[Centraal] Irak en IS #95

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 22:49 schreef theunderdog het volgende:

[..]

Lijkt mij duidelijk: de gevangen vrijlaten, stoppen met de onderdrukking van de soennieten en samen met de soennitische stammen vechten tegen de slangen van ISIS.

quote:

It’s popular to blame sectarian violence in Iraq on the person of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. It’s also wrong. Maliki reflects many in the political class. Almost any politician in Iraq thinks to some extent through a sectarian or an ethnic lens simply because Iraqi political parties are organized largely around ethnic or religious identity, instead of economic or social philosophy.

Politicians react to events; they are seldom consistent over time. That Maliki became more sectarian with time is indisputable. So too is the reality that he was pushed into a sectarian corner. Many analysts point to the arrest warrant for former Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi issued on Maliki’s watch as evidence that Maliki sought to pursue sectarian vendettas. The evidence against Hashemi was pretty overwhelming, though. To absolve him of guilt simply because he was Sunni and the prime minister was Shi‘ite is ridiculous. And while former Finance Minister Rafi Issawi also found himself accused of capital crimes, those who would absolve Issawi ignore the fact that Issawi’s accusers were Sunni and he voluntarily has paid blood money to them. Maliki also cracked down on Muqtada al-Sadr’s Jaysh al-Mahdi at times, suggesting his politics were more complicated than sectarianism. If a prime minister does not target terrorists then he is accused of failing to ensure security; if he does go after Sunni terrorists, he is accused of being sectarian, and if he goes after Shi‘ites sponsoring death squads, then he is accused of being authoritarian by cracking down on rivals. So is Maliki blameless? Absolutely not. His fault was not that his government pursued Sunnis accused of crimes, but that too often the decision about who to pursue appeared sectarian.

Iraqi Sunni figures are not without blame. Take Prime Minister Nouri l-Maliki’s raid on a protest camp in Ramadi late last year. It is absolutely true that most of those at the camps were young, unemployed local Sunni Arabs who were not prone to Al Qaeda. It is also true that the timing of the raid was motivated by politics. But it is just as true that Al Qaeda had a presence at the camp, as videos of sermons endorsing Al Qaeda and protestors waving Al Qaeda flags show. To also suggest that Al Qaeda was not present but materialized and seized Ramadi and Fallujah in outrage within days beggars belief. The simple fact is that Al Qaeda and its sympathizers have long sought shelter in Iraq’s Sunni-led provinces, and Sunni politicians have allowed them to on the belief that they could be a useful wedge against the central government.

Indeed, too often it appears that Iraq’s Arab Sunni political leaders are the most sectarian in Iraq. The basic problem is that the majority of Sunni leaders refuse the legitimacy of any Shi‘ite-led central government. That Baathists and Sunni tribal leader colluded with the Islamic State is not so much the result of frustration, but rather of malice. They saw such collusions as a means to an end, the end being not winning greater compromise in Baghdad, but rather winning control in Baghdad.

But didn’t the surge present a model? Certainly it was militarily brilliant and had great success in the short-term. But it was politically and culturally Pollyannaish and, effectively, convinced those disdainful of Baghdad for sectarian reasons that they could win through violence what they could not win politically. Some Sunni tribal figures joined the surge so long as the money was right. Some prominent U.S. generals were willing also to promise them continued funding and then lay the bill at Maliki’s desk, regardless of whether they had the authority to do so or not. And while Baathists, too, have shown that they are willing to cooperate for a time; they are not willing to forfeit their basic animus toward Shi‘ites, whom they castigate as Fifth Columnists. That was why General David Petraeus’ empowerment of Baathists in Mosul was so shortsighted and disastrous, and led to countless deaths in the November 2004 uprising. The point is this: When Maliki—and almost every other politician in Baghdad—warn that the Sunni officer corps seeks a coup to change not just the prime minister but the entire system, they are not paranoid. Instead, they are right. To push for the restoration of so many former Sunni military officers into the Iraqi army would endanger the Iraqi state and justify the Iranian propaganda which suggests that Iraqi Shi‘ites might not like their Persian brethren, but have no choice but to accept their protection.

So what must be done?

