Shifting Sands, Part II

I mentioned in Part I that it is time to get Machiavellian in Iraq. This is what I mean:
Our primary goal in Iraq is a unified, democratic nation that extends basic human and civil rights to all its citizens. In this vision, Sunni, Shia, and Kurd, as well as the other minorities follow the rule of law, respect religious differences, and have faith in their elected leaders to do what is good for all of Iraq, not just one particular ethnic group or political party. The Iraqi Security Forces are honest keepers of the peace and able to defend Iraqi borders from attack.

If Iraq existed in a vacuum, we would have already accomplished these goals in this country. However, all of our efforts and the Iraqi efforts have been hampered by the interference of Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. Still, when you regard what has been accomplished in Iraq since 2003, the Iraqis have done a tremendous job in striding towards democracy.

Iran is Iraq's primary enemy, and our's too. Iran is bent on upsetting all of the gains the Iraqis have achieved. And they will do this through the spurring of sectarian violence.

I have not blogged about the destruction of the Golden Mosque, because there is a lot to say about it. But one of the things that ties into this discussion is that Iran, through al-Sadr and (I believe) al-Sistani, encouraged the Iraqi Shia to violently demonstrate. With al-Sadr, there is no guessing game. He works for the Iranians, period. Every interest he has in Iraq is diametrically opposed to ours and the independent-minded Iraqis. Sistani, on the other hand, is a much more astute politician...and a potentially more dangerous one. His words regarding the Golden Mosque attacks had the appearance of peace in them, but they were really calls to violence. Sistani asked the Shia not to retaliate against Sunni Mosques, but he called for a seven day period of mourning. If you translate this into realspeak, it reads: "You have seven days to express your rage at the Sunnis in the streets of Iraq." Sistani is no dummy. He knew this would lead to violence. If he truly wanted peace, he would have demanded no retaliaton, asked the Shia to pray for forgiveness for those who destroyed the Golden Mosque, go back to work and go on with their daily lives. But any call to mourning is a call to rioting and revenge. Do not forget that Sistani has been sending millions of dollars to Iranian religious schools and institutions. This is millions of Iraqi dollars going to Iran. Sistani is a savvy political figure. It is foolish to take him at his word and not study and learn his deep intentions and desires.

In light of the existing Shia leadership, the US must foresee the possibility of an Iranian-Iraqi Shia alliance in case of an upcoming conflict with Iran. We must be thinking ahead...our State Department must be thinking ahead...and developing courses of action in Iraq that will bind the Sunni and Kurds to the Coalition Forces in the event of war with Iran. If we are not already planning this out, we are behind. Iran is one-step ahead because it already has al-Sadr in their pocket and possibly al-Sistani.

Our Department of Defense must be wargaming this scenario also. We are fortunate, to some extent, because the heavily Shia populations are in one region of Iraq. But are we looking at the map now and determining where the lines will be? Iran is.

Some might say this is a pessimistic overview of the situation and the future in Iraq. I don't think so. I think it is prudent to be looking ahead and planning. If we are prepared for the, more than likely, sectarian split that will occur because of a conflict with Iran, we will be able to protect what we have accomplished in Iraq better. Will we have to change our timetables, plans, and policies? Absolutely. But that does not mean we have been wrong or that we failed. It means that we had to meet a more pressing problem in the region and make slight, or major, changes to our plans for Iraq. But the drive toward Iraqi democracy will not have to stop. In fact, a closer working relationship with the Sunni against Iran may be an important step in bringing stability to Iraq. But we are going to have to deal with Iran sooner or later. Iraq will not stabilize if a belligerant, ancient enemy next door is allowed to meddle and rattle its saber.