Monday, January 15, 2007

Zakaria on the surge

Even If We 'Win', We Lose
Groups like Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army don't generally start fire fights with the Americans or attack Iraqi forces. Their goals are different, quieter. Another U.S. adviser, Maj. Mark Brady, confirms reports that the Mahdi Army has been continuing to systematically take over Sunni neighborhoods, killing, terrorizing and forcing people out of their homes. "They're slowly moving across the river," he told Hastings, from predominantly Shiite eastern Baghdad into the predominantly Sunni west. If the 20,000 additional American troops being sent to the Iraqi capital focus primarily on Sunni insurgents, there's a chance the Shiite militias might get bolder. Colonel Duke puts it bluntly: "[The Mahdi Army] is sitting on the 50-yard line eating popcorn, watching us do their work for them."
...
Over the past three and a half years, the dominant flaw in the Bush administration's handling of Iraq is that it has, both intentionally and inadvertently, driven the country's several communities apart. Every seemingly neutral action—holding elections, firing Baathists from the bureaucracy, building up an Iraqi military and police force—has had seismic sectarian consequences. The greatest danger of Bush's new strategy, then, isn't that it won't work but that it will—and thereby push the country one step further along the road to all-out civil war.

1 comment:

nick said...

Has anybody read any analyses on what to do about this sectarian problem in Iraq? How do you deal with this centuries old problem? There doesnt seem to be any equivalent in American history. In our own civil war, people were physically separated by hundreds to thousands of miles. And when the war was over, money was there to cool things off, that is, the North needed the Souths raw materials and food, and the South was perfectly happy to sell it.

I have yet to read anything on how to deal with these crazy Iraqis!

Search This Blog