Iraq's only hope is to split into multiple self-governing areas.

Does anyone else think that Iraq's only solution peacefully is to 1) for the USA to not build bases and occupy them and 2) let them divide up their country this time...maybe it should be three countries with 3 leaders...the way it is divided, not an artificial whole?

They should be allowed to do this. Why should Americans force the entire patchwork of a country forced upon it by the Brits earlier be a happy government?

There are clearly separate and distinct geographical areas (based upon ethnic, religious and geographic peoples) of this nation called Iraq. Why don't we let them determine their self determination in whatever form it would be...3 Iraquettes...of THEIR choosing?

I guess people don't want one?

Clearly Duers tonight would rather start a civil war in the USA than discuss the possibilities of Iraq.

Friday nights are definitely not the time to start a conversation on DU.

Oh and by the way, my letter smearing the woman about the Florida vote will be printed because they called me yesterday to okay it to print!

and would probably make things a hell of a lot better than they are now. However, I don't think the BFEE wants it that way - they want control of the whole shebang and if Iraq splits into separately governed states, their won't be able to get their greedy little mits on all the resources in the region.

That's my guess. Also, I agree with you about finding solutions. It seems like a lot of the really thought provoking posts sink to the bottom pretty quickly. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people would rather argue about the same old things than entertain new ideas.

Even if I don't know very much about a topic, I still enjoy being educated about it. Thanks for your post!

but I was curious how many of the smartypants out there in DU land would chew over the split Iraq idea. I like reading their posts because I'm not a history person.

Thanks for answering smirkymonkey! :)

so that the Kurds don't get too much power leading to a separate Kurdistan. Which they think will cause problems with their Kurdish population.

from, let's say, a cobbled-up "country", instituted by some foreign entity with the military to enforce it, comprised of California, Florida, Oregon and Massachusetts. "Here's your new nation, folks - enjoy."

As difficult as something like that would be, imagine that each of the regions had a thousand years of traditional solidarity, strongly and maybe violently opposed to those of the others.

I suppose we could issue an edict demanding that eagles and mice are hereby required to live in peace and an end to hostilities. Yes, I'm sure that would work.

......let the Iraqi's decide for themselves.

You've stuffed up their country, killed tens of thousands of their people and dissed their culture and beliefs.....how about not interfering in their future?

Does this look like Iraqis wish the dissolution of their nation?

Iraqi Muslim Sunni and Shia marched hand in hand:


Iraqis unite to condemn interim constitution
March 20, 2004

Thousands of Muslim Sunni and Shia gathered after Friday prayers in al-Adhamya and al-Kadhimya districts in Baghdad to demonstrate against the interim Iraqi constitution.

...

Demonstrators chanted "Yes to Iraq, no to sectarianism, no to US occupation", in an attempt to show the commitment to national unity among Iraq's various religions, sects, and ethnicities.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B90497BA-C408-4E65-8ED7-5301CBBF841A.htm

Who wants civil war, and who would benefit from it? The ones beating the drums of civil war are the neoconservatives. And having conquered Iraq, they want an excuse to divide it, so it will never again be an independent economic and military power. That's good to remember, when the bombs blow up mosques and pilgrims, and neither Sunnis nor Shiites take credit nor appear keen to fan the sectarian flames. And think of the constitution the US has tried to impose, institutionalizing sectarian division. Iraqis do not want this!

The neoconservatives WANT Iraq to dissolve into chaos, so it can be carved into tribal vassal states. It's also a strategic goal of the Israeli right. Read Israeli journalist Oded Yinon, writing in 1982:

"The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target.... Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria.... Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north."
http://www.xymphora.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_xymphora_archive.html#1078
What looks to us like a disaster is, to the neo-conservative ideologue, a transitional stage to the redrawing of the map of the Middle East.

So when the bombs explode, seemingly without reason, be assured: there's one huge, bloody reason.

Robert Fisk, March 3: "All This Talk Of Civil War, And Now This.... Coincidence?"

Odd, isn't it? There never has been a civil war in Iraq. I have never heard a single word of animosity between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq.

Al-Qa'ida has never uttered a threat against Shias - even though al-Qa'ida is a Sunni-only organisation. Yet for weeks, the American occupation authorities have been warning us about civil war, have even produced a letter said to have been written by an al-Qa'ida operative, advocating a Sunni-Shia conflict. Normally sane journalists have enthusiastically taken up this theme. Civil war.

...

I think of the French OAS in Algeria in 1962, setting off bombs among France's Muslim Algerian community. I recall the desperate efforts of the French authorities to set Algerian Muslim against Algerian Muslim which led to half a million dead souls.

...

We are entering a dark and sinister period of Iraqi history. But an occupation authority which should regard civil war as the last prospect it ever wants to contemplate, keeps shouting "civil war" in our ears and I worry about that. Especially when the bombs make it real.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5805.htm

and who gets the water? The oil is in the north and the south but most of the water is in the middle.

Resource wise spliting Iraq up would cause some serious problems.

The real solution is to get the US to hand over control to the UN and/or NATO and then let the Iraqis figure out what the hell they want to do about the mess we've left them in.

2nd, This belongs in the Mid-East Forum.

3rd, Bad Idea
Splitting Iraq into 3 parts is just what the neocons want. The Iraqi's did not, just our very own pnac'ers. How in God's name did we ever let this happen, especially in our name, the US, "Blessed by God".

Why does this belong in a separate thread?

Why is it a bad idea? Do you recall the former Communist countries in Eastern Europe? Name them now.

The Shi'ites have over 60% of the population. In a democracy, they'll have enough votes to control the whole country including the Sunni and Kurdish areas. Why would they want to allow those sections to split off and take the resources with them? For instance, why should they allow the Kurds, the smallest group of the three, to take away a disproportionate share of the oil? Or have control of the upper Euphrates? They would be crazy to allow that--they want the whole enchilada.

They also have the problem that the Turks would most likely invade the Kurdish region as soon as it got sovereignty. The Turks don't want the Iraqi Kurds to form a union with the Turkish Kurds--and they would try, you can count on it. Then, the Sunni's and Shi'ites would have to decide whether to allow the Turks to take the oil resources or to try to drive them out.

This is precisely why Bush* and the neoconmen screwed up big time. They opened a can of worms that they'll never be able to restore peacefully. Civil war is the probable outcome when the Shi'ites flex their muscles.