. This is a dangerous partitioning based on sectarianism and ethnicity,” said Hashim Taie, a member of the Iraqi Accordance Front, the parliament’s main Sunni representation.
Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s political supporters joined their rivals in denouncing the U.S. Senate’s measure. “This project is the strategic option for the American administration in its failure to igniting a sectarian war inside Iraq,” Nasr Rubaie said. “They started to search for a replacement, which is to divide Iraqi.”
Federalism has long proved a charged topic for Iraq. The Sadrists still are seeking a strong national government. The Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, another large Shiite political faction, also has started to downplay the idea of further weakening an already frail national government.
Leery of American intervention, Rubaie said the powers of the provinces and regional blocs should be defined once the United States has pulled its troops out of Iraq.
Plays on worst fears
Joost Hiltermann, a Middle East expert at the International Crisis Group think tank, cautioned that the Senate proposal had played on some of the worst fears of Iraqis and other Arab states. “In Iraq and the Arab world, the word partition is an anathema associated with the worst aspects of imperialist policy,” Hiltermann said.
Over the weekend, U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 60 insurgent and militia fighters in intense battles, with most of the casualties believed to have been Al-Qaida fighters, officials said Sunday.
U.S. aircraft killed more than 20 Al-Qaida in Iraq fighters who opened fire on an U.S. air patrol northwest of Baghdad, the U.S. command said.
Iraq’s Defense Ministry said in an e-mail Sunday afternoon that Iraqi soldiers had killed 44 “terrorists” over the past 24 hours. The operations were centered in Salahaddin and Diyala provinces and around the city of Kirkuk, where the ministry said its soldiers had killed 40 and arrested eight. It said 52 fighters were arrested.
In a separate operation, U.S. forces killed two insurgents and detained 21 others during weekend operations against the Al-Qaida group.
The U.S. military also announced the death of a U.S. soldier killed Saturday in a roadside bombing and gunfire attack in eastern Baghdad. There were 62 U.S. military deaths in September, the lowest monthly toll since July 2006 when 43 U.S. soldiers were killed, according to a preliminary Associated Press tally.
Los Angeles Times staff writer Saif Hameed and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
© 2007 The San Jose Mercury-News
“In Iraq and the Arab world, the word partition is an anathema associated with the worst aspects of imperialist policy,” Hiltermann said.
These Iraqi’s have long memories and for good reason…It’s all happened before…
Hooray! The USA is finally getting the Iraqis to agree on something.
Way to go! High five!
Now let’s make sure that all these people who will unite against us are heavily armed.
And let’s give them lots of reasons to fear and hate us.
Looks like a plan!
Let’s git ‘er done!
There is no need to divide it, it’s already divided. Colin Powell told “Starfish”, “If you invade Iraq you will OWN it”. (From a taped interview with Powell by Bob Woodward)
Powell was correct, __ and since we now own it, if we divide Iraq by three, we could eventually have 53 stars on ‘Old Glory’. Better make it two to keep it even. ___ Well,__ on second thought, ___ Iran would be four stars.
Q. If the US and other forces were to ask for advice from Hierarchy, what advice and solutions to the terrible mess of Afghanistan and Iraq would they receive?
A. To admit the wrong committed by the invasions and to pour the necessary monies and all other resources to restore these countries to peace and calm. To hold an international UN-led inquiry into the best way to begin and complete this restoration and to avow no further incursions of a like kind anywhere in the world.
Excerpted from: Questions and answers
http://share-international.org/magazine/SI_current.htm#qa
I think we should build a bunch of Evangilical churches over there, teach them Arabs what they’ve been missing. We’ve already permanently ‘freed’ over a million Iraqi civilians and insured another three to four million have been afforded new homes in other lands. They WILL have Democracy, whether they want it or not. ‘Starfish’ says so and he always gets what he wants, his daddy insures it.
The decider thinks: We will bring democracy to the Iraqi people if we have to kill every damn one of them to do it. Now that’s what I call real democracy in action. Democracy, my eye!!
Hey locust…
You’ve just been promoted from chief blogger to General…bring it on, an’ go get em!!
Hey Kem…
After reading your offering, you go get em too!!
Hey, it worked great for Ex-Yugoslavia and Kosovo!
I can’t say that I blame the Iraqi politicians on this one. It was not our Senate’s place to telling them how to restructure their government. It was actually pretty imperialistic of us to do so.
I’m afraid that what Iraq needs for a government is exactly what we took down; a strong dictator who kills or imprisons anyone who commits acts of violence. Nothing else is going to work. In the end, the Shiite will dominate and kill the Sunni and the Kurds will be left to themselves. No hand wringing on our part is going to make any difference.
My solution is to drop dirty nukes down their oil well shafts so that all their oil is radioactive, thereby worthless. Then we would have no more reason to be there.
I’m sure the Biden/Gelb partition plan will work as successfully as the north/south partition of Vietnam worked out.
Bill from Saginaw
For anyone who bothered to read the article, it maybe noteworthy that in the first sentence it notes the politicians in Iraq don’t like the idea of being put out to pasture or whatever one does with camels. Since they don’t seem to represent the population on other matters, why should we expect they represent the general population on this matter either. There has been plenty in the European and USA press suggesting the general population would like to see three segments!
