Saturday, December 03, 2005

50 ways to leave your lover

I was talking about the War in Iraq today, and the idea came up that, if we left, Iraq would succumb to a civil war. So why are we leaving Iraq together? If this is true, then they obviously don't want to be a single nation. Why should we leave Iraq together, since Iraq is, itself, an artificial construction of imperialist nations drawing lines in the sand. Why not split Iraq into thirds, creating an independent Kurdistan, East and West Iraq?


Blogger Noumenon said...

It might not be that bad of an idea, but it would be admitting defeat in Bush's quest for democracy (or would it be three times the democracy?) and leave a bunch of weak or failed states. Sunniland could be the next Afghanistan. Here's Slate's take on partion:

Some analysts, most notably Peter Galbraith and Leslie Gelb, have advocated a "three-state solution." Iraq, after all, was an artifice of the British Empire from its very birth in the land-grabbing wake of World War I. Why not undo the monstrous deed and sever the conjoined triplets into separate beings? Partition has its abstract appeal, but it's a recipe for creating three weak states, and it would probably spark a civil or regional war. Iraq's oil is concentrated in the Kurdish north and the Shiite south; the Sunnis in the center would get nothing from the deal and thus would fight it. They could expect aid in this fight from the Saudis, who, if nothing else, would want to stem expansionist Iran, which would no doubt aim to dominate the Shiites (Iran's making political incursions even now). Meanwhile, the Kurds would come under pressure from Turkey, which would get nervous about the example being set for its own Kurdish residents; Turkey might be encouraged in this pressure by northern Iraq's large Turkmen population, which would chomp at Kurdish rule. (To be fair, Galbraith endorses a "loose federation," not three distinct states, but the problems and regional dynamics would be only slightly less severe; it's doubtful that our own Articles of Confederation could have survived such pressures, and Muqtada Sadr is no Thomas Paine.)

2:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home