The American Alternative
Whoever looks at Iraq after the American withdrawal will find a new sectarian polarization. This polarization appears to be a political need of the factional leaders in the new Iraq, especially post-2003 Iraq. The country is now sectarian, and no one can deny or ignore what is currently present regarding the obvious polarization. It may be the diversity in Iraq that imposed this political scenario. However, this diversity cannot have such a negative effect as we are seeing today unless it is driven by political necessity.
The current political scenario receives support, given to all political parties in Iraq, from abroad. There is a foreign presence in a majority of the political parties. It is difficult to imagine that there is anyone who could determine what he wants by himself if he was not backed by foreign interests, trying to direct him towards their goals.
This is what confirms that there is no national decision as effective as the foreign ideas that are the most influential in Iraqi affairs. It is known that the policies of change were not palatable in the peripheries of Iraq and that said changes were planned by foreign militaries. The American administration found itself unable to manage the affairs of Iraq as planned. America’s goal was to topple Saddam and not to build a democratic country in line with democracies around the world. America was at a deficit for not understanding the internal issues of Iraq. Iraq is a diverse country with different nationalities, religions, and doctrines. All these diversities were folded into the political landscape at the expense of a unified identity. On the one hand, this was in line with American ideas, but on the other, it fit with the ideas of Iraq’s neighbors, who were also concerned with their own interests in Iraq. We have seen a strong Iranian, as well as Turkish and Arab, presence.
If we are to look at the Iraqi political scene since 2003, we will see that it belongs to her neighbors.
Many solutions to foreign problems have been implemented in Iraq, showing the subordination of the country's leaders. It is strange that the political powers openly proclaim this in media battles and accuse each other via this party or the other. What we are afraid of after the American withdrawal are that a void will be left and that any number of parties (Iranian, Turkish and Gulf Arab) will move in, trying to fill the void. There are factors that help lead to this end. Some are trying to internationalize the current crisis through continuing talks with the Iranian and American ambassadors and Turkish officials. There are leaks regarding these talks with foreign officials.
Some parties within Iraq are trying to strong-arm others at the expense of their own. This is what has turned Iraq into an open forum for everyone else, and not for the Iraqi people, to decide what is appropriate for their country and their people.
Here, we must ask, where are the national forces? The answer may come as a shock to those on the streets of Iraq because these forces are present on those same streets. However, they are far away from the political decisions of the country because they are not a part of the foreign agenda and those taking part in the political process.
The current political scenario receives support, given to all political parties in Iraq, from abroad. There is a foreign presence in a majority of the political parties. It is difficult to imagine that there is anyone who could determine what he wants by himself if he was not backed by foreign interests, trying to direct him towards their goals.
This is what confirms that there is no national decision as effective as the foreign ideas that are the most influential in Iraqi affairs. It is known that the policies of change were not palatable in the peripheries of Iraq and that said changes were planned by foreign militaries. The American administration found itself unable to manage the affairs of Iraq as planned. America’s goal was to topple Saddam and not to build a democratic country in line with democracies around the world. America was at a deficit for not understanding the internal issues of Iraq. Iraq is a diverse country with different nationalities, religions, and doctrines. All these diversities were folded into the political landscape at the expense of a unified identity. On the one hand, this was in line with American ideas, but on the other, it fit with the ideas of Iraq’s neighbors, who were also concerned with their own interests in Iraq. We have seen a strong Iranian, as well as Turkish and Arab, presence.
If we are to look at the Iraqi political scene since 2003, we will see that it belongs to her neighbors.
Many solutions to foreign problems have been implemented in Iraq, showing the subordination of the country's leaders. It is strange that the political powers openly proclaim this in media battles and accuse each other via this party or the other. What we are afraid of after the American withdrawal are that a void will be left and that any number of parties (Iranian, Turkish and Gulf Arab) will move in, trying to fill the void. There are factors that help lead to this end. Some are trying to internationalize the current crisis through continuing talks with the Iranian and American ambassadors and Turkish officials. There are leaks regarding these talks with foreign officials.
Some parties within Iraq are trying to strong-arm others at the expense of their own. This is what has turned Iraq into an open forum for everyone else, and not for the Iraqi people, to decide what is appropriate for their country and their people.
Here, we must ask, where are the national forces? The answer may come as a shock to those on the streets of Iraq because these forces are present on those same streets. However, they are far away from the political decisions of the country because they are not a part of the foreign agenda and those taking part in the political process.