The US Success and Failure in Iraq
Since the disassemledment of the USSR in 1980s the world has changed. Russia tried to hold its cold war position but failed. Others like France and China tried to be the equalizer for the only super-power (USA) and they were both long ways behind.
Although the East Europe changes spread so quickly towards democracy many of them remained poor countries compared to the West Europe. The European Union though an economic competitor to the USA but can not take the role of the USSR. Among its countries the strong ally of the USA is the UK.
In spite of the recent big changes the Middle East and Arab world remained snoring in a deep sleep!
During the cold war era the Arab world governed by leaders who used the Palestine issue as a narcotic and excuse to control power and wealth over their helpless people. Those leaders were supported either by the USSR or the Western countries according to their interests. Unfortunately the same notion are still happening but with the change in the interests and countries involved.
The world discovered very late that democracy is a better way for peace and stabilizations every where including the ME, yet some are still following a wrong ideology may be just to serve their agenda.
The changes in the Arab world (if exists) remained very small, and negligible.
The big change in ideas came only after thousands of people were killed in just few minutes, nowhere, but inside the USA which believed before that it is immune to some extent after the end of the cold war. The attacks of 11 Sep 2001 proved that this notion was wrong and it changed the thinking.
Iraq was not an isolated part from the world but it is always taken to be as an important strategic part not only of the ME but in the whole world. Although the ordinary US or European citizen was unable to differentiate between Iraq and Iran and not know where is Iraq in the map but those involved in politics, oil and ME issues knew the details were the devil indulge in.
Iraq in its recent history suffered a lot and the same principle mentioned above used as narcotics and excuses to control its people and wealth by its leaders. The recent leaders of Iraq after the corrupt Othman Empire were appointed initially by the British after their occupation of Iraq. In 1958 the appointed Royal family overthrown by a coupe de tat led by young officers as part of their thirst for power and changes. One of the mistakes done by the British is appointing minority to lead over the others.
After 14 July 1958 coupe struggle for power start between different parties, officers, gangs and others openly and secretly. These groups were all supported by the foreign countries including the USSR, the UK and the USA.
Since 1968 the Baath party controlled power and used same narcotics on people. Until 1978 the life was relatively tolerable but when Saddam controlled full power in 1979 the hell descended down from heaven on Iraq. Saddam was given the green light to kill and slave the Iraqis with full support from the West including the USA. This was peaked at the time of the Khomeini revolution in Iran. The USA paid a high price after the fall of Shah especially following a humiliated US operation in the desert of Iran trying to free the hostages in the US Embassy in Tehran.
Saddam invaded Iran with full support and armament from the West and economic support from Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. During the war with Iran he oppressed and killed mainly the Shiite and Kurds by many ways including the use of chemical weapons. This resulted in hundreds of mass graves, ecological disasters, ethnic cleansing, sociological damages, and all the other disasters until the recent situation.
Following 9 April 2003 until now the USA struggled to be successful in Iraq but strongly opposed by the regional countries and regimes which oppose the democratic changes in its region. The opposition for this is a regional universal with relative responses being the strongest from the Wahabi groups for which Al-Qaeda and the ideology of Saudi Arabia based on as well as Syria, Iran, and others.
Contrary to the ideas of Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski the USA may achieve a good success in Iraq but have to bear in mind the following points:
- To be genuine in its agenda about democracy and reconstruction process
- To accept the choice of the Iraqis and not to impose its choice on them
- To understand the Iraqi mentality and culture
- To understand that the Iraqi Shiites are different from the Iranian politicians
Here we would like to mention that Iran hidden intention is with a Sunni Saddam's like government in Iraq. This may sound strange but in actual fact Iran would like to keep its ambition to be the leader of the Shiite Muslims in the world. They don't like to see Najaf and Karbala flourished again to retake its position for theological and philosophical place for the Shiite Muslims in the world including Iranian themselves. The position of Najaf and Karbala was always seen as so until Saddam damaged it since his control from 1970s. The difference between the two is that Qom (Iran holiest city) and Najaf/Karbala is that the former mix religion with politics deeply while Najaf/Karbala school not seen as political schools other than religious and theological schools mainly. Saiyd Ali Sistani is the best example for a moderate attitude of the Najaf Hawza. In one word Iran don't like to see Iraqi Shiite theology schools beating their own schools as this will take the lead from their hands in that regard which is so important in their dogma. Those who share this attitude with the Iranian leaders (not the Iranian people) are the Wahabis and we know why?
It is very wrong if one talk about Iran not differentiate between the ordinary Iranian people who were the victims of (Saddam/Khomeini) once before and between their hard line leaders. Also among the Iranian leaders some moderates who would like to see changes and democracy probably Mohammad Khatami is one of them. However Iran is better than the Arab world even with its present system of 4 yearly elections and changes. Therefore for the USA to be successful in Iraq they should open a political and useful dialogue with Iran instead of threats of attacks. With four yearly elections in Iran, changes will come but the ones who need to be changed are the life-long dictators of the Arab world.
At last those who think that civil war may happen in Iraq are not very wrong but the possibility of it is happening without election is more than after election and this is why the terrorists are pushing to prevent the election. It will be the biggest mistake ever if this war allowed happening and the USA escaped backward from it.
Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski forgot about what will happen if the civil war resulted in the terrorists becoming strong inside Iraq whether with or without controlling the power especially if the USA pulled! It will certainly be the worst disaster for the region since the WWII and will give birth into another 11 Septembers in many areas regional and abroad.