In the midst of the contradictions and consequences of a political environment characterized by obscured democracy, the Iraqi citizen is living in a unique state of passivity, coupled with a lack of motivation. The splintering of attitudes among Iraqi citizens is clear and decisive. The fragmentation of the country along ethnic and sectarian lines continues without regard for the significant risks that threaten the very existence of Iraq as a land and people, including any hope for its future prosperity.
One of the most notable ways in which others exploit opportunities presented by the absence of conscious popular will is embodied in Iraqi movements, political parties, and national institutions. Unbeknownst to the Iraqi citizen, these political actors undertake activities that facilitate the dangerous agendas that foreign circles of power have in store for the country. The most important of these foreign circles is the American administration and the American right-wing, working in coordination and cooperation with Israeli intelligence, Mossad. They go about implementing their policies in a deceptive, quiet and patient manner, with the participation of opportunistic Iraqi-Arab political entities, in addition to the leadership of the two Kurdish national parties.
We Don’t Want It (As Confusing as a Night in a Dark Bazaar!)
At a time of growing concerns for the Iraqi citizen, when the level of social security has deteriorated, the contradictions that afflict the government are broken down into three fundamental groups. These contradictions are set forth in security ministries that are devoid of ministers who bear any sense of legal responsibility for the security of the country; as a result of quotas enacted in the distribution of ministerial positions; with each political group seeking control over the ministerial positions that will ensure its own members every possible legitimate and illegitimate benefit.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi people are suffering from poor services and a government that underperforms in providing even basic infrastructure. The growing phenomenon of administrative and financial corruption and devious waste of Iraqi funds has left the government unable to handle problems such as the 23 percent unemployment rate. This in a country that has opened its doors to foreign investment companies, a strategy that was supposed to be the best way to employ Iraqi manpower. Indeed, creating jobs for Iraqis is specified among the leading conditions set forth in every economic or industrial agreement made between the Iraqi government and foreign companies. We have not even considered the social problems of 1 million widowed women and 2 million orphaned children, and about half a million disabled individuals incapacitated thanks to internal or external wars. The single biggest loser so far is the Iraqi people.
Playing With Our Misfortunes Even as the Enemies Are Digging in!
We are not bringing anything new to the table when we point to the fact that the foremost risk that threatens Iraq is the program designed to partition and divide the country. While the Iraqi people are distracted by the theatre playing out on the political stage, Iraq’s enemies are working in silence and in depth, building a foundation upon which they will divide the country.
We are not surprised to see some signs show up in the news media regarding what others think of us and our future! In that respect we find that the report from the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center has been adopted almost entirely in its every detail by the U.S. administration. They depend upon this institution to provide strategic analysis of U.S. policies in various countries around the world. It is often singled out to answer the many questions that policymakers need to resolve regarding the future of Iraq. “The Case for Soft Partition in Iraq” is Brookings’ broadest, most detailed report dealing with Iraq’s geopolitical and demographic situation, and it gropes for the most realistic ways to execute the goal of partition.
To begin with, we should recall the fact that the report was prepared by Brookings Institution researcher Edward Joseph. Joseph is one of the experts who worked on issues surrounding the Balkan War in partnership with Michael O’Hanlon, a scholar in U.S. national security issues and another leading researcher at the Brookings Institution.
This report fulfilled the desires of a wide current within the American administration, especially Vice President Joe Biden, who as Senator from Delaware called for the partition of Iraq, and Leslie Gleb, honorary president of the American Council on Foreign Relations, who in early May of last year announced along with Biden her intention for Iraq to be divided into three countries: one Shia, one Sunni and one Kurdish.
The efforts to continue pursuing the goal of partition were ongoing, despite an announcement from the White House in this period about its lack of support for this project (“He does not want another Balkans.”) primarily because partition, from the perspective of James Baker, president of the Iraq Studies Group, would “give Iran control of the Shiite minority and lead to intense, unwavering opposition from Turkey, which will not countenance a Kurdish nation on its southern borders.” Ryan Crocker, the American ambassador in Iraq, confirmed many of these doubts when he said that the Kurds represent “a powder keg ready to explode when the issue deals with Kirkuk.”
Subsequent declarations from Massoud Barzani concerning “the right of self-determination” indicated that the Brookings report comprehended the party stance taken by Barzani and Talabani, (the leaders of the Kurdish block). But a surprise came when the Iraqi citizens rejected the partition idea, even though some of the most prominent supporters of separatism included Abd al Aziz al Hakim, president of the Islamic Supreme Council, an influential power in the Iraqi street.*
The stances of other Iraqi parties towards partition ranged from complete rejection to agreement on the formation of administrative districts, according to the model paradigm for the formation of administrative districts in Iraq: the potentially inspirational experience of the Kurdish territories, which nevertheless are characterized by the especially peculiar Kurdish situation – in terms of regional entry and political leadership – within the framework of the basic elements of “the American program for the future of Iraq.”
