2nd of August, 2005.
Risks and Guarantees
The ideology of all politicians, regardless of how eagerly they play at reviling each other, must accomodate reverence for the unity of their country. "Backwards" or "progressive", the politicians of all states acknowledg the vital role national unity plays in all other theatres of endeavour, and accordingly nurture and defend it when threatened. All, that is, excepting the new Iraqi politician, who has shrugged off the weight of reverence towards unity, deeming it to be merely another bargaining chip in the policy market. Those subscribing to this principle have developed the techniqe since their opportunist days in the London conference (roughly August 2002), each side aggreeing their stance with regard to use of ethnic and sectarian division and now building upon their successes 'till the find themselves in receipt of the desired level of authority.
The routine for Iraq of late has been to pander to those U.S. strategies focusing on reformation of the Middle East per ethnic division and sectarian methods, especially in those regions closest to the wealth of oil fields. These techniques facilitate managment and looting via the politically acceptable methods of the day, pretexts usually reasoning along the lines of resisting terrorism in such ways as to accomodate redistribution of national administrative powers under the guise of the democratic imperitive and human rights. These techniques tend so effectually to silence any moral arguments when inflicted on countries without democratic rule.
Those United States and the Iraqi nationals allying with them are managing well in consolidating their favoured political methods for redistributing authority according to their own desires.
The new political reality can be relied upon to seed disputes over positions and rewards, struggles in the cities and the outer lands reaching to the federal canton (province) borders, so well indeed as to nigh guarantee civil war and distruction of the fabric of society, unless each canton declares their independance, leading ultimately to the federal state dividing into three states.
Now there is a canton in north Iraq with president and parliament and foundations, as an introduction to division and separation. I was in Northern Iraq last week. I see a new state(canton) flag raised everywhere, I can not see the Iraqi flag except in a few places. 99% of flags belong to some new state and 1% to Iraqi state. Everything in Northern Iraq is different . This is the first canton , and work is continuous to gradually create other cantons in Southern, central, and Western Iraq. These are the facts we see in our daily lives, not made much mention of in the papers, (although they do talk of raising the Iranian flag in Southern Iraq, where some constitution writers claim Persion to be the main nationality). This canton in Northern Iraq was created in 1991 under sponsor of US administration with Israeli assistance, and all along those United States prevent our central government from raising a finger to stop these outrages.
Who are the beneficiaries of this division ?
Israel profits hugely. Zionist clerks write in the Mariff newspaper that Iraqi division is the most important topic of discussion between leaders of Israeli and U.S. administration since 1991.
Iran wants to establish a state allied to Iran in southern Iraq.
The Kurds want a state for their own peoples in Iraq.
A popular theory amongst U.S. administrators (that Iraqi unity poses a source of risk and threatens the interests of those United States as well as those of regional states, whatever regime controls them) suggests working towards conversion of the current Iraqi state to, at first, a federal union of states, paving the way for real division.
Kuwait also has reason to support the division of Iraqi unity, to safeguard the advances and gains they have made, from perceived fears of annexation.
Many states perceive a threat in strength at their borders, favouring the weaker canton, and working towards this where they can.
The main stakeholders, taking the boldest steps in Iraqi development, find their aggenda underwritten by currently fashionable United States strategies, particularly those of dominating the region by divisive measures that will yield the Kurdish North to Israel and the southern canton to Iran.
Who will save Iraq? As I have illustrated, the loser in Iraqi division is the Iraqi people themselves, but they have to admit to themselves that they alone have the ability to put a stop to the current trend.
We must engender unity, patriotism if you like, to overcome the ethnic sectarianism we so far have so sadly met with passivity and neglect. Such stragegies can only fail when attempted upon a people who believe in and exercise their solidarity towards each other. We remember the rebuilding of the German nation as a shining example of a people who have proudly acknowledged and declared their duty towards each other, as indeed should we mark Iraqi unity as our goal.
Belala Alani is an husband and father, controls and system engineer, and world citizen concerned with human-rights.
For queries, or to provide criticism or any other support, please contact us at:
i n f o @ h u m a n - i n t e r e s t . o r g