Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • 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.

War on Iraq

The Myth of Sectarian Violence in Iraq

By Dahr Jamail, International Socialist Review. Posted January 8, 2008.


The policy is divide to rule.
Advertisement

If the U.S. leaves Iraq, the violent sectarianism between the Sunni and Shia will worsen. This is what Republicans and Democrats alike will have us believe. This key piece of rhetoric is used to justify the continuance of the occupation of Iraq.

This propaganda, like others of its ilk, gains ground, substance, and reality due largely to the ignorance of those ingesting it. The snow job by the corporate media on the issue of sectarianism in Iraq has ensured that the public buys into the line that the Sunni and Shia will dice one another up into little pieces if the occupation ends.

It may be worthwhile to consider that prior to the Anglo-American invasion and occupation of Iraq there had never been open warfare between the two groups and certainly not a civil war. In terms of organization and convention, Iraqis are a tribal society and some of the largest tribes in the country comprise Sunni and Shia. Intermarriages between the two sects are not uncommon either.

Soon after arriving in Iraq in November 2003, I learned that it was considered rude and socially graceless to enquire after an individual's sect. If in ignorance or under compulsion I did pose the question the most common answer I would receive was, "I am Muslim, and I am Iraqi." On occasion there were more telling responses like the one I received from an older woman, "My mother is a Shia and my father a Sunni, so can you tell which half of me is which?" The accompanying smile said it all.

Large mixed neighborhoods were the norm in Baghdad. Sunni and Shia prayed in one another's mosques. Secular Iraqis could form lifelong associations with others without overt concern about their chosen sect. How did such a well-integrated society erupt into vicious fighting, violent sectarianism, and segregated neighborhoods? How is one to explain the millions in Iraq displaced from their homes simply because they were the wrong sect in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Back in December 2003 Sheikh Adnan, a Friday speaker at his mosque, had recounted a recent experience to me. During the first weeks of the occupation, a U.S. military commander had showed up in Baquba, the capital of Diyala province located roughly twenty-five miles northeast of Baghdad with a mixed Sunni-Shia population. He had asked to meet with all the tribal and religious leaders. On the appointed day the assembled leaders were perplexed when the commander instructed them to divide themselves, "Shia on one side of the room, Sunni on the other."

It would not be amiss, perhaps, to read in this account an implanting of a deliberate policy of "divide and rule" by the Anglo-American invaders from the early days of the occupation.

There have been no statistical surveys in recent years to determine the sectarian composition of Iraq. However, when the Coalition Provisional Authority, led by Paul Bremer, formed the first puppet Iraqi government, a precedent was set. The twenty-five seats in the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), were assigned strictly along sectarian lines based on the assumption that 60 percent of the population is Shia, 20 percent Sunni, and 20 percent Kurds, who are mostly Sunni. For good measure, a couple of Turkoman and a Christian were thrown in.

It is evident that this puppet troupe deployed at the onset of "democracy" in Iraq was mandated to establish to the population that it was in the larger interest to begin thinking, at least politically, along sectarian and ethnic lines. Inevitably, political power struggles ensued and were cemented and exacerbated with the January 30, 2005, elections.

Mild surface scratching reveals a darker, largely unreported aspect of the divisive U.S. plan. A UN report released in September 2005 held Iraqi interior ministry forces responsible for an organized campaign of detention, torture, and killing of fellow Iraqis. These special police commando units were recruited from the Shia Badr Organization and Mehdi Army militias.

In Baghdad during November and December 2004, I heard widespread accounts of death squads assassinating Sunni resistance leaders and their key sympathizers. It was after the failure of Operation Phantom Fury, as the U.S. siege of Fallujah that November was named, that the Iraqi resistance spread across Iraq like wildfire. Death squads were set up to quell this fire by eliminating the leadership of this growing resistance.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: media, iraq, sectarian violence, dahr jamail, unembedded

Dahr Jamail is an independent journalist who reports from Iraq.

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


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:
Excellent work!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 8, 2008 11:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we wanted to get out of Iraq and end the violence, the first two steps would be as follows:

1) Remove the permanent military bases - tear them down, and be very public about it, so that all the Iraqis know that U.S. troops are going to be pulling out.

2) Allow the Iraqis to nationalize all of the oil, as is normal for the region, and tear up the hydrocarbon law (which was written by the Economic Hitman firm of BearingPoint for the benefit of Halliburton, Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Hunt Oil, etc.).

That basic strategy would immediately quell the violence - almost all of which is aimed at ending the occupation of Iraq by foreign troops. It would also mean that the U.S. would have zero control over Iraqi oil production. However, establishing such control was the whole reason for the occupation in the first place.

Petraeus, Bush and Cheney are all representatives of Big Oil interests, and the corporate press (which lied to the public about WMDs, Saddam and 9/11, and the real reasons for the invasion) has no interest in discussing such a solution.

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

Negroponte
Posted by: Kitty Lady Oregon on Jan 8, 2008 11:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I learned that Negroponte was named to be the US ambassador to Iraq, I knew immediately that death squads would be implemented. They were, and the Cheney/Bush Neroponte, et al crime family managed to kill another 2000 plus American troops and hundreds of thousands Iraqis. Makes me ashamed to be a US citizen.

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

» Bingo. Posted by: pig