It’s essential to realize that sectarianism in Iraq isn’t a Shi‘ite against Sunni phenomenon but is often more acute the other way. I have never met a Sunni politician who, after a couple hours of discussion and maybe a couple whiskeys, didn’t acknowledge that they sought to restore Sunni control over the Shi‘ite population.
It’s also important to recognize that many Sunni leaders have their hands sullied by terrorism. Getting the Turkish or Qatari governments to vouch for their innocence is like getting Ted Bundy to assure the world of Jeffrey Dahmer’s innocence.
There should be no redemption for any figure that cooperated in anyway with ISIS or with the current uprising. Perhaps they thought they could use ISIS but retain control. That alone should disqualify their judgment into the future.
It’s long past time senior American military officers who have spent years in CENTCOM’s area of operation recognize that the clientitis that affects career State Department Arabists can also infect them. Generals interact with their effete and elite counterparts, and too often accept their complaints and adopt their biases. When it comes to anti-Shi’ite bias, how frustrating it is to see so many Americans more sectarian than Iraqis.
If the goal is to undermine Iranian influence, then it becomes essential to have a real presence in Iraq, one that Iraqis of all stripes can use to push back against Iranian Qods Force chief Qassem Suleimani’s demands. Sometimes there is no substitute for a base, be it in Iraqi Kurdistan or in southern Iraq.
Likewise, if the goal is economic opportunity, then no effort should be spared to build and improve the Iraqi private sector. This should not be left at the hands of USAID. The staffers at that dysfunctional and wasteful organization don’t know the first thing about free market enterprise. Rather, it’s time to do what the Iraqis have been asking for all along: Send in American businessmen to invest in small projects: hotels, local manufacturing, etc.
Bolstering the private sector is also important since every Iraqi ministry has about ten times the employees it needs to function. Bloated state payrolls might work when the price of oil is high, but what goes up also comes down, and the bloated bureaucracy is a ticking time bomb.
And, finally, federalism needn’t be a dirty word. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States centralized the government in part because it was just easier for the State Department and Pentagon to handle that way. But, instead of building a huge bureaucracy in Baghdad, why not simply leave defense and foreign affairs in Baghdad, and distribute Iraq’s oil revenue not only to the provinces to decide what to do with, but directly to the districts. Let them compete for the best model, and replicate the tale of two cities—Kirkuk and Mosul—throughout the whole country. The key is that federalism should be based on administrative district, and not on ethnicity or sectarian identity.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:00 schreef TeenWolf het volgende:
De Isis profiteert van de instabiliteit in Irak, laat ze maar eens landen gaan aanvallen die niet in burgeroorlog zijn zoals Iran of Turkije.Worden ze weggevaagd, ze zijn erg provocatief bezig.

Hieronder een Isis perswoordvoerder met een (te) grote bek tegen Turkije.

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/Milliyet-Tv/nevidyo/video-izle/ISID-den-acik-tehdit---Istanbul-u-vururuz--dAFymYLL8b3Q.html

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:07 schreef Loekie1 het volgende:
Poetin heeft ervoor gewaarschuwd:

Het was Poetin die waarschuwde voor het alternatief voor Assad; toch bleef het Westen Assad verzwakken en zijn tegenstanders steunen. Het resultaat: het kalifaat van IS (voorheen Isis).
http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl(...)-met-de-Russen.dhtml

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 22:50 schreef UpsideDown het volgende:

[..]

Als ik het goed begrijp is de YPG dus bezig Sinjar in te nemen en komt de Peshmerga er niet aan te pas. Wat een grap.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 22:58 schreef Peunage het volgende:
The key is that federalism should be based on administrative district, and not on ethnicity or sectarian identity.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:31 schreef Charismatisch het volgende:

[..]

Nonsens van Michael Rubin waar de Koerden nooit akkoord mee zullen gaan.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:01 schreef TeenWolf het volgende:
Kelen doorsnijden, hoofden op spijlen spiesen en dan nog denken dat Allah trots op je is, wat voor een broodmongool ben je dan.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:44 schreef Loekie1 het volgende:

[..]

En dat doen dan de goed opgeleide jihadi's uit Europese landen. Opgefokt door de talloze jihadvideo's waar ze het ergste van het ergste op hebben gezien en die voor niets meer terugdeinzen. Op alle gebieden hebben ze voorsprong op de mensen die ze vermoorden. Ze zijn nietsontziend, hebben hun gevoel uitgeschakeld, en willen de video's die ze kennen alleen nog maar overtreffen in gruwelijkheid. Het zijn goed opgeleide topmoordenaars. Wie kan die nog uitschakelen? Niet de Irakese regering. Je zou een gebied moeten afgrenzen waar de opgejaagde burgers van Irak kunnen leven maar dat gebied zou extreem vakkundig beveiligd moeten worden.
Alle landen waar deze jihadi's vandaan komen hebben wel een verantwoordelijkheid in deze!

quote:

Op zaterdag 16 augustus 2014 01:06 schreef Charismatisch het volgende:
Why Kurdish Independence Is the Only Solution for the World
http://time.com/3105066/kurdish-independence-iraq/

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:55 schreef Zienswijze het volgende:

[..]

Ten eerste hebben Westerse landen de verantwoordelijkheid vanwege het afzwakken van Assad en het wegjagen van Saddam. De moslimextremisten zijn direct voor deze genocide verantwoordelijk maar het Westen heeft hiervoor de randvoorwaarden gecreeerd. En Nederland natuurlijk blind als een staat zonder eigen mening achter Amerika aanlopen.

Tegen een sterk Assad en een sterk Saddam zou de ISIS nooit zo groot en machtig kunnen worden.

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 23:45 schreef BluesRebel het volgende:
https://news.vice.com/art(...)takeover-of-his-town

!

quote:

Op vrijdag 15 augustus 2014 22:57 schreef Peunage het volgende:

[..]



De gevangenen vrij laten ja, anders worden ze toch uitgebroken door ISIS en de baathisten. Dan weet je meteen wat voor gevangenen het zijn.