Assertions conflict with ground realities

Jan.26, 2008

Assertions conflict with ground realities

BEHIND the headlines that show a see-sawing security situation in Iraq, a political drama is being played out with the goal of determining by July this year who is in charge of the country under an agreement under negotiation. It is a difficult process, given the conflicting interests of the various parties involved.
Obviously, the Shiite-led Iraqi government would like to maintain the US military presence in the country until such time that the Shiites are satisified that the Sunni-led insurgency is quashed for good and they are able to take absolute security control of the country. At this point in time, they do not see any other use for the US military except to fight the insurgents and protect the Shiites while they implement their own policies with a close eye on relations with Iran. They object of any US military move away from this objective.
Of course, different Shiite groups have their own agendas, but they all share the goal of assuming unchallenged authority and power now that the political equation is in their favour in post-war Iraq and almost all of them do have Iranian connections one way or another.
Similarly, the Kurds, another major component in the government, have their own seditionist agenda and they would like the US military to stay on as they press ahead with their designs and plans that have little room for Iraqi nationalism if there is such a thing at all today.
The Sunnis are divided, with one camp determined to continue the insurgency, perhaps with help from Al Qaeda, while the other wants to fight off foreign jihadists, including Al Qaeda, so that they could focus efforts on securing what they could in terms of their rights and interests in the country. Few of them are impressed by the recently adopted law on "rehabilitating" members of the defunct Baahist Party, and they want to guarantee their rights partly through fire-power. There the Awakening Councils, which are backed by the US, come into play through their co-operations with the US military in fighting off Al Qaeda from their respective areas. At the same time, the Shiites are apprehensive that the Awakening Councils would build themselves to be a Sunni fighting force to challenge the Shiite-led dominance of the country.
Finally, the US agenda in Iraq could be seen either as excluding the plans of the Iraqis or including all or some of them as long as it hopes to serve its objective of having almost absolute proxy control of the country, whether it takes any alliance with any group, Sunni, Shiite, Kurd or any other.
Well, it is a laugh. We hear US commanders and strategists speaking authoritatively about Iraq and implictly suggesting that the US goals are being served there, but we know that they have understood very little about the country and its people even five years after invading and occupying the country. They are deliberately downplaying the crisis in Iraq or have not really understood the magnitude of the problem in the country.