Last but hardly least, why bother to discuss it or pay any attention to what the Iraq politicians are saying since the “Gang of Dubya” will decide and dictate any changes to the politicians in Iraq?
Woo who! I just love it! The Iraqis have found a voice and something they can agree on. I’ll bet they can find more to agree on too after this - like US occupying forces out of their country!
I kind of like MRFROAD’s idea of dropping nukes down the oil wells. Shucks, Detroit would probably figure a way to tune our cars to use it though! It would force us to turn to alternate fuel really quickly and, not too soon for me!
You go, Iraquis! They aren’t listening to us. I’m on your side for settling your own problems internally! Stupid Congress has ignored the American public just one time too many…..
The Senate proposition was a serious one. It also could work.
I am suspicious of their so-called reactions to this proposition.
Does anyone else share this suspicion, or even better, have evidence that would dispute the basis of these claims?
You may remember the BARBED WIRE argument that engulfed the West prior to 1900. It is not so different from the problems facing IRAQI factions with distinct differences.
As history bears out….the arguments of both sides eventually came true [Not all at the same time], the Pros and Cons, the Good and Bad alike. Perhaps if these groups were separated by an imaginary line they might come to figure a way to share and solve and live in relative peace.
But we know History is in books, and the DECIDER doesn’t read much….[any?].
Ever since the civil war in the states they have been paranoid, racing around the world murdering millions of innocent people and dividing their countries into north and south, etc.
If the Iraqis only realized that united they could kick ass and free their country of invaders.
pfutrell: I would think that most Iraqis or anyone putting themselves in their shoes would realize that partition means suicide. Iraq as it is, is small compared with some of its neighbors and average to the rest. Being broken up is a sure recipe for becoming a permanent protectorate of the U.S. Do you really think many Iraqis, regardless of affiliation, want that? They don’t, and our media calls it an insurgency. I call it the resistance. International law calls it illegal. The only people this proposal is good for are tired and dimwitted Americans who want to appear to be doing something. i.e Joe Biden.
Actually though, it is not dim-witted but quite dastardly, and now that U.S. strategy is exposed it seems so obvious. Of course, large “non-permanent” permanent bases nestled in with our new friends, all three of them, for we are responsible you know…
All this goes to show what you can do with the world’s largest military, if you are willing to use it. If we pull off the partition, the oil is in the bag, or barrel. We won’t need no stinking “benchmark” oil agreement.
I don’t wish no harm to the Iraqi’s oil since it is their way of supporting their country. Noticed I said “their”!
Iraqi’s you have something in common with all the other religious tribes…..you are human beings that need to look out for each other. Set your differences aside and do what needs to be done for the better good of you all! PLEASE!
Set the example to the rest of the world. Show that war is useless and that it doesn’t solve differences! MAKE IT HAPPEN!
pfutrell, 5:50 pm:
“The Senate proposition was a serious one. It also could work.”
You might be correct,pfutrell, but to a certain extent, that’s besides the point. Instead of deciding what’s good for Iraq without bothering to ask Iraqis their opinion, the US Senate should start worrying about what’s good for the US: its budget deficit, its troops, and its reputation throughout the world.
What the Senate could have been doing, for example:
1) Closing down Guantanamo.
2) Cease funding the war.
3) Require the administration to follow the steps outlined by the Iraq Study Group.
4) Re-define the military mission in Iraq.
The Senate’s action once again proves the old adage: It’s easier to solve someone else’s problem, than to solve your own.
I really don’t believe that most Iraqis want a divided country. The sectarian violence was unleashed by the chaos that ensued during the illegal US/UK-led invasion of Iraq. It’s great to see that people from rival groups are banding together to protest the breaking up of their country. If Iraq were to be divided into three regions — a Kurdish, a Sunni and a Shiite — what would that mean for the remaining Iraqis who are not members of those groups? There are still Arab and non-Arab (Chaldean) Christians in the country. These people’s faith predates the Muslim conversion — their ancestors were Christians long before most Westerners’ ancestors were. I believe there may be other groups (Jews?) in Iraq as well. What would happen to these people? Would Iraq turn into another Yugoslavia?Earlier this year, an Christian Iraqi woman was decapitated for not wearing a headscarf. This sort of thing apparently didn’t happen under Saddam. He was horrible, of course, but he seemed to hold the country together. Is it possible for there to be a strong Iraqi leader who can achieve this witout being the despot that Saddam was?
To think about it, it worked great in Korea, Vietnam, ex-yougoslavia, now Iraq. What country next to be divided along artificial lines so the country isnt able to be able to perform a kind of motor for culture economics etc for its region? The “threat of the good example” Venezuela? Brazil? India? I mean, after Iran.
Iraq is a Shi’i majority, repressed by Saddam, a Sunni. The Kurds are really not wanted anywhere.
There are approximately 3% other religions in Iraq. Yes, there are Jews, they are a tribe of the Kurdish.
Shi’i, I am sure would like to be in control due to the lengthy repression with Saddam in control. Sunni feel they should have superiority over Shi’i since it was that way for so long.
The Kurds will try to cross into Turkey to aid their terrorist group the PKK. They have murdered over 37,000 Turks so far.
We have to get out and let them figure it out. We are not the be all and end all as to how the world should be run.
Illegal war, illegal seizure of the Iraqi life. It has to stop NOW!