HOW TO END THE WAR IN IRAQ
(and reduce the price of oil)

God will not punish us for partitioning Iraq but will certainly punish us for allowing so many Iraqis to die. - Sheik Ahmed al-Lami

Harvard professor John G. Stoessinger has said that for some 400 years, the three Ottoman districts of Mosul in the north, Baghdad in the center and Basra in the south, the three comprising the area now known as Iraq, had coexisted in peace.  Mosul was predominately Kurd, Baghdad, predominately Sunni and Basra, predominately Shiite.  The upending of peaceful coexistence can be traced to British meddling in the area after WWI.  Great Britain, still a colonial power, cobbled the three administrative regions together, giving birth to the modern-day nation of Iraq.  Eager to exploit the new nation’s vast oil reserves, the Brits installed a Sunni-led monarchy, though Shiites, Kurds and other groups rebelled against de facto Anglo rule.  For almost a century the nation was held together by force.

For close to forty years Saddam Hussein wielded the force that held Iraq together.  Today, without “strong man” rule, Iraq is splitting apart into warring factions.  So far, U.S.-backed elections and a half-trillion dollar military effort have only wreaked havoc.

So why not encourage the re-division of the country into autonomous regions resembling the Ottoman districts that many scholars say had existed peacefully side by side for centuries?  The cultural reality we are now seeing is de facto partitioning.  Separation is inevitable simply because many Shiites and Kurds will never trust Sunnis and most Sunnis will always fear the other major groups in Iraq, who suffered under their rule.  Iraqi native and Fulbright scholar, Mohammed Harba, expects the birth of a tribal state in the Sunni provinces that will fight the armed groups there, and a “Shiite Vatican” in the south.  Harba goes on to describe how the Kurds benefited from self rule for some 17 years and quieted their internal discord.  This enabled the Kurds to incorporate some democratic elements into their political institutions and progress as a federal state.

It is also of key importance for the U.S. to ensure that the bulk of Iraq’s oil wealth remains in Iraq.  At present, there is the widespread view that the eventual “big winners in Iraq will be Exxon-Mobile, Chevron-Texaco, British BP-Amoco and Royal Dutch-Shell”.  The Bush administration’s policies have only heightened this fear.  Indeed, our administration has endorsed a draft oil law for Iraq that favors foreign oil cartels.  This plays into the hands of insurrectionists who assert that the U.S. invaded Iraq to secure that nation’s resources for Big Oil.  Read Ibrahim Mohammed’s comments at: www.alternet.org/story/43045

U.S.-backed national elections have failed to achieve any real gains.  Instead of bringing unity to Iraq, the Shiite majority government in Baghdad has been unable to quell the growing chaos and its policies have served to ignite greater Sunni enmity.  After more than eighty years of ill treatment by the Sunnis, it was naive to expect the Shiites to share power equally.  To Sunnis, a “unified” Iraq under Shiite-Kurd control means permanent marginal status.

Future elections will only yield similar results.  Shiites and Kurds may win enough votes to control the national parliament but that will remain meaningless if they’re unable to rule the country.  This is why the best option left is a Bosnia-like “Federation of Iraq”.  Autonomy will give Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds a strong incentive to succeed on their own terms.  Indeed, the Kurds have long shown a desire to re-divide Iraq and have created a unity government in the north.  They have been petitioning the Baghdad government for the right to independently export oil.  The Kurds’ example may speak to many Sunnis who also desire greater economic stability and self rule.

Re-dividing Iraq isn’t a panacea.  Some predict that it will lead to civil war, as if tens of thousands of Iraqis have not already been killed in sectarian violence since the invasion.  Re-division will require U.S., United Nations and regional support, and a U.S. position warning neighboring states about the consequences of invasion.  It should be pointed out that the regions would not be “ethnically cleansed”.  They would be mixed, as always.  There would just be one group in charge of each region or federal state; much like having one captain on a ship.  Many Iraqis could live as minorities in a mixed region once the current power struggle is resolved by allowing separation.

A growing and diverse group of Democratic and Republican Senators from Joe Biden to Sam Brownback, from to Barbara Boxer to Kay Bailey Hutchison support a three-region solution.  The approach has many supporters in Iraq as well.  As Kosrat Ali, Kurdistan’s Vice President put it, “No one here accepts to be ruled ever again by the other.”