|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Should we partition Iraq?
Kurdish leaders planning to establish independent state.
Summary: The Kurds have wanted an independent Kurdistan for a very long time, and as soon as the Americans leave Iraq, they're going to establish it. They're also going to claim the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, which the Sunnis want to hold on to. It is a near certainty that there will be some form of autonomous Kurdish state. If we (the Americans) continue with our current plan, there will be a civil war over Kirkuk. This will likely spread to the Sunni-dominated provinces as well, as they don't want to be an oppressed minority in a country they used to rule. So while we have the troops on the ground in the region, and the fighting hasn't really started yet, let's consider the reality of the situation. The nation of Iraq was established by the British after World War I, ignoring tribal boundaries. Kurds are the largest ethnic group in the world that doesn't have it's own country, and they've been subject to brutal persecution in Iraq and Turkey. They are as determined to have their own country as the Israelis, and will fight just as hard. The Sunnis will reject a democracy in which they're a minority, and the insurgency will continue unabated after they realize they've lost the latest election. Iraq is very unlikely to be preserved as a united nation. Let's recognize this and begin negotiations to form separate countries relatively peacefully. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
Yes- this problem was caused by the British when they used force to set false boundries.
Will using force to redraw those boundries now work? It was the british partition of india that has helped lead to the problems with India and Pakistan (helped, obviously divisions between Hindu and Muslim populations were a major cause). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
The British have always, as a matter of policy, done things this way. The principle is that basically, the more you set the stage for the conquered to be at each others throats, the more likey you are able to exploit the situation indefinately. It's proven effective many times. Look at Isreal. Before the Zionists got control of Palistine, it was the British who gave land grants to the Yemenese so they would go and live there. Before that, hardly anyone lived in Palestine.
Anyway, to the matter at hand, I do think that failure to allow the Kurds, Sunnies and Shia to split into separate independent states peacefully would be a mistake. It's going to happen one way or the other. Might as well kill as few people as possible. I don't think the Sunni's will go along, though, because as a minority, they are going to get the short end of the deal, and this after being the special privileged group under Saddam. Any way you cut it, there may be civil war. The more I study this, the more I think it was poorly thought out from the beginning. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How about \"not at all\" ?
[ QUOTE ]
Before the Zionists got control of Palestine ... the British ... gave land grants to the Yemenese so they would go and live there. Before that, hardly anyone lived in Palestine. [/ QUOTE ] Wow. What a howler. Let's just say you made a bad joke and it crashed. And move on. [ QUOTE ] The more I study this, the more I think it was poorly thought out from the beginning. [/ QUOTE ] I guess you are referring to the whole Iraq snafu. Well, better late than never, for ya. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: How about \"not at all\" ?
Well Cyrus, seems I heard that in a blurb somewhere during a documentary about the period of the British Mandate. But, alas, I can't find any documentation. The closest I could come was this page with a link to this one .
I agree, though. The information I put out is flawed in some way and I'll be happy to say it was a failed bad joke and go on. Thanks for challenging it. It was interesting reading this morning trying to look it up. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
[ QUOTE ]
It was the british partition of india that has helped lead to the problems with India and Pakistan (helped, obviously divisions between Hindu and Muslim populations were a major cause). [/ QUOTE ] Yes, that partition didn't go well. The lines were drawn hurriedly by the British rulers without much input from the residents. Millions of people moved from Pakistan to India or vice versa, and millions died in subsequent rioting. One cause of these problems might be that the partition occurred after withdrawal of British authority, and the newly formed governments couldn't keep order. The more I hear about this situation, the more it seems that Iraq will split up. If we begin negotiations with local leaders now, we may be able to avoid the kind of violence and subsequent war that happened in India. We can negotiate borders with local input (Kirkuk and possibly Baghdad may have to be given special status, with US or UN protection). We can let people move to whichever country they want to live in before the situation degenerates into total anarchy after the US leaves. It's obviously not optimal, but it's certainly better than civil war. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
We have pledged to our important ally Turkey, that we will not support the creation of an independent Kurdistan because it would exacerbate tensions in their Kurdish region. And the Sunnis and Shi'a won't go for partition either, because they both want the resources of all Iraq and the Sunnis want to impose their will on all the other factions as do some of the Shi'a.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
Turkey's not that great a friend to us. The denied us transit rights to get to Iraq before the war. The population keeps electing Islamist governments, and if it weren't for the army's repeated coups, they'd be about as anti-Western as everyone else in the region.
Anyway, why do you care all of a sudden about what other countries think about us? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
Turkey is a much better ally than you are making out despite their not being able to help as much as we would like sometimes for domestic political reasons. And I care about what our true allies think, as opposed to false ones like France. Turkey since its modern founding has always limited religious influence in its government, and if the army is the mechanism by which that balance is achieved, then that is their business. And they are a much better Islamic ally than Saudi Arabia which has more mixed motives and hidden agendas, and which doesn't need the US as a friend as much as Turkey does. And if I had to go into combat with non-US military units, then after the British and Australians, the Turks would be my choice because they are fearless (the North Koreans/Chinese hated them during the Korean War).
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should we partition Iraq?
[ QUOTE ]
Turkey's not that great a friend to us. The denied us transit rights to get to Iraq before the war. The population keeps electing Islamist governments, and if it weren't for the army's repeated coups, they'd be about as anti-Western as everyone else in the region. Anyway, why do you care all of a sudden about what other countries think about us? [/ QUOTE ] What is interesting about Turkey is that the government and parliment wanted to let us use their land as a staging ground. The problem was that over 90 percent of turkish citizens were vehemently opposed to the idea. Letting the army use it would have been political suicide. I like the cut of your jib, jj, stay around for awhile? |
|
|