Right about now, the Sunnis must be wondering what they're fighting for....
The Shia government wants it made very clear, there will only be Shia militias.
In other words, fight and kill amongst yourselves until you're tired. Then, disband and be subjugated.
The Shia were far happier when the Sunnis were the clearly identified, armed enemy.
Later: A long (just okay) NYTimes article looking at the Sunni tribal militias.
Iraq's Shiite-led government declared Saturday that after restive areas are calmed, it will disband Sunni groups battling Islamic extremists because it does not want them to become a separate military force.
In other words, fight and kill amongst yourselves until you're tired. Then, disband and be subjugated.
The Shia were far happier when the Sunnis were the clearly identified, armed enemy.
Later: A long (just okay) NYTimes article looking at the Sunni tribal militias.
posted by mikevotes at
10:22 PM
4 Comments:
In essence, they want the genie put back in the bottle.
One must wonder who will be doing the "disbanding". The Iraqi Army?
When this blows up, it will be spun as the Iraqi government's problem. If al-Qaeda isn't involved, we don't care.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 3:38 PM
That's a really good question. I would guess the interior ministry (ie Shia militias with governmental cover) would be tasked with that.
And I'm not so sure we'd leave it alone. It's my opinion that the US is also creating a balancing force in these Sunni militias to give them a lever against the Shia and Iran once the US draws down.
The US really can't attack the Shia because of the politics, but maybe they think the Sunni militias might offer a nice threat.
By
mikevotes, at 4:28 PM
"It's my opinion that the US is also creating a balancing force in these Sunni militias to give them a lever against the Shia and Iran once the US draws down."
Perhaps.
This would be impossible to spin as anything other than involvement in a civil war, however, which is the perception that Bush has tried mightily to dispel for years. I am reluctant to underestimate his stupidity, however....so, perhaps.
By using the Sunnis as a lever, we would be, in practical terms, inciting a civil war. This would not only be a bad idea on a number of levels, but it could quite possibly bring the Saudis and Iran in on their respective sides.
Unless, of course, you are referring to the idea of soft partition. Breaking up Iraq in order to save it, IOW.
I'm not convinced the Sunnis are at all interested in taking orders from us, much less being our proxy against Iran. Al-Qaeda was the rival gang, and they wanted it wiped out -- that's as far as our interests coincide.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 12:15 AM
Well, I don't think the intention is open civil war although that may likely be the outcome.
And, maybe I oversimplified, this is a very amorphous idea right now, but, I would think that the US doesn't directly need to control the Sunnis, just make sure that they're there to keep back a complete Iranian "overrun."
Let the Saudis, for example, handle the Sunnis and keep them in place, not with the intention of seizing power but to act a as a "firebreak".
And yes, it would risk a broad regional war, but the alternative in this analysis, is a totally dominated Iraq with Iran then moving its eye further afield.
The idea being to tie down the Iranian growth in influence in a fairly cold civil war ala the Iraq/Iran war.
By
mikevotes, at 7:16 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home