Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A case for dividing Iraq

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A case for dividing Iraq

    TIME.com: The Case for Dividing Iraq -- Nov. 13, 2006 -- Page 1

    Reading the situation now as above, this seems to be the only possible solution to end sectarian violence in Iraq.

    George W Bush should have foreseen this from history,
    what happens when a unifying force is removed (Saddam)

    USSR, Yugoslavia, British India.

    USSR broke up into its constituent nations.
    Yugoslavia fragmented into ethnic regions.
    British India was divided on religious lines.

    Now Iraq seems bursting at sectarian(Shias & Sunnis) and ethnic (Khurds) lines.

    Division will trigger mass migration & mass violence for a short time.

    But not doing that may be still worse.
    Violence will continue for ever.

    A nice catch 22 situation.

  • #2
    "Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization."

    Oded Yinon A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties (1982)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Al-khiyal
      "Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization."

      Oded Yinon A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties (1982)
      ya rab yi7fazna...ou yi7faz bladna

      Comment


      • #4
        The Prophecy of Oded Yinon: Is the U.S. waging Israel's wars?

        Comment


        • #5
          "But the violence will not decrease. On the contrary, it will continue at elevated levels - encouraged and funded by the US which will both condemn it and use it as a pretext to move semi-autonomous regions into fully autonomous city-states."

          Final phase of the Iraqi war

          Comment


          • #6
            God..! That is what they want.

            That is their plan of action.

            Comment


            • #7
              JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The Iraq war was a boon for Israel's security, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Wednesday, voicing fresh endorsement for a Bush administration sapped by the unpopularity at home of its Middle East policies.

              The mid-term election losses of U.S. President George W. Bush's Republican Party were widely considered a repudiation of his decision to topple Iraq's Saddam Hussein as part of a vision of democratizing the region and bolstering allies like Israel.

              Olmert avoided explicit comment on the Republicans' fortunes during Washington talks with Bush earlier this month. But in a speech to visiting American Jews, Olmert made clear he had few regrets about the changes wrought by the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

              "I know all of his (Bush's) policies are controversial in America. There are some who support his policies in the Middle East, particularly in Iraq, and some who do not," he said.

              "I stand with the president because I know that Iraq without Saddam Hussein is so much better for the security and safety of Israel, and all of the neighbors of Israel without any significance to us," added Olmert, who was speaking in English.

              "Thank God for the power and the determination and leadership manifested by President Bush."

              With U.S.-led forces mired in an Iraqi insurgency, political analysts have speculated that Bush may redirect his attentions toward solving an Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is a major grievance in the Arab and Muslim world.

              That could prompt Olmert to reconsider his unilateral policies towards a Palestinian leadership that he has argued is incapable or unwilling to make peace with Israel.

              Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, a moderate who has been struggling to revive rapprochement efforts despite opposition from the Hamas Islamists with which he shares power, has said that Israel should seek peace as a key to wider regional calm.

              Under Saddam, Iraq backed Palestinian militants and posed a menacing presence to Israel's east. During the 1991 Gulf war, Iraq rained missiles on Israel but Israel held its fire at the behest of Washington, which was wary of alienating Arab allies.

              But Olmert's views on today's Iraq have not been shared by all Israeli experts.

              Yuval Diskin, chief of the Shin Bet intelligence service, said in a leaked briefing earlier this year that Israel could come to rue Saddam's ouster if it deepens regional instability.

              "When you take apart a system in which a dictator has been controlling his people by force, you have chaos," Diskin said in a recording broadcast by Israeli television. "I'm not sure we won't end up missing Saddam."

              Iraq war was good for Israel: Olmert

              Comment


              • #8
                Whether or not it was part of some nefarious plan, it would seem that a divided country is likely to be the outcome.



                V

                Comment


                • #9
                  There seems to be no other alternative than dividing the country;
                  If peace is to be restored to this tormented land.

                  Till now the minority Sunnis were lording over the majority Shias.
                  Thanks to a Sunni dictator.

                  Now under the new dispensation of representative government,
                  the Shias naturally outnumber the Sunnis & Khurds.
                  They will be taking revenge on the Sunnis.

                  They Sunnis & Khurds will never want to be underdogs below a majority Shias.

                  Thus a single nation on a true democratic platform does not seem to be plausible.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No, that isn't the only solution... The only solution is that the Iraqis get unified as IRAQIS not each group to isolate itself into a corner and brood hateful thoughts on each other. I'm not just talking about the Muslims, but the Christians and Jews as well... they were all living together in peace before bas the saraseer have a saying and it usually applies to us "Divide and conquer". Divided we are weak, united we are POWERFUL... and that's what they don't want...........

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sania View Post
                      the Shias naturally outnumber the Sunnis & Khurds.

                      Shia & Sunni = religious groups

                      Kurds = ethnic group


                      There are millions of Kurds who are Sunnis - and millions of Kurds who are Shi'ites. Hussein had Sunnis, Shi'ites, Christians and Kurds in his government. Kurds assisted Hussein with his Al Anfal campaign. There have been millions of Shi'ites in the Ba'ath Party. Iraq was not quite in the tear-off portions that you perhaps imagine.

                      Sectarianizing Iraq's political arrangements - which is what the U.S.A. quite deliberately did - is what has made the pitching of various power blocs against each other inevitable.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Amman - Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned Saturday that his country 'will not stay passive' towards any attempt to split Iraq, saying such a development would 'accelerate' the ongoing sectarian strife there.

                        Addressing a press conference jointly with his Jordanian counterpart Marouf Bakhit, the Turkish premier said that his country attached 'great importance' to the meeting scheduled for Wednesday in Amman between US President George W Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

                        'The partition of Iraqi will accelerate the civil war raging there, and neither history nor humanity will forgive those who play havoc with the question of Iraq's division,' Erdogan said.

                        'With more than 50 people killed daily in Iraq, Turkey cannot stay passive towards what is going on there,' he added.

                        Erdogan, who leads the largest Sunni country outside the Arab world, alluded to the bloody acts of violence and counter violence between Iraqi Shiites and Muslims that killed more than 300 people from both sides over the past three days.

                        Turkey is also extremely sensitive towards the partition of Iraq that would enable Iraqi Kurds to break away and establish their own state and encourage Turkish Kurds to follow suit.

                        'As countries adjacent to Iraq, we have held 10 meetings so far and we are determined to do more efforts to help handle the situation there,' the Turkish premier said.

                        He said that Ankara 'attached great importance' to the upcoming meeting between Bush and al-Maliki in Jordan.

                        'I also intend to raise the Iraq question with the US president when I meet him at the forthcoming NATO conference,' he added.....

                        Turkey will not permit partition of Iraq, says Erdogan

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Dividing Iraq:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            That is a poignant but sad map of divided Iraq, post Saddam.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Al-Khiyal,

                              What I meant was that the Shias OUTSIDE of Khurds outnumber Khurds as an ethnic group.
                              In the sense that Khurds want a separate nation.

                              Iraq under Saddam might not have looked to have been at the tear-off point.
                              But the tensions were simmering.. like a volcano about to blow off..
                              only capped by the brute force of a dictator.
                              .

                              Comment

                              Unconfigured Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X