Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Anti-Occupation Politicos Gain Clout in Iraq

By Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation. Posted January 17, 2008.


Iraqi nationalists, opposed to the U.S. presence, are slowly gaining ground.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
Hard to Believe: 73 U.S. Kids Sentenced to Life Without Parole at 14 or Younger, and All Are Black
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges

More stories by Robert Dreyfuss

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On January 13 an emerging Sunni-Shiite nationalist bloc in Iraq signed a groundbreaking agreement aimed at ending Iraq's civil war, blocking the privatization of Iraq's oil industry and checkmating the breakaway Kurdish state. It's a big step forward, and it could change the face of Iraqi politics in 2008.

For the past two years, Iraqi nationalists--opposed to the US occupation, opposed to Al Qaeda and opposed to Iran's heavyhanded influence in Iraqi affairs--have struggled to assert themselves. The nascent coalition contains the seeds of true national reconciliation in Iraq, but it has emerged independently of the United States. Unrelated to the constant American pressure on the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to meet various reconciliation "benchmarks," the new coalition is designed either to sweep Maliki out of office or force him to join it.

Enormous obstacles stand in the way of the Sunni-Shiite coalition, and Iraq is just as likely to descend into a new round of intense civil war as it is to stabilize under a new ruling bloc. Still, it could work, but there's a big if--if the United States steps back and gets out of the way.

Since the rigged Iraqi elections of 2005, the United States has supported a shaky and now utterly discredited four-party coalition in Iraq. Two of those parties are the ultra-religious Shiite parties, the Islamic Dawa Party and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), both strongly supported by Iran. The other two are the Kurdish warlord parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). During that time, Iraq's two prime ministers, Ibrahim Jaafari (2005-06) and Maliki (2006-2008)--both from Dawa--have staunchly refused to open the door to increased Sunni Arab participation in the government. But now that coalition is falling apart, and its partners are increasingly at odds with one another.

The potential collapse of the Shiite-Kurdish pact that has ruled Iraq under the American occupation has created a freewheeling search for competing alliances among the myriad political factions that have emerged since Saddam Hussein's overthrow.

Partners in the new, twelve-party alliance include nearly all of the Sunni Arab parties, including the Sunni religious parties and the secular National Dialogue Front; the secular Iraqi National List of former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, a secular Shiite; two big Shiite parties, including Muqtada al-Sadr's bloc and the Fadhila (Virtue) Party; a faction of the Dawa Party; and assorted smaller groups, including independents in Iraq's Parliament. Among its goals, say its leaders, are to ensure that Iraq's "oil, natural gas, and other treasures [remain the] property of all the Iraqi people," opposing both the proposed new oil law that would open the door to privatization of the oil industry and the illegal oil deals signed by the Kurdish regional government. Another goal, they say, is to block the Kurdish takeover of the oil-rich region around Kirkuk in Iraq's north. And, they say, the new coalition will "overcome the narrow circle of sectarianism" by uniting Sunnis and Shiites.

What's more, there are reports of talks involving the remaining Sunni resistance groups--those that have not joined the American-sponsored Awakening movement and the so-called Concerned Local Citizens groups--in a broad-based national reconciliation effort. According to the Arab press, six Sunni resistance factions have been meeting in England in preparation for a proposed conference in Cairo with representatives of the Iraqi government and political parties. A parallel effort is under way at meetings in Beirut. And French President Nicolas Sarkozy, currently touring the Middle East, has renewed his country's offer to bring Iraq's warring political factions together. Sarkozy suggested "hosting in France, far from the heat of passions and on neutral ground, inter-Iraqi roundtable talks that are as large as possible." It's unclear whether Sarkozy's proposed conference would include representatives of the armed resistance, but it's possible. (An earlier offer by France to host similar talks got the cold shoulder from Maliki and no encouragement from the United States.)

The fact that Sadr's bloc opted to join the opposition bloc is critical. Not only does Sadr command thirty-two seats in Iraq's Parliament but on the ground in Baghdad and in the south his Mahdi Army militia is a formidable force. The Fadhila Party, too, has great power in and around Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, which controls the bulk of the oil industry and Iraq's exports.

A wild card in any political realignment in Iraq is the attitude of the powerful new Sahwa (Awakening) movement, the 100,000-strong paramilitary force whose backbone is Iraq's tribal leaders. Currently, the Sahwa movement is strong in Anbar, Diyala, Salahuddin and Nineveh provinces to the west and north of the capital, as well as in Baghdad itself and in the suburban belt south of Baghdad. Though Sahwa is not a party (and thus has no seats in Parliament), it is a power to be reckoned with, and it is being courted assiduously both by the new nationalist coalition and by Dawa and ISCI. If forced to choose, the Sahwa movement would be far more likely to align with nationalists than with Shiite sectarian parties, since the tribal leaders regard ISCI, in particular, as an agent of Iran.

So far, the United States has continued to prop up Maliki's shaky regime, despite its growing unpopularity. US officials fear that if Maliki were to fall, the results would be unpredictable--especially in an election year. Besides, the nationalists would be far less likely than Maliki to sign the proposed long-term extension of the American presence in Iraq that Maliki and President Bush intend to ink by July.

