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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

War on Iraq

Iraq's Three Civil Wars

By Juan Cole, MIT Center for International Studies. Posted March 6, 2008.


There are three major conflicts in Iraq -- and the U.S. is virtually powerless to stop them.
Advertisement

All war situations are a little bit opaque, but from reading the Iraqi press in Arabic, I conclude that there are three major struggles for power of a political and violent sort. What's striking is how little relevance the United States has. It is a superpower, and it is militarily occupying the country, but it appears most frequently to be in the position of going to the parties and saying, "Hey, guys, cut it out. Make nice. Please." It's odd that it should be so powerless in some ways, but let me explain.

So, what are the three wars? There's a war for Basra in the deep south. This is a port city on the Shatt al-Arab. It's the body of water where the Tigris and the Euphrates come together, and they flow together, then out to the Persian Gulf. In the old days, it was a major port, Al Basrah, because the ships could come up the Shatt al-Arab from the Persian Gulf. Now they'll stop instead at a smaller port named Umm Qasr near to Basra, and this is how you get things in and out of Iraq. Last I checked, Iraq was exporting 1.8 million barrels a day of petroleum. Where is it exporting from? Largely from Basra. (There is some, about 300,000 barrels a day going out through the north, but it's a relatively minor amount.) So, basically, import, export, lifeline, and petroleum, are all that is centered in Basra, and if Basra were to collapse, then Iraq collapses. I don't see how the government survives, how anything goes positive in Iraq if Basra collapses, and I cannot figure out what's causing it not to collapse. There is not a good situation down there, as I'll explain.

Then, there's a war for Baghdad. This is the one that Americans tend to know about because the U.S. troops are in Baghdad, and so it's being fought all around our guys, and we are drawn into it from time to time. The American public, when it thinks about this war, mainly thinks about attacks on U.S. troops, which are part of that war because the U.S. troops were seen by the Sunni Arabs as adjuncts to the Shiite paramilitaries, and they have really functioned that way. Most American observers of Iraq wouldn't say that the U.S. is an enabler of the Mahdi Army and the Badr Corps paramilitaries of these Shiite fundamentalist parties, but you could make the case that, functionally speaking, that's how it's worked out. The U.S. has mainly taken on the remnants of the Ba'ath party, the Salafi jihadis, and other Sunni groups, and has tried to disarm them, tried to kill them, and has opened a space for the Shiite paramilitaries to claim territory and engage in ethnic cleansing and gain territory and power. So that battle between the Sunni Arabs and the Shiite Arabs is going on in Baghdad, is going on in the hinterlands of Baghdad, up to the northeast to Diyala Province, and then south to Babil and so forth.

And finally, as if all that weren't enough, there is a war in the north for control of Kirkuk, which used to be called by Saddam "Ta'mim Province". Kirkuk Province has the city of Kirkuk in it and very productive oil fields, in the old days at least. Kirkuk is not part of the Kurdistan Regional Authority, which was created by melding three northern provinces together into a super province; however, the Kurdistan Regional Authority wishes to annex Kirkuk to the authority.

Regional governments are super-provinces or provincial confederations. Try to imagine what happened -- Iraq had 18 provinces in the old days, but it now has 15 provinces and one regional authority. It would be as though Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana got together, erased their state borders, elected a joint parliament and a prime minister, and then told the Federal leaders in Washington that if they would like to communicate with any of those states, they need to go through the regional prime minister, and by the way, we're not sending any more money to Washington. And don't even think about keeping federal troops on our soil. So, this is what the Kurds have done. They've erased the provincial boundaries that created one Kurdistan government that had -- it has -- its own military. They're giving out visas independent of Baghdad. They're inviting companies in to explore for oil independent of Baghdad. They're the Taiwan of the Middle East. They're an independent country. They just don't say that they are because it would cause a war.

There is a war for Kirkuk in the sense that there are Arabs and Turkmen there that don't want to be part of the Kurdistan Regional Authority. The Kurds, on the other hand, are very insistent on having Kirkuk because if Kurdistan has Kirkuk in the long run, it means Kurdistan is a viable country in its own right. The Turks don't want the Kurds to have Kirkuk, and so on and so forth. And the fighting around Kirkuk -- not only in Kirkuk City and the rest of the province, but in places like Hawija -- extends down to Mosul, a largely Arab city in Ninawa (Ninevah), where 70,000 Kurds have been chased out of Mosul. There's this ethnic cleansing phenomenon of Arab, Kurdish, and Turkmen fighting. There's an international dimension because the Kurdistan Regional Authority would like eventually to be an independent country. They're regional expansionists and would like to add more parts of Iraqi provinces to themselves, part of Diyala, all of Kirkuk, part of Ninawa and so forth, and they seem to have an eye on Kurdish populated regions in Iran and in Turkey, ultimately adding them to themselves. This is an aggrandizing, regional, ethnically based new state in the Middle East and, I think, it bears some resemblance to the phenomenon of Serbian nationalism in the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. We all know what kind of trouble that caused, and I think similar trouble is coming in the north of Iraq.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, sunni, turkey, shiite, kurds, baghdad, kirkuk, sadr, mahdi army, u.s. military presence

Juan Cole is a professor of history at the University of Michigan and maintains the popular blog Informed Comment.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! 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:
Is there any positive glimmer of hope at all?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Mar 6, 2008 11:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, the relevance of the United States in this three part mess is that we started the ethnic cleansing program in the first place.

The evidence is pretty conclusive. Commanders were instructed to separate Shiites and Sunnis and Kurds from the very beginning. Shiites were driven out of Sunni areas in Anbar and Baghdad, and Sunnis were forced to flee Kurdish regions. As a result, Iraq now has the world's biggest refugee population, both internal and external - and none are being let into the U.S. The Iraqi refugee issue is certainly a candidate for a Project Censored mention.

Second, the U.S. covert action program in the Middle East has been massive. Juan Cole briefly mentions that the surge assisted the ethnic cleansing in Baghdad. Petraeus is the "counterinsurgency expert" and the Bush team is straight out of Central America's dirty wars, so what do you get?

Seymour Hersh: The Redirection: U.S. support for Sunni terrorist groups

David Rose: The Gaza Bombshell: U.S. covert support for Fatah in the Hamas-Fatah conflict

Robert Fisk: Secret armies pose a threat to Lebanon

"What now worries the Lebanese authorities, however, is the sheer scale of weaponry arriving in Lebanon. It appears to include new Glock pistols (asking price $1,000). There are growing fears, moreover, that many of these guns are from the vast stock of 190,000 rifles and pistols which the US military "lost" when they handed them out to Iraqi police officers without registering their numbers or destination."

The U.S. and the current Bush crew in particular have a long history of waging dirty wars using covert forces and proxy armies in Central America and the Middle East - even when U.S. troops aren't actively deployed.

Thirdly, there is one group that Juan Cole doesn't mention - the Iraqi oil and electricity unions, who really should be a focus of efforts to stabilize the country. The problem for BushCo is that the unions insist on nationalizing their energy resources and kicking out the IMF, the World Bank, and the neoliberal agenda of the economic invasion of Iraq.

This third point is critical. Where are the billions in Iraqi oil sales going?

Thanks to Senator Carl Levin, we know something about this: US senator wants Iraq oil funds used for rebuilding

"What kind of an absurdity is it that we are paying for the reconstruction of Iraq with American taxpayers dollars if Iraqi oil sales, to a significant degree, are going into foreign banks and not being used for their own reconstruction," said Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat. . .

. . .U.S. taxpayers have instead seen about a half-trillion dollars of their money spent on the war so far. In the meantime, there are estimates that Iraq has up to $30 billion in assets invested in U.S. financial institutions."


The Iraqi oil unions keep saying the same thing: if they had access to that money, they could rebuild and modernize their electricity and petroleum refining and export systems - without the need for Exxon, Chevron, BP or Shell.

Governments and their servants in the press don't like to talk about the economic rationale for war, do they?

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

Keep repeating: The Surge is Working
Posted by: taxidriver on Mar 6, 2008 2:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine if the mainstream media covered the war in such detail? Imagine if Americans really learned that the surge is only a temporary respite from a resurgence in violence? And that the "surge" as a label covered violent ethnic "cleansing" as well as massive bribery? It's all too complicated and disturbing. Instead, let's focus on who's best qualified to answer the phone at 3AM, whose middle name is vaguely familiar in an alarming way, and who's wearing funny clothes without an American flag pin. And let's write another chapter in the decline and fall of the American empire.

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

dick
Posted by: rtmyth on Mar 6, 2008 3:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not to worry. The war is going great for the power elite, who are in charge here, and Israel is overjoyed, thus nothing will change with a new administration and Congress. .

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

thanks, Alternet
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha on Mar 6, 2008 5:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
always a pleasure to read some good hard analysis stripped free of the "support our troops or else you hate America" mantra- that's why I love you Alternet

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

Two thumbs up for this article
Posted by: sanddollar on Mar 6, 2008 11:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciate juan Cole's attempt to explain the convolutions and cast of characters in a way no mainstream media source ever has. He clearly states, "this is my take on it, as best I can make out," of an incredibly complicated, tragic, evolving plot line.

What kept going through my mind as I read it, were how George Shultz, Condi Rice, and others tutored W. about world affairs before he started campaigning for the 2000 election. He really had no clue or or sensibility about these matters when he walked into the White House. And this horrible mess is among the results.

It makes me think that the current tiiff between Hillary and Obama over who's more qualified to answer a 3am phone call is much ado about nothing. Both of them are far more aware than W. ever has been.

Lord what a stinking mess W. has got us into... and it's only one among many sad situations he's bungled, to be inherited by whichever unfortunate SOB next sets up shop behind the Oval Office desk.

In today's world, anybody claiming to be a political analyst, who lacks a keen sense of the absurd, is in the wrong line of work.

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

All part of the plan
Posted by: atka on Mar 7, 2008 11:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article, too bad only a limited audience will read it. Should be front page of the NYT.

If someone was cynical, one could think that this major fiasco actually plays right into their (the Bushies and Co.) hands. Ethnic cleansing plus civil war or, better, a regional war will only benefit the military industry, prolong the war so more profits go to Halliburton & Co. Once they've finished each other off, the US will calmly step in and take over the oil because there will be nobody left to protest.

Compassionate conservatism, indeed. If ever there was an oxymoron...

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

Compassionate conservative,where I first heard it.
Posted by: nightgaunt on Mar 7, 2008 1:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I occaisionally listen to Limbaugh and others such to know what the enemy is thinking. Years ago I heard him in his supercilious oily tones chiding the idea of compassion. Yes that paragon of Christian moral philosphy joked about how compassion is anything but a virtue but was instead a characteristic of weaklings. You know like myself and you the reader. Only a psychopath and rightwing authoritarian think compassion is a detriment to their muscular view of the warrior king personality. Hitler,Hirohito,Mao and Stalin liked such a personality construct so Limbaugh Cheney and Bush would fit right in. That is no exaggeration. Just look at what they have done and compare it to what those previous holders of infamy were involved in. Numbers don't count (deaths) as much as doing the deed. Others say no because the numbers aren't there. Just the ethous of the fact of invasion,mass killing are enough. We don't want them to start World War III and kill billions. We are running out of time before these authoritarian fools wreck what little we still have of this earth.

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

DOWN WITH CORPORATE MEDIA - UP WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
Posted by: Michael_D on Mar 7, 2008 1:34 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our military is nothing less or more than a reflection of society with which it is made up. Sad.

Please wake up people! Obama is a cousin of Cheney and is a CFR mouthpiece just like the other and you people want to still deny how these criminals roll? Caught up in the crossfire of power/corruption like so many! He says only "change" allot thus proving his inexperience or will to tackle our REAL problems!!!! He is no different at ALL than the others.

The Clinton's ? watch this and WAKE UP TO THE TRUE POWER OF MEDIA MANIPULATION!

The revolution is on. Wake up to what we all have let the media do to America. They have now consolidated into only 5 corporations for everything on AMERICAN TV!!!! The news commentators on TV are either part of it, or fooled themselves!

oh yea, realize this fact too pretty damn quick people:

Coke Bush


If you want to see some REAL patriots look here
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero
REAL American Hero


and watch this TRUTH too
REAL American Hero

They do this by contolling information and by GREATLY influencing our elections with the BUSH-CHENEY connected DIEBOLD MACHINES (now PRIMIER) and all kinds of other strong arm tactics

around the nation whereby they influence or STEAL the elections!.

Wake up if you love American freedom and hate needless war for profit and/or overthrowing of governments and confusion of the masses by corrupt CIA and all the neocons!

This is what the media/government has done to us for too long. The internet and people rising up with the TRUTH after all these years of media lies is the only thin that can help America now. There is no

left or right in America at this moment. Only corruptness and media lies so big that most can't see though it.

McCain is one of the WORST puppets out there!!! His top four contributors, (like most candidates, are... BANKS!

R E S E A R C H

Ron Paul’s military contributions are greater than those of all other current candidates – John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama –combined.

The “Top Contributors” figures can be found at www.opensecrets.org.

JOIN the rEVOLution people. IT IS DUTY.

When big media blocks Ron Paul out, it blocks YOU (and all your kids and family) out.

Why do you think they spew so much about "terrorists"?

Starting to get the picture now?

No more lies. They must go. The time is now.

STAND UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Join the revolution. Take back America. Shun the non-believers.

TaxDay08

and sure don't miss the rally on DC on June 21st.

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

boilerman
Posted by: cogden on Mar 7, 2008 4:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only thing left out of this discussion is our paying the various groups in Iraq and Afganistan that "agree" with our policies not to fight us.

Heck,what a policy. We probably could of won in Vietnam with thinking like that. I guess we are Capitalists.

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

And as bad as its
Posted by: compu on Mar 10, 2008 12:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a cake compared when in near by Pakistan
fundamentalists overthrow the present regime.
All this is related with what they fill
the west bent in destroying their culture.

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

Excellent, As Always, but...
Posted by: Marshalldoc on Mar 10, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I always enjoy Juan Cole's perceptive analyses and this one is no exception.

I do have one point of confusion though. It's the failure to mention the development of the Sahwa and how (particularly in view of his analysis Sunni's perception that the U.S.' role in Baghdad was "disarming the Sunni Arab population") the Sunni-dominated "Awakening" groups are willing to work with & for the same U.S. troops who, according to this essay, are responsible for the ethnic cleansing of their Sunni brothers & sisters in Baghdad.

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

Only 3?
Posted by: Urgelt on Mar 10, 2008 7:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I respect Juan Cole, and this article does justice to the three conflicts he wrote about.

But there's more going on than three conflicts, and Juan should know better than anyone what they are.

For example, there's a division between separatists and nationalists. This complicated struggle crosses ethnic and religious lines and confuses the heck out of observers, who often leap to erroneous conclusions about the nature of a particular bit of violence. You can find both separatists and nationalists among Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds (though the last group seems to be mostly separatists), and the violence this conflict spawns can not only pit Sunni against Sunni or Shiite against Shiite, but produce alliances between any or all of the three main ethnic groups. When, for example, a Sunni death squad descends on a Shiite political leader, it pays to ask if they were on opposite sides of this division.

Then there's pro- and anti-Iranian factions. Not many Sunnis or Kurds are pro-Iranian, of course, but this division within Shiite ranks has and can turn deadly.

Those are only examples. The simple truth is that Iraq is not fragmented by three conflicts. It's been shattered into a state of near-total anarchy, where very ideology, every ambition, every loyalty, every geographic location is at cross purposes with every other.

What has happened in Iraq is that the citizenry has largely withdrawn its consent to be governed as a single state. Instead, loyalty is given by that citizenry to smaller groups: ethnic, cultural, geographical, ideological, religious, even corporate. There is no shared vision of a future Iraq, and we have found out the hard way that one cannot be imposed by force.

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

There are three major conflicts in Iraq...
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit on Mar 12, 2008 8:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And the reason it can't stop them is because it is largely to blame for causing them!

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