Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow Politic arrow Before the March 2003 US-Led Invasion of Iraq
Apr 07 2006
Before the March 2003 US-Led Invasion of Iraq | Print |  E-mail
By kgajendra singh   
Article Index
Before the March 2003 US-Led Invasion of Iraq
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6

The United States needs a regime and a system under which people can question, without being labeled unpatriotic or enemies, failures of a system that could not and cannot protect them. -- There were enough concrete warnings - the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the attack on the US Navy warship Cole in the harbor at Aden, the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, a residence for American GIs, and the bombing of two US embassies in Africa.

Members of the EU, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the OECD should persuade the US to have a dialogue with the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC).

[Power is now shifting to  Russia, China , India and East and US losing  Latin America , with people friendly leaders being elected]

MIDDLE EAST- Iraqi Mosaic in Pandora's Box  by K Gajendra Singh

Paper no 607, 17 Feb , 2003 .South Asia Analyses Group( www.saag.org)

 Iraq is a delicate mosaic, which must be handled carefully, but a US led war would shatter and scatter it to bits.    

Whenever post Saddam Hussein Iraq is discussed in USA and elsewhere, not enough serious thought is given to ethnic, religious and other differences of its constituents and their tortuous history, which go to make Iraq a delicate mosaic. In a population of nearly 23 million ,its Shia Arabs form nearly 70% of 78 to 80% of Iraq's Arab population while less than 20% are Kurds, mostly Sunnis and concentrated in the north .The rest are Shia Turcomen (1 to 2% ), Assyrians , Yezidis and others .

But the Shia Arabs ,a majority with 55% of the total population have been traditionally kept out of power , a legacy of the Ottomans ,  who were Sunnis and in conflict with its Shia Safavid neighbour, Iran . But the Ottomans allowed Shia clerics to flourish in almost autonomous enclaves of Najaf and Kerbala in its Basra Vilayat. When the Ottoman empire collapsed after the first world war and the Arabs took over Iraq with British help, the power remained in Sunni Arab hands (over 20 %), which is a reality even today. The major languages are Arabic, Kurdish, Assyrian and Armenian.

But such things are not unusual in the region .Across in Syria, under another branch of Ba'athists –secular Arab nationalists, Shia Alawites ,12% of Syria's population, constitute the ruling elite.  --  they came into power in 1960s. -- In Saudi Arabia , the ruling elite is a curious amalgam of two opposites ; pristine puritan Wahabis and an oligarchy of Saudi princes' whose life style, according to Wahabi believers, is totally at variance with their percepts of Islam. So if western style democracy with elections and votes were to be introduced in Iraq, would the Shias get power!  

Take another example, Pakistan in 1971. Remember what happened when Bengalis of East Pakistan got a clear majority in the parliament after the elections; massacres and genocide and breakup of Pakistan .And the role of Nixon –Kissinger administration! Or the break up of European Communist Yugoslavia and the religious and ethnic cleansing and the wars , not only between Kosovo and Serbia only but Croatia and Serbia , both Christian states and among others. It is so easy to shatter an ethnic, religious and cultural mosaic from the outside.

Saddam' heirs , proxies and pretenders ,

"Just you wait until we have democracy in Iraq, and I'll throw you in jail!" one lifelong opponent of Saddam Hussein to another at the December 2002 Iraqi opposition conference in London. 

Now let us look at Saddam Hussein's heirs, promoted by the West and their claims to bring about stability, rule of law and democracy as part of the regime change in Iraq. The Anglo-Saxons organized a conference of Saddam Hussein's opponents in London in mid December last year to back their claim. It was held after many postponements and much prodding-- an achievement itself. Many a times the proceedings looked like the scene from the film "Lawrence of Arabia" starring Peter O'Toole, with  the Arab tribes squabbling and fighting after taking over Damascus following the with drawl of the Ottoman troops. The French had chased them out.

The conference brought together north Iraqi Kurdish parties, KDP and PUK - who are at each others throat inside Iraq , Iranian-backed Shia group SAIRI (Sciri) , the Constitutional Monarchy Movement and the National Accord Movement. One of the prime movers of the conference was the Iraqi National Congress (INC), headed by Ahmad Chalabi, on the run once from Jordan's law , but now a creature of  Washington. Those who did not participate were the Iraqi Communist Party, the Socialist Party and the pro-Syrian branch of Iraq's ruling Ba'ath party. The Shia Muslim al-Daawa Party also did not attend, as the purpose of the conference implied a US attack on Iraq and installation of a pro-US regime. 

The only apparent agreement reached was that after Saddam Hussein, USA should not run Iraq (like making an advertising film without the product and the message. )There  was no agreement on the kind of political system or general frame work for a Constitution . The only common denominator to emerge was some vague form of federalism. The Kurdish parties argued for a bi-national model with an Arab and Kurdish state, (like Cyprus!) while others called for geographic and not ethnic decentralization. 

