|
Conscript
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2
|
Political History of Iraq, Part 3
Part 3
Political History of Iraq
Conclusions
One of the first myths promulgated by Pentagon spokesfolks after the peace went bad was that, ‘Goodness gracious, Iraq could not be expected to implement the fruits of democracy or enjoy security because of the dictatorial conditions that had existed during the 24 years of Saddam’s rule or the total of 35 years of Baath Party rule.’
But it is obvious from the above that Iraq has never enjoyed a stable, democratic, republican or honest government, not since the founding of the constitutional monarchy dating from 1932, and certainly not during the period of Ottoman control which ran from the 1650’s to the 1920’s.
It is conventional wisdom that the British erred in cobbling modern Iraq together from such disparate parts, but even the Ottoman’s could not govern Iraq. The British Mandate period lasted from 1920 to 1932. During those twelve years, the British were unable to solve the problems afflicting the country. The British established a government modeled on their own constitutional monarchy with a representative legislature, but “none of the problems inherent in a state that is a mosaic society composed of many minorities had been solved by the date of Iraq’s independence.”
Twelve years of British advice and guidance resulted in constitutional law in Iraq lasting for the sum total of four years. In 1936, Iraqis staged the first of over 16 coups and major coups attempts in the 32 years leading up to 1968, the year when the Baathists seized power. It’s a wonder that any Iraqi politician was willing to serve as President, Prime Minister or Premier since holding those offices usually proved fatal. A few of the notable Iraqi politicians and statesmen murdered by other office seekers and statesmen during that period includes Jafar al Askari, General Bakr Sidqi, Abd al Illah, Nuri as Said, General Abd al Karim Qasim and not to mention, King Faisal II.
In Iraq today just as in the past, cabinet posts are portals to corruption and personal political advancement. In the coups and counter coups since 1932, the coups as often as not were instigated by members of the cabinet against the leadership or instigated by the leadership against other members of the cabinet.
Today, just as in 1979, giving every minority group a cabinet post has not proven to be a stabilizing influence, since, “Cabinet governments become an assortment of unstable, communal coalitions,” according to Abbas Kelidar, author of The Integration of Modern Iraq and Iraq: the Search for Stablity. Today in Iraq, just as in the past, political parties represent personalities and tribal relationships, not issues, and political parties tend to represent a shared religious heritage, not political or economic philosophies or values.
If we take the year 1920, the official year of liberation from the Ottomans as the beginning of modern Iraqi history, then, to the present, a period of 85 years, neither reasonably moderate statesmen nor dictatorial strongmen have been able to solve the dysfunctional nature of Iraqi society. Admittedly, Saddam and the Baath party took the level of abuse against the population to the next level, but the Bakr / Saddam government merely perfected the tools used by Prime Minister Hashimi, Hikmat Suleiman, General Abd al Karim Qasim and General Bakr Sidqi.
Looking back even further to the Ottoman “victory” in 1638, “Once regained Iraq was difficult and costly for the Ottomans to hold. …..the constant and divisive factor of religious politics complicated the process of rule.” Today, just as in 1979 and 1638, “Ethnic and sectarian rivalries continue to plague modern Iraq, which possesses an extremely heterogeneous society that has been politically and economically dominated by the minority Sunni Muslims…” As a result of various forms of repression, “Elements of the Shiite community harbor grievances that, if expressed in protest against the central government, could prove to be a serious threat to the stability of the Baath regime” (or for that matter, any non-Shia regime)
The position of the United States today in Iraq is roughly equivalent to the British Mandate Period, with one crucial difference, we have empowered the vengeful Shia majority. Iraqi society, such as it is, is being held together only by the presence of U.S. military forces. It is interesting to note that most of the coups which took place after independence were led by Sunnis against other Sunnis. Adding the Shia to the political mix will increase the potential number of coups almost exponentially once most U.S. combat troops pull out of Iraq after the 2008 election.
Some administration officials seem to think that the Kurds can be convinced to become an integral part of the new Iraqi state. However, a brief review of Kurdish History suggests a different outcome, at least eventually. In the 1650’s, the Kurdish Baban dynasty established an autonomous region at the beginning of the Ottoman occupation. During World War 1, the Kurds fought against the British attempt to occupy the Kurdish region. In 1919-22, the Kurds engaged in a revolt against the British. At about the same time, Turkish Kurds engaged in anti-Turkish revolts against the government of Mustafa Kemal Pasha. In 1932 Kurds rebelled against the British and Iraqis under the leadership of the Kurdish general, Mustafa Barzani. During World War 2, Kurds chased out Iraqi troops and established self government in the Barzan area. Iraqi troops restored government control in 1946. Kurds rebelled against the Qasim government in 1961-63. Fighting broke out again in 1965-66. Fighting broke out again in 1969.
After years of negotiations, Iraq decided to crush the Kurds by force, yet again. General Barzani abandoned the traditional Kurdish guerilla tactics and fought a frontal war against the Iraqi army, with disastrous results. The Kurds pulled back to the Iranian border to rest and re-equip, but to the surprise of everyone, in 1975 Iran and Iraq signed a comprehensive treaty which among other things, closed the border to the Kurds and cut off their supplies. The Kurdish rebellion collapsed, at least for the moment. After the Gulf War, the Kurds rebelled against Saddam and were brutally repressed. The United States then used the Air Force to establish a safe zone for the Kurds in northern Iraq, where the Kurds established a reasonably representative form of self government.
Will the present Kurdish leader, Barzani, the grandson of General Barzani, capriciously dismiss the aspirations which the Kurdish people have cherished since the mid 1600’s? Or are the Kurds merely biding their time.
It is clear that the Bush administration failed to do their homework and did not do basic research on Iraq before deciding to invade. Had Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld read even one book on the history of government and politics in Iraq, the administration would have had second thoughts about their prediction of an seamless transition to democracy. Wishful thinking is not policy.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 liberated a maladjusted culture which is caught in a Middle Ages time warp. The root of the problem goes back to the year 650. No matter what military or political tactics the United States implements over the next few years, or how long a commitment the United States is prepared to make, the problem will not be solved for at least a generation, if then.
The facts cited above are from :
Nyrop, Richard, editor. Iraq: A Country Study. Foreign Area Studies. Area Handbook Series. Washington, D.C. The American University. Third Edition, 1979.
Editorial comments and conclusions are from:
Jim McMeans.
5335 Highway 106 North
Danielsville, GA 30633
|
Linear Mode