And if we believed what was stirred up lately about Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki encouraging some leading tribal figures and well-known faces in western Iraq to form an administrative district of Anbar, then we would realize that the matter honestly does not hinge on the pampered Kurds alone, but even beyond — to the implementation of a program for partitioning all of Iraq.
Although some Iraqi political blocks have sought refuge in vagueness and silence, in order to protect their interests and earnings, there is yet an uncharted test being conducted in Iraq, i.e. when former MP Wael Abdul Latif called for a proclamation to establish a Basra protectorate. At the time, Latif did not achieve the support required to bring the call into effect, so he gave in, and some other voices demanding the installation of the Basra protectorate were drowned out along with his.
Yet a short time ago we began to hear new voices demanding the establishment of a southern, Shia administrative district, which some observers see as a potential cornerstone for the erection of other districts…As far as the report estimates, the severance of the 17% of Iraq’s annual budget apportioned for the northern district – which for practical and legal purposes includes the protectorates ofSulaimaniya, Irbil, and Dahouk – along with adoption of the Oil and Gas Law, are the beginnings of the actual foundation of a Kurdish state. The recommendations of the International Crisis Committee, which came in November 2010, addressed the two Kurdish parties, advising them to unify the Peshmerga and strengthen the culture of separatism. Likewise, Barzani’s announcement about the “right to self-determination” comes as a necessary episode in pulling the curtains away from the secret work, and coming out in public to achieve separatism despite Kurdish conversations characterized as “cold” assertions of “unity and coexistence.”
Moreover, a short time ago, Kurdish party leaders agreed to one of the recommendations of the International Crisis Committee concerning unification of both parties of the Peshmerga into one organization. This recent development reveals the speed with which elements of the partition framework have been implemented in steps leading up to fulfillment of the separatist program.
Researchers see a number of vital constraints in terms of implementation of the “partition” plan, the most important of which is:
Iraqi Demographics
Iraqi demographics are constrained by close ties between Iraqi families, which are considerably difficult to divide or fragment. At the forefront of such ties is marriage between sons and daughters of different races and Islamic religious creeds. This produces sons who do not concern themselves with sectarianism or racism. However, the American occupation was the oppressor and active local power – in the framework of the “partition” plan – that exerted great effort in consecrating sectarianism and racism, the most prominent manifestations of which was the system of quotas in divvying out government positions, in addition to the criminal activity practiced by the ethnic and sectarian militias, which marked out factional and confessional “cantons” on the ground for the first time in Iraq.
Group Living And the Consecration of Exclusion
The report is taken to speak of the desire of the Iraqi people to live a common life within one state: a lie exposed by grouping of Iraqis of specific sects or ethnicities in particular places, and the preference not to spread out into different regions.
The Bombing of Holy Shrines and Outside Fingers
There are clear indications of an outside effort exerted for the sake of a“soft partition” of the deep bonds that exist in the relations between Iraqi sects and ethnic groups. What came to pass in the Iraqi street in the wake of the explosion of the al Askari shrine in Samara, which was executed by foreign hands, provoked significant criminal acts from militias set loose onto the street by various political factions.
The acts of the militias led to the emigration of hundreds of thousands of families from their areas of origin to other new regions. This achieved, to a certain extent, the de facto partition of residential neighborhoods on the ground, leading to a shrinking of the middle class; the most important class in economic and social life. And that indeed laid the foundation for serious problems in terms of providing services, reimbursements and provisions for human life.
Baghdad, An International City
The Brookings researchers puzzle over an issue of the utmost importance: the method of partitioning the borders between “the three Iraqi countries.” There is no problem with the southern region of Iraq, since there is a clear similarity in the ethnicities of the inhabitants, their religion, their sect, and the nature of the land and rivers of the region, which makes the desired states an easy affair! The real problem is concentrated in two regions: the central and northern regions.
Moreover, there is disapproval of American Vice President Joseph Biden’s desire to make Baghdad an international city, and the impossibility of achieving this is asserted authoritatively, as a result of fundamental obstacles, primarily the demographic overlap between different ethnicities in the same city. Also added to the complications for Baghdad’s conditions were the processes of displacement in various provinces following the sectarian turmoil. Likewise, the Iraqi Constitution stipulated that Baghdad would not be included in any single protectorate, and so enforcing partition would require amendment of the Constitution.
We add another reason to the causes inhibiting partition: the presence of 3 million people living in Sadr City. In Sadr City they back the Shiites, including opponents and supporters of partition. Additionally, there are many strong family bonds and provocative tribal influences in Baghdad, in which the clan takes on the role of the state in many cases.
The Revolution Satisfies Everyone…If Only!
The strategic study considers it a big mistake for some to say that Iraq’s oil wealth is concentrated in the southern region, over which the Shia will claim a monopoly in the event of partition. The study emphasizes that oil and gas are present all throughout Iraq. Iraq floats on a lake of oil. The Shia do not single-mindedly support or oppose partition. The majority of the Shia, followers of the Supreme Islamic Council, “The Call” party, and other less influential Shiite parties, support the Shia administrative district plan in southern Iraq. In doing so, they face off against a wide segment of Shia possessing independent political stances. The stance of the Sadrist current, which represents a wide popular constituency in Shiite circles, is a truly distinctive obstacle standing in front of the partition.
