THE END OF IRAQ?....Well, this is bad news

[kpete]

THE END OF IRAQ?....Well, this is bad news:
By Kevin Drum

Kurdish leaders have inserted more than 10,000 of their militia members into Iraqi army divisions in northern Iraq to lay the groundwork to swarm south, seize the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and possibly half of Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city, and secure the borders of an independent Kurdistan.

....The Kurds have readied their troops not only because they've long yearned to establish an independent state but also because their leaders expect Iraq to disintegrate, senior leaders in the Peshmerga — literally, "those who face death" — told Knight Ridder. The Kurds are mostly secular Sunni Muslims, and are ethnically distinct from Arabs.

Their strategy mirrors that of Shiite Muslim parties in southern Iraq, which have stocked Iraqi army and police units with members of their own militias and have maintained a separate militia presence throughout Iraq's central and southern provinces. The militias now are illegal under Iraqi law but operate openly in many areas. Peshmerga leaders said in interviews that they expected the Shiites to create a semi-autonomous and then independent state in the south as they would do in the north.

This is from Tom Lasseter of Knight Ridder, who's been reporting on ethnic fragmentation in the Iraqi military for quite a while. It's worth noting that Lasseter's reporting has been pretty pessimistic on this score for some time, which could be because he's better informed on these issues than most others, or just because he's more pessimistic. Who knows? But he's a good reporter, and his pieces from Iraq are data points that are worth taking seriously.

http://www.latestblognews.com/

[BushOut06]

1. Devil's Advocate - why not let Iraq split up?

Iraq's boundaries were drawn up artificially by the British in the early 1900s, throwing in these factions without any regard as to how they would coexist. Only the brutal reign of Saddam kept them in check, for the most part.

Why should we insist that these groups that obviously hate each other work together? Why not let Iraq divide up along its ethnic lines? If they want to fight each other, that's their own business. Why should we keep allowing our servicemen to die because they can't get along?

[shoelace414]

3. independent Kurds in the north would cause problems

with Turkey's large Kurdish populaiton.

not all three "new states" would havbe Oil, causing the losers to have deep resentment for the other states.

[BushOut06]

6. And that would be different than today in what way?

The factions are already arguing over who gets to control the oil. And the Kurds have been causing headaches for Turkey for quite some time. An independent Kurdistan within Iraqi territory woudln't make much difference - and might actually make it easier for Turkey to deal with the problem directly (either diplomatically or militarily).

[Raksha]

13. Well, DUH! Shrub's own father could have told him that!

That was my first thought when I opened the thread: "The Turks aren't going to be too happy about this." But who DIDN'T know it going in? That's precisely why Bushdaddy didn't go on to Baghdad in Gulf War I. He knew exactly what kind of ethnic strife would result from a power vacuum, and he knew he couldn't deal with it. Anyone could have known that except Dimson.

[rkc3]

5. Oil.

I think that's one reason to force them to stay together. With oil spread out across the country, Exxon would have to negotiate with three governments rather than one - and the current government was set up by Paul Bremer et al. with the sole purpose of making it friendly to US/English interests.

Plus, pipelines might have to run through three countries to get to the Gulf. If they aren't getting along with each other, you might find pipeline disruptions occur with great frequency. Not to mention issues associated with oil metering - how much of each region's oil is in the tanker.

[aquart]

12. big deal. we deal with lots of oil suppliers. we manage.

And things will eventually be a lot easier if they're managing their own stuff for their own benefit.

[rkc3]

17. My point is that some of the new countries may feel they have claim on oil

in other countries. That and tensions going back 2,000 years will cause innumerable problems for the people who are relying on an uninterrupted supply of oil.

[ixion]

2. Iraq is descending into civil war, as many here on DU and

elsewhere, including 'Poppy' Bush and friends, predicted it would.

This is only a shocker if you've been watching any US CMC broadcast over the course of the last 5 years. :sarcasm:

[Cleita]

4. Iraq was an artificial nation created by the British and other

western powers after WWI. Maybe it should split up to show it's truth ethnic and tribal boundaries. The smaller the nations created, the less powerful they are. It would force them to form coalitions with other allies in the ME. Maybe this is what is really needed to bring peace there.

[wtmusic]

7. Geographically the ethnic/tribal boundaries

would have to give way to natural resource boundaries, or the fighting will continue. Could the UN help hammer out an agreeable division of land/resources? I agree with you--that's the only hope for peace.

[TomInTib]

9. already been done. See my post below.

[TomInTib]

8. I was in a conference room at Purvin & Gertz, a Houston-based

petroleum consulting firm in early 2002.

There on the wall was a hand drawn map of Iraq on one of those white boards. We were talking to one of the company principals who was not aware the map was still visible (it was set in a frame with doors that had obviously been inadvertently left open.

The map was clearly divided into North, Central, and South regions. There were population redistribution notes all around the map- Kurd, Shia, and Sunni.

I said something to the effect of' "Boy, that map looks familiar". You should have seen them falling all over themselves to shut those doors on that map.

PM me and I will tell you who to google. This person and firm were part of Cheney's task force and a hell of a lot more.

[maxsolomon]

10. would have been a sensible strategery in 91.

and likely welcomed by the shiites & kurds at that time. they were all ready to like us until we stood by & let the republican guard kill their moms.

fuck turkey. they need to get over their fascist selves.

[spindrifter]

11. Splitting Iraq Was Probably

a goal of the big oil people all along. Marginalizes the power of the three dominant groups even more.

[Union Thug]

14. So would the Kurds be considered terrorists or freedom fighters?

All this is getting too confusing! ;-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Perhaps it's an idea we should consider here.

Splitting mighty 'murka into 3 or 4 separate countries would make the world a safer place. I like it.

[Cleita]

16. I agree with you, but every time someone brings it up

the internet police come around and say we are being subversive or something like that. I like to think of it as saving the people of this nation by diffusing the power of Washington, but what do I know. Anyway it isn't a subject that is condoned here at DU.

[catmandu57]

18. DU was way ahead on this

We talked about this in 02 and 03 before bush's folly, everything we prophesied about then has came to be and is evolving even now.
The regional split along ethic lines the claims for terratory and resources, the inly thing I'm waiting on now is for the conflict to erupt and drag in the entire region, sparking WWWIII.

[Rex]

19. That's what happens when you take out a dictator

now YOU have to run the country and make everyone happy...or you can just bomb them back into the stone age. Either way the Country Formerly Known as Iraq is toast and no farcical democracy will change it. If anything, it has made it worse. Now there will be a backlash against democratic ideals (or there will be when our troops leave), hence we ain't ever leaving.