Intelligence Chief: Iraq And Syria May Not Survive As States

[Purveyor]

Source: ASSOCIATED PRESS

KEN DILANIAN, The Associated Press
Published: September 10, 2015, 6:52 pm

WASHINGTON (AP) — Iraq and Syria may have been permanently torn asunder by war and sectarian tensions, the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency said Thursday in a frank assessment that is at odds with Obama administration policy.

“I’m having a tough time seeing it come back together,” Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart told an industry conference, speaking of Iraq and Syria, both of which have seen large chunks territory seized by the Islamic State.

On Iraq, Stewart said he is “wrestling with the idea that the Kurds will come back to a central government of Iraq,” suggesting he believed it was unlikely.

On Syria, he added: “I can see a time in the future where Syria is fractured into two or three parts.”
That is not the U.S. goal, he said, but it’s looking increasingly likely.

Read more: http://wlns.com/ap/intelligence-chief-iraq-and-syria-may-not-survive-as-states-2/

[Skittles]

1. there is Dubya's legacy

[Raster]

2. Thank you cheney*/bush*!

Let freedom reign!

[former9thward]

3. It is the legacy of Britain and France.

Those two countries carved up the remnants of the Ottoman Empire after WW I into colonies. They created "nations" artificially for their own purposes ignoring culture, religious factions and tribal issues. They own it.

[WestSeattle2]

4. So many have forgotten that history. The cluster we're

dealing with today, did indeed originate 100 years ago. Scheming and manipulation by multiple US administrations have contributed greatly to the current unrest to be sure.

[Igel]

7. There's no good solution.

It's the legacy not just of Westerners, but of the Ottomans.

In many cases they encouraged emigration that fostered more mixing of heterogeneous groups, kept their empire a patchwork of non-empowered ethnicities, and if push came to shove both pushed and shoved recalcitrant groups into different areas (for example, Circassian forced resettlement).

It worked well in SE Europe, playing off a patchwork of ethnic minorities against each other, a situation that resulted not just in a much resented converted Muslim population (since Muslims had special rights not enjoyed by non-Muslims), but led to the Balkan crisis of the '90s.

Mixed non-assimilating heterogeneous groups get along under two conditions, broadly speaking: When everybody's happy and prosperous and when all groups are equally oppressed. If there's a disparity, if there's a grasping after power or societal benefits, then it's every group for itself. It's only a matter of degree whether that's corruption or munitions.

[PufPuf23]

8. The Peace to End All Peace is a great read.

http://www.amazon.com/Peace-End-All-Ottoman-Creation/dp/0805068848/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441938271&sr=1-2&keywords=the+peace+to+end+all+peace

"The critically acclaimed New York Times bestselling account of how the modern Middle East came into being after World War I, and why it is in upheaval today

In our time the Middle East has proven a battleground of rival religions, ideologies, nationalisms, and dynasties. All of these conflicts, including the hostilities between Arabs and Israelis that have flared yet again, come down, in a sense, to the extent to which the Middle East will continue to live with its political inheritance: the arrangements, unities, and divisions imposed upon the region by the Allies after the First World War.

In A Peace to End All Peace, David Fromkin reveals how and why the Allies came to remake the geography and politics of the Middle East, drawing lines on an empty map that eventually became the new countries of Iraq, Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon. Focusing on the formative years of 1914 to 1922, when all-even an alliance between Arab nationalism and Zionism-seemed possible he raises questions about what might have been done differently, and answers questions about why things were done as they were. The current battle for a Palestinian homeland has its roots in these events of 85 years ago."

[6chars]

15. NYT RW apologist blames Dubya's successor

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/opinion/roger-cohen-obamas-syrian-nightmare.html

[Skittles]

16. Obama should have been screaming from the rooftops about the mess Dubya left behind

instead, he told us we all needed to "look forward"

no one has been held accountable

it all completely SUCKS

[Martin Eden]

5. Most nation-states in the Middle east were artificial constructs of Colonialism

The region was never allowed to develop on its own, always being repressed by foreign occupiers or home grown strongmen emerging from the dysfunctional states the imperial powers left in their wake.

Until Americans disabuse themselves of the notion that military solutions will do anything besides make the situation worse, the situation will get worse.

[eppur_se_muova]

11. Beat me to it.

France and Britain split up the territory captured from the collapsing Ottoman Empire and drew the borders to suit their own interests, including what ground their troops were holding at the moment and which local leaders were allied with them.

Quick read on the history: http://www.mepc.org/journal/middle-east-policy-archives/troubles-syria-spawned-french-divide-and-rule?print

Longer read: http://www.powells.com/biblio/9780805068849 reviewed at https://www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/06/specials/fromkin-peace.html (Origin of the title: Field-Marshal Earl Wavell said despondently of the Paris Peace Conference, "After the 'war to end war', they seem to have been in Paris at making the 'Peace to end Peace'".)

[6chars]

19. Where does the Ottoman empire fit in this history?

[Martin Eden]

20. It was the imperial power that preceded European colonialism

Fits into the "never allowed to develop on their own" part of what I wrote.

[SCVDem]

6. USA! USA! USA!

Does anyone really wonder why we are hated?

The Middle East may have always been a clusterfuck, but it took America to git er done!

Listen to the GOP candidates and you would never know our intervention really messed it up.

They are ready to repeat the past. Dumb shits!

[starroute]

9. Exactly what the Israelis have wanted all along

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_the_Realm

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the "Clean Break" report) is a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel.[1] The report explained a new approach to solving Israel's security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on "Western values." It has since been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and the containment of Syria by engaging in proxy warfare and highlighting its possession of "weapons of mass destruction". . . .

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions." . . .

In 2006, Sidney Blumenthal noted the paper's relevance to potential Israeli bombing of Syria and Iran, writing that "In order to try to understand the neoconservative road map, senior national security professionals have begun circulating among themselves" the Clean Break "neocon manifesto."[12] Soon after "Taki" of The American Conservative wrote that:

"recently, Netanyahu suggested that President Bush had assured him Iran will be prevented from going nuclear. I take him at his word. Netanyahu seems to be the main mover in America’s official adoption of the 1996 white paper A Clean Break, authored by him and American fellow neocons, which aimed to aggressively remake the strategic environments of Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. As they say in boxing circles, three down, two to go."

[6chars]

13. Are you saying Israel caused this?

interesting.

[Behind the Aegis]

14. It had to happen.

Like the cleaning of a house, it never ends.

[starroute]

21. "Caused" is a slippery word

Almost 20 years ago, a bunch of American Neocons laid out an agenda for Binyamin Netanyahu that involved systematically weakening and even dismembering Syria, Iraq, and Iran. He didn't follow it at the time, but it's gradually been put into action over the years.

Right now, Iran is the last one of the targets left intact -- and Netanyahu's government and its supporters are doing their best to keep Iran in the crosshairs.

Does that mean Israel "caused" the whole process of dismembering Shi'ite power in the Middle East? Was it an alliance of US Neocons and the military-industrial complex? Has Turkey also played a role?

These are tricky questions -- but the principle of cui bono suggests that Israel has had more to gain from the current mess all around its borders than anyone else.

[6chars]

22. Do you think these developments have been good for Israel?

[starroute]

23. I'm the wrong person to ask that

Since I don't think any developments since 1967 have been good for Israel.

But then, I remember the days when Israeli politicians were old-fashioned socialists who were known for wearing no ties and their shirts open at the neck.

However, I would guess that Netanyahu and pals believe everything is going according to plan.

[6chars]

24. geopolitically, it's not clear

there isn't a strong syria, but there is isis, there isn't have a strong lebanon, but there is hezbollah, there isn't a strong iraq, but iran might be stronger than ever. maybe a case of be careful what you wish for.

[Nihil]

17. Thanks for that. (n/t)

[moondust]

10. Partitioning

of Iraq probably should have happened before the U.S. left. Biden seemed to suggest it in 2006 but he later denied it. Now ISIS controls territory, making it anybody's guess how partitioning would work now. ISIS might have never developed if the Sunnis had been given a partition of their own a few years ago.

Syria might have been saved if Assad had agreed 4 years ago to either taking his bejewelled wife and leaving for a life of luxury in Switzerland or staying and forming some kind of coalition/compromise government with his opposition and holding elections.

Maybe Jesus will show up and fix everything that humans have hopelessly mangled.

[DCBob]

26. I agree.

I felt from the beginning partitioning was the answer. It seemed a more natural stable way to deal with the complexities of Iraq.

[roamer65]

12. This is precisely the reason we stopped at the Kuwaiti border in 1991.

Toppling Saddam equalled the death of Sykes-Picot. Welcome to the next Great War.

[riderinthestorm]

18. no shit nt

[arely staircase]

27. It is obvious. The boundaries of all those Arabic and otherwise soutwest Asian places

were arbitrarily drawn by Europeans.