US favourite Chalabi of INC wanted a government in waiting ( with himself of course at the head ); a political authority to provide legitimacy against political power vacuum after the fall of the present regime .The US strongly opposed the formation of a government-in-exile, arguing that it would  alienate serving Iraqi generals and others who might mutiny once a war starts. ---Naturally USA did not want to tie its own hands in advance concerning Iraq's rulers and its political fate .More importantly about the economic status of its oil reserves.  

WAR & CHAOS ALL AROUND;  

Every party i.e. "heirs, pretenders and proxies " remains worried about the ambitions of the others . Chalabi is rightly worried about the Kurdish plans .While there is little official to go by but there would be a mad scramble for power. Kurds with their peshmargas and other groups would try to fill in the vacuum. --

Of course the Turks , faced with unenviable choice of a war are willing only if  the oil rich province of Mosul and Kirkuk ,does not fall under some body else's control . Turkey already has many thousand troops in north Iraq and has moved heavy armor along its border with Iraq .It says that it is to prepare for a 1991 like refugee influx. And also to protect their kinsmen the Turcoman .But Turkish ministers have talked of their old claims on Kirkuk and Mosul ,Turkey has made no secret of occupying parts of north Iraq to prevent Kurds taking control of Kirkuk .-- opposed to any Kurdish bid for statehood in north Iraq. They have refused to put their troops under US command .They have put many other conditions on the urgent US request to deploy up to 40,000 American troops in South East Turkey to invade Iraq. Turkey also wants billions in aid, loans and compensation. An attack from north is very vital to get rid of Saddam Hussein. In a situation of a large-scale Turkish incursion -- Kurdish forces can be expected to fight. Barham Salah, a senior PUK leader, said recently that Turkish intervention could encourage that of Iran. "The best thing the neighbours can do is stay out, as any country entering Iraq could draw in others," he added .Even PKK cadres , whose leader Ocalan is in jail have threatened to end their 1999 ceasefire and resume their rebellion for a separate state[in south east Turkey] . US propped Iraqi opposition groups have an alliance of convenience with the Kurds , but they would oppose any threat to Iraq's territorial integrity .Thus it appears that US led  war on Iraq could trigger a conflagration in Kurdish areas involving Turkish, Kurdish, Iraqi and even Iranian forces .—

[The strained relationship between Nato Allies US and Turkey erupted into a full blown crisis on March 1 , 2003 when the Turkish parliament rejected a government resolution to allow the US to use Turkish territory as a base to open a second front in north Iraq. Matters were made worse by what the Turks felt was American bullying during negotiations over the terms of the proposed deal and its patronizing and sometimes scurrilous coverage in the US media . After the 1990-91 Gulf crisis and war, most of the US  verbal promises made to Turkey were forgotten.

In any case, the parliament vote was simply a reflection of strong public opposition to the war in Turkey , in spite of its powerful military's tacit approval to join with the US forces . Polls showed that 90 percent of Turks were opposed to a war against Muslim Iraq, perhaps the only traditional friend among neighbors.]

The Anglo-Saxons turned Afghanistan and Pakistan into nurseries of, for which they are paying , but mostly countries like India in the neighbour hood .But Anglo-Saxon have not yet succeeded in changing Iraq or its secular , nationalist and socialist regime under Saddam Hussein into an Islamic one . They might, after heaping death and destruction and untold miseries on the hapless Iraqi population, already suffering from 12 years of sanctions' regime.

Apart from an exit policy for the enemy as Napoleon believed in, there should be an exit policy or a with drawl position for the other side , if war like bluff fails or the momentum for a  war would lead to  unpredictable disasters or even a catastrophe . --The second Gulf war after the unnecessary 1991 Gulf war , would be a parallel of second world war after the first one , in terms of destruction and misery in the region. The cold war would be replaced by a war against an invisible enemy ;Al Qaida and its mutants all over the world.

Here are men in USA with terrible means of destruction in their hands , with their narrow corporate  experience and vision ,with little overall holistic understanding , hurtling along a mad course to a war , opposed by majority of the world and its population . Millions all over the world from Australia to USA have protested against war on Iraq on 15 February. The war would kill many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis-- 

Remember the Kharijites , the Wahabis , the Al Qaeda cells and its copy cats all over the world. They would not be short of new recruits in the Islamic world or in the west , with tens of millions of Muslims in FRG, France, UK and other European countries and 3 to 5 million Muslims , mostly blacks ,in USA.

(K Gajendra Singh, served as Indian Ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan in 1992-96. Prior to that, he served as ambassador to Jordan (during the 1990-91 Gulf war), Romania and Senegal . He is currently chairman of the Foundation of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies, in Bucharest.


Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 2287

Be first to comment this article
RSS comments

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  K Gajendra Singh Before the March 2003 US-Led Invasion of Iraq Gajendra Singh


 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: