Nothing has exposed the delusionary disaster of the war on terror like the past week’s eruption of its mutant progeny across Iraq. British Prime Minister David Cameron declared on Wednesday that the Islamic State of Iraq (ISIS) and Greater Syria, is now the most serious threat to Britain’s security.
As ISIS forces were reported to have seized Iraq’s largest oil refinery at Baiji, US President Barack Obama was said to be considering demands from both Baghdad and Washington hawks for air attacks to halt the advance of the jihadist-led rebellion. Hundreds of US troops have already been dispatched to prepare the ground and defend the 5,500-strong US embassy.
Eleven years after the US and Britain launched their onslaught on Iraq, they are once again considering a return to the scene of their strategic humbling.
ISIS are in reality the shock troops of a wider Sunni Arab revolt — backed by ex-Baathists and other former resistance groups — against the Shiite-led government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
While the US and fellow travelers are effectively allied with ISIS and other Sunni Islamist rebels fighting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in Iraq they stand with the Shiite Islamist al-Maliki battling the same groups.
It was his US-trained forces that melted away when Isis took Iraq’s second city, Mosul, last week. The collapse was smoothed by sympathetic or corrupt commanders, as well as tacit deals with Kurdish forces who used the chance to take control of the contested city of Kirkuk and the northern oilfields.
Now Isis is coming up against more serious resistance on the way to Baghdad. The sectarian takfiri group was originally the al-Qaeda franchise holder under the US-British occupation, but was rejected by the bulk of the resistance. It then moved into Syria to join the anti-al-Assad uprising.
Since summer last year it has controlled a swath of Syrian territory near the Iraqi border. Yet it was the al-Maliki regime’s brutal suppression of a Sunni protest movement last year — culminating in the massacre of dozens of demonstrators in Hawija — that gave ISIS a new opening in Iraq.
The idea that this horror story can be disconnected from the US-led military occupation of Iraq that preceded it is an absurdity. It is not just that there was no al-Qaeda or ISIS in the country before the invasion, or that the occupiers deliberately dismantled the Iraqi state and army and destroyed the country’s infrastructure in the process.
Not only was a religious and ethnic carve-up enforced across public life, but US commanders were directly involved in sponsoring an El Salvador-style dirty war of sectarian death squads to undermine the armed resistance.
Al-Maliki was himself selected by the US as a suitable strongman to protect its interests. That is not to suggest that any transition from former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship would not have been painful, or that Iraqis have had no agency in what took place. However, much of the Western debate of the past week has glossed over the scale of the human and social catastrophe unleashed by the US-led war. The most recent US academic estimate of the death toll is at least half-a-million, while Iraq Body Count has recorded a minimum of 190,100 violent deaths as a result of the invasion — 4 million became refugees.
That was not a “tragic error,” as some claim, or a problem of post-invasion planning. It was a barbarous crime whose predicted consequences Iraqis are living with today. The idea that former British prime minister Tony Blair — who helped launch the war on a false pretext and now says we need to “liberate ourselves from the notion that ‘we’ have caused this” — remains Middle East peace envoy is beyond parody.
The apologists say US troops left too soon, that Iraq is now a democracy, and that Syria shows non-intervention can carry its own costs. However, post-occupation Iraq is an institutionalized kleptocracy, a US-Iranian condominium where voting is by enforced sectarian and ethnic blocs, torture is rampant, and thousands are imprisoned without trial.
If democracy is the yardstick, it was the Iraqi government that demanded the withdrawal of foreign troops. As for Syria, the US and its allies are bleeding it by funding and arming rebel forces, while withholding the means for a decisive breakthrough. Without doubt, direct Western military intervention would escalate the death toll to Iraqi proportions.
The arguments about how Iraq reached today’s breakdown matter precisely because the backlash from the last intervention risks being used to justify yet another — and not just in Iraq. Since its launch in 2001, the war on terror has spread and spawned support for jihadist terror groups across the Muslim world, from al-Qaeda to the Pakistani Taliban. US bombing or drone attacks on Isis in Iraq, embedded in urban areas, will not break its grip on cities such as Mosul or Tikri, but it is certainly expected to kill large numbers of civilians and inflame the country, and the region, still further.
A narrow, violent takfiri group such as ISIS is unlikely to be able to hold large urban centers for long, let alone continue its advance into Baghdad or Shiite heartlands. Yet its successes have certainly put the survival of Iraq itself at stake. Like Syria, the country is already effectively partitioned — and Islamist groups are very far from being alone in rejecting the artificial “Sykes-Picot” borders imposed by Britain and France on the Arab world at the end of World War I.
Only a determined break by a major Iraqi political force with the sectarian and ethnic politics bequeathed by former US president George W. Bush and Blair could now halt the fragmentation. The entire Arab world is living with the fallout from a century of attempts to control their region and resources. Only Iraqis can shape their future.
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
RSS