Iraq: Bush's Islamic Republic

[Barrett808]

Iraq: Bush's Islamic Republic
By Peter W. Galbraith
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18150

On June 4, Jalal Talabani, president of Iraq, attended the inauguration of the Kurdistan National Assembly in Erbil, northern Iraq. Talabani, a Kurd, is not only the first-ever democratically elected head of state in Iraq, but in a country that traces its history back to the Garden of Eden, he is, as one friend observed, "the first freely chosen leader of this land since Adam was here alone." While Kurds are enormously proud of his accomplishment, the flag of Iraq—the country Talabani heads—was noticeably absent from the inauguration ceremony, nor can it be found anyplace in Erbil, a city of one million that is the capital of Iraq's Kurdistan Region.

Ann Bodine, the head of the American embassy office in Kirkuk, spoke at the ceremony, congratulating the newly minted parliamentarians, and affirming the US commitment to an Iraq that is, she said, "democratic, federal, pluralistic, and united." The phrase evidently did not apply in Erbil. In their oath, the parliamentarians were asked to swear loyalty to the unity of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. Many pointedly dropped the "of Iraq."

The shortest speech was given by the head of the Iranian intelligence service in Erbil, a man known to the Kurds as Agha Panayi. Staring directly at Ms. Bodine, he said simply, "This is a great day. Throughout Iraq, the people we supported are in power." He did not add "Thank you, George Bush." The unstated was understood.

...

It may be the ultimate irony that the United States, which, among other reasons, invaded Iraq to help bring liberal democracy to the Middle East, will play a decisive role in establishing its second Shiite Islamic state.

(more)

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18150

[Frederik]

1. The secession of Kurdistan

was a part of the war plan all along, I think. It is meant to weaken Iraq and destabilize Iran, Syria and Turkey. The strong influence of Iran in the new Iraq was not a part of the plan, or rather, the plan was to attack Iran after Iraq. The last thing CheneyCo wants to see in Iraq is a strong Shi'ite state aligned with a strengthened Iran, which is why it wouldn't surprise me if they are in fact aiding the Sunni insurgency in some way.

It was recently leaked that Cheney has ordered StratCom to make plans for a nuclear attack on Iran in retaliation for a "new 9/11", regardless of whether Iran was involved in this new attack or not. This, I think, is cause for concern.

[bemildred]

2. Yes. It's a problem. Greater Shi'iastan was not in the plan.

I am betting at this point that the decomposition of Iraq will be resisted vigorously by the new "government" and their Persian friends too, and not just because of the Kurdish issue.