A hint of how entrenched the American presence in Iraq might be came this week, when Iraq's defense minister, Abdul Qader Mohammed Jassim, came to the United States for an extended visit, during which he met with long-range planning staff at the Pentagon. During his visit, Jasim declared that a significant number of troops would have to remain in Iraq for another ten years, until 2018.

The passage, on Saturday, of the so-called Accountability and Justice Act by Parliament was widely hailed by US officials, including President Bush, as a sign that at least one of the benchmarks laid out at the start of the surge a year ago had been met. That act was supposed to have eased the draconian anti-Baath party rules that excluded hundreds of thousands of Iraqis from government service and jobs.

The act was passed by a half-empty Parliament, with only 140 of the 275 elected members of the body in attendance. It was widely condemned by the very people it was designed to help, including several Sunni and secular parties and former Baathists, and it appears that the new law could trigger a purge of Iraq's defense ministry, interior ministry, army and police, forcing many thousands of former Baathists out of the security services--in other words, precisely the opposite of its ostensible purpose. Indeed, because Sadr's bloc is so bitterly anti-Baathist, it is possible that Maliki chose this moment to force passage of the law in an attempt to use the divisive issue as a wedge to split Sadr away from potential partners in the new alliance.

In the end, Iraq is still a shattered nation. Its economy is a shambles. The sectarian civil war has eased, but violence is everywhere. In the past week, two major US military actions--a sweeping offensive just north of Baghdad and one of the heaviest aerial bombardments of an area south of the capital--killed scores. The situation around Kirkuk is explosive. And intra-Shiite violence in Basra and other cities in the south simmers just below civil war levels. Even without US interference, it might still take a miracle for a stable Iraqi coalition to take root.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, nationalists

Robert Dreyfuss is the author of "Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam" (Henry Holt/Metropolitan Books).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What Did We Expect?
Posted by: Sissy on Jan 18, 2008 4:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why wouldn't the "politicos" be signing up against the U.S.? What we brought upon that nation was unconsciensable. We totally destroyed their infrastructure, killed a million of their innocent citizens, built bases that some candidates say will house American troops for a hundred years and "come off" like we did them a huge favor. What did Bush say some time ago? "The Iraqi's should thank God every day that the Americans came". Good Lord, what criminal arrogance.

Do you know what "gets me" more than anything in this whole debachle? When we in America puff up ourselves and say "we need to get them over there so they don't come over here". How dare we? Who in hell do we think we are that we can go into another country without just cause and totally destroy them? It is no wonder that there is much glee over the death of these kids who gallantly fight under this country's flag.

I am most ashamed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What Did We Expect? Posted by: nochicagoboys
Our own Founding Fathers were prelude to Iraqi Nationalists
Posted by: nochicagoboys on Jan 18, 2008 5:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now we're calling them Iraqi nationalists. Up to now, we called them insurgents.

From everything I've read and understand, the reason this war (i.e., occupation) seems without end is because from the day Paul Bremer was named Director of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, the United States has attempted to create a totally non-regulated, laissez-faire, free-and-unrestricted market economy in Iraq. It's been an experimental lab, basically. The "insurgents" are essentially the citizenry who were more-likely-than-not laid-off from their (pre-invasion) jobs and positions, while Bremer sent in no-bid contractors, with a total foreign workforce, and attempted to impose upon Iraq a system that left them without a voice in their country's reconstruction. Unemployment, with no hope in the future, turns ordinary citizens into insurgents, or "extremists", as our press likes to label them.

If the United States would leave, the Iraqi people would be free to establish their own brand of market presence. This would bring economic security, and an end to the violence and mayhem. Our occupation only exacerbates the problem. The sooner we leave, the sooner stability will come to their country.

By-the-way, the same disaster capitalism could happen in the United States, assuming Iraq can be counted as a success story for the neocons (along with Iran, if this administration -- or possibly the next -- has its way). Just witness the harrowing problems that persist after Katrina. Neocons love a good disaster. It makes their job so much easier.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Robert Dreyfus's 'The Devil's Game' is a must read
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jan 18, 2008 6:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He explains how the US has nurtured, supported, enouraged the Islamist radicals since WW2 as a force against Arab nationalism and against the rise of socialism/communism in muslim countries.

While retards like Kristol and other neocons are on every MSM from Fox News to NPR, people like Dreyfus, Robert Pape et al get no exposure.

No wonder we americans are so ignorant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

On schedule
Posted by: solrev on Jan 18, 2008 6:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First the Iraqi nationalists and then a united Islam, a nice plan. American nationalists could be a big help to the Iraqi nationalists, but first we have to take our own land back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: On schedule Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: On schedule Posted by: RedAaron
We are winning the war!! The "surge" is a grand success!!!
Posted by: xvictor on Jan 18, 2008 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't those ignorant, rebellious Iraqi insurgents know that????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Finally
Posted by: warriornation on Jan 18, 2008 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Palestinian American it's great to see that an Arab nation is finally standing up to America. I'm not being anti-American, but Presidant Mubarrak of Egypt and the King of Saudi Arabia have brown nosed America for along time and the Arab citizens have suffered. It's great to see that Iraq realizes that it's time to slow the bleeding down a little bit and not let Iraq become New America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement