Congo or Biafra
Divide what? No fucking way
Merits of Partitioning Iraq or Allowing Civil War Weighed
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 30, 2006; Page A18
As the U.S. military struggles against persistent sectarian violence in Iraq, military officers and security experts find themselves in a vigorous debate over an idea that just months ago was largely dismissed as a fringe thought: that the surest -- and perhaps now the only -- way to bring stability to Iraq is to divide the country into three pieces.
Those who see the partitioning of Iraq as increasingly attractive argue that separating the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds may be the on
ly solution to the violence that many experts believe verges on civil war. Others contend that it would simply lead to new and dangerous challenges for the United States, not least the possibility that al-Qaeda would find it easier to build a new base of operations in a partitioned Iraq.
One specialist on the Iraqi insurgency, Ahmed S. Hashim, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College who has served two tours in Iraq as a reservist, contends in a new book that the U.S. government's options in Iraq are closing to just two: Let a civil war occur, or avoid that wrenching outcome through some sort of partition. Such a division of the country "is the option that can allow us to leave with honor intact," he concludes in "Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency in Iraq."
Bush administration officials have expressed relief and optimism since Iraqi politicians ended a four-month impasse this month by finally choosing a prime minister, Jawad al-Maliki, a Shiite politician. Such political milestones, coupled with the ongoing training of Iraqi security forces, are the cornerstones of U.S. policy and the keys to building a unified, stable Iraq, U.S. officials say.
Partitioning Iraq would lead to a Biafran type civil war with a central and oil funded Shia govenrment, conquering the Sunni areas, and then marching to Kurdistan.
Allowing a civil war could lead to a Congo-like bloodbath, with Shia and Kurdish paid mercenaries waging war first in Sunni areas and then in the Kurdish homeland.
You cannot force the Shia to run a third of what the Sunnis ran and call it liberation. Besides the fact that the US has no legal power to divide a soverign nation, Sadr is most inisistant on a united Iraq.
posted by Steve @ 1:12:00 AM