This comes at a time when researchers considered the leaders of the two Kurdish nationalist parties and their creation (the northern territory) as the major tool for carrying out the partition project. This depends on a number of factors, with local administrative experience at the forefront along with experience in mass mobilization toward the patriotic goal of establishing a Kurdish state; in addition lofty (diplomatic) relations tie the northern Kurdish territory with the American administration and American and EU decision-makers.
These matters cause the leaders of the Kurdish protectorate to put stages of the plan into effect, sequentially, beginning with seizure of all possible assets on the ground and extraction of statutory powers – based on the blurry Iraqi Constitution – to address and resolve many essential matters — above all the identity of Iraq, a founding member of the Arab League according to the Constitution!
The text did not stipulate the obligation to settle and resolve the Arab identity of Iraq, and this was in fact one of the preliminary stages in the early preparation for partition, laying the cornerstone for Kurdish separatism efforts. Even if their efforts stop short of a total split, the Kurds have already stripped away the Arab character of Iraq legally! This was stated in the hazardous Constitution drawn up with care to provide ample room for all of the sins committed thereafter. It sees, in these (new) districts, a plan to join together with Iran.
The Shiites who oppose partition see in the “Shiite region” a weakening of the central government, which ruled the country for the past 80 years and secured the unity of the country at the most dangerous and most difficult of times. In other words, at a time when international demands on the Iraqi state have never been greater, we find the Arab world being partitioned into isolated, weakened microstates, demilitarized and submissive to the will of the great powers.
What also shows up here are current demographic indicators in Iraq. As a result of the sectarian disturbances in the years 2006, 2007, and 2008, 1.7 million people were internally displaced, i.e. forced from their cities and homes in Iraq to other parts of the country. An additional 2 million Iraqis emigrated to Syria and Jordan, and several thousand emigrated elsewhere in the Arab world. All of these were exiled, in addition to the emigrants able to make it as far as Europe or even the United States.
As for the means that will be used to execute the “Soft Partition of Iraq” scheme, there will be Iraqi political entities agreeing to the establishment of regional governments, as well as two Kurdish parties with support and consultation from the Israelis, the Americans, the UN, and the Arab League. Yet, the United States will not directly engage in every aspect of this scheme; rather, it will monitor the situation in the neighborhood and maneuver its tools for the sake of executing the overall plan. From the beginning, it has been accused of being a “radical power” with its desire to see the partition of Iraq take place. But the United States will not have anything like the role it had in the Balkans. Today it has only an ambassador in the Balkans, but the issues in Iraq are much more sensitive and require deeper yet inconspicuous U.S. involvement.
The Arab States: More to Come!
In viewing the political situation in the Arab World and the Middle East region since the beginning of the movements; in calling for the secession of southern Sudan from the northern government, and continuing through the “Kurdish region” in the north of Iraq, to the success of the revolutions of Tunisia and Egypt and to the initial stirrings of uprisings in Libya, Yemen, Algeria, and Bahrain, we realize immediately that there is more to come in relation to Arab political systems and the region, which to this day have not rested upon the popular will to steer the ship of state.
But while the movements for change comply somewhat with the desires of the people, and indeed use slogans such as “the will of the people,” the fingers of the United States and Israel are not far from operations which aim at partitioning and splintering the Arab world, whose nations are the target of a new/old strategy of dividing for the sake of conquest.
Among the other requirements for executing the “Soft Partition” in Iraq is a just distribution of wealth, meaning that returns on oil and gas wealth should be distributed according to the number of citizens in every province. This demands a comprehensive census of the population in order to obtain detailed statistical indicators. In like manner, this will require issuing unique national identity cards to the citizens of each province for the purposes of personal identification every time anyone wants to travel from one province to another!
The most dangerous sign is the fact that the reduction in the presence of American forces is unlikely except where the population is divided, and where the administrations of the regions and their security forces are based to protect the region from foreign forces, and also to manage checkpoints in the cities.
To wrap things up, Iraq has been subjected to geopolitical partition since 1990, as a result of measures imposed by the international community upon Iraq within the framework of the 32nd and 36th parallels, wherein the no-fly zone was enforced between these two lines. This created a very real split on the ground in the country, accompanied by a number of measures intended to change the traditions of rule in the country and its administration, and to alter the conflict between its national and sectarian institutions, in addition to the presence of a (protected) “Kurdish region.” All of this has created a suitable setting for the gradual implementation of a partition plan toward its final goals!
Till we meet again for part two, “The Tree of Love bears Fruit in the Presence of a Skilled Farmer”
*Editors note: The above quotes may be found in the Brookings Institution’s report entitled “The Case for Soft Partition in Iraq,” located at the following URL: (http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2007/06iraq_joseph/06iraq_joseph.pdf)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.