Is it Time to Break Iraq into 3 Nations?

[The Sushi Bandit]

Iraq was carved out of the Ottoman Empire by the French and British as agreed in the Sykes-Picot Agreement. On 11 November 1920 it became a League of Nations mandate under British control with the name "State of Iraq".

Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites


from:http://www.gungeralv.org/

[knowbody0]

1. let them vote

electorally represented, and give fair share of resources.

Anglos fuck everything up.

[demosincebirth]

2. thats the way it will probably end up,and with one Central government

[The Sushi Bandit]

3. Dissagree - 3 governments, not one

[redphish]

4. And you can bet that the Shia faction will become part of Iran.

[nickinSTL]

27. If the Shia join Iran...

would the Sunnis join...Syria? Or just be allied with them?

Of course, the Kurds will want Turkey to give over their Kurdish areas to their new Kurdistan...

Still a mess...

[Ravenseye]

34. definately

Turkey most definately would be against this solution. Anything giving the Kurds their own state would create instability in both Turkey and Iran. While I understand the Kurdish desire for a homeland, if they were to get what they want it'd open a whole new bag of worms.

As far as the Sunni Iraqi's joining Syria or Jordan, I doubt it would ever happen. Iraqi's have their own identity and multiple dialects of the Arabic language that are different from Syrians. There are more differences involved in the peoples than a simliar religion can unite. Food, culture, language, dress, self-identity. Iraq may be a construct, but that doesn't mean the people are even closely identical to the Arabs in another country.

[Ravenseye]

33. Doubtfull

The Shia Arabs don't exactly love the Persians just because they're Shia also. They might have friendly relations with them, but they're not going to become a part of Iran willingly.

[Warpy]

7. Could be, 3 regions with a lot of autonomy

but a weak central government, just enough that neither Turkey nor Iran would rush in to split it for them.

The last thing either Turkey or Iran want is a fully independent Kurdistan.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

5. anybody have a map of the original borders?

[mcscajun]

12. Iraq was cobbled together out of a section of the old Ottoman Empire

there are no "original borders", per se. Iraq was one result of the partitioning of the old Ottoman Empire (MAP) in the 1920s.

Iraq was not an ancient nation, but rather the product of European statesmen and diplomats dividing among themselves the ruins of the vast 500-year-old Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. At its peak, the Ottoman Empire included not only what is modern Turkey, but much of southeast Europe (Greece, the Balkans, Bulgaria, Rumania), almost all of the Middle East, and coastal North Africa as well.

http://www.bu.edu/alumni/bostonia/2003/summer/iraq/index.html

Here's a sentence with a familiar ring to it:

When the British entered Baghdad in 1917, they insisted -- in startlingly twenty-first-century language -- that they were doing so not “as conquerors or enemies,” General Stanley Maude proclaimed, “but as liberators.”

(snip)

So three Ottoman provinces become Iraq. There was no such thing as an Iraqi people. Who lived there?
Fromkin: Along with the Kurds, there was a small Christian community in Mosul, including many refugees from Turkey. Basra in the south was populated by Shi’a Muslims. And Baghdad was chiefly Sunni Muslim, although the city of Baghdad itself was largely Jewish, which the British seem not to have been aware of.

http://www.bu.edu/alumni/bostonia/2003/summer/iraq/index.html

[Viva_La_Revolution]

14. yep, I found this timeline....

http://www.regiments.org/nations/mideast/iraq.htm

but it's difficult without a period map to really make sense of it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. One thing's clear. It can't be us who tells them to do it

Some folks miss the irony of having Americans sitting back here in the Staets planning how the next generation Iraq is going to or should look. They have to reach that conclusion for themselves, because though those lines look simple on a map, even after all the refugee relocations already caused by sectarian fighting, millions more would probably have to relocate if that type seperation happens. And it won't work if those mini states are just used as staging areas for atttacks across new borders in a continuing power struggle.

We certainly shouldn't stand in the way of it though, and it may be how Iraqis end up sorting this mess out. I will note that a hell of a lot of Sunni's don't like Hussein either, they just fear being a minority in a Shiite dominated State.

[AIJ Alom]

8. Looks more like the status quo, with the no-fly zones of the 1990's

just shifted by 45 degrees. In essence, Iraq has been 3 nations since Desert Storm and the creation of UN no-fly zones. So with this current debacle in Iraq, complete with needless death and civil war we will accomplish the status quo + Al Qaeda terrorists who will no doubt remain to muck the things up long after we leave, if we ever leave.

[pinto]

9. I've heard it mentioned more and more recently. Partition just

has such a bad history, it seems a poor choice, among equally bad choices.


India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Ireland.
Germany.

I'd support partition, if Iraqi factions choose it - up front and openly - as a viable option, decide on the partition lines and what relationships, if any, three regional states would maintain. A buy in from neighboring Arab states, as well as Iran and Turkey, would be a huge benefit.

I don't really think this is our call after all that's happened. We need to realistically pull back. If this Administration won't do it militarily, at least stop the sham of a central government that has no real control outside the American OZ - the Green Zone, and help muster some real discussion for the region about what happens next.

[mcscajun]

13. As others have said, it's not our call, but it doesn't have to be all

bad.

Yugoslavia didn't break up quietly (Kosovo, Milosevic), but it has resolved into independent entities after considerable strife, but each through their own democratic referendum to choose independence.

[pinto]

15. You have a point.

[pork medley]

18. you're right! there IS a bright side to ethnic cleansing!

[mcscajun]

25. Now get Real! You KNOW that's NOT what I meant.

Ugh.

[nickinSTL]

28. and the Soviet Union broke up fairly quietly

with a few exceptions, like Chechnya.

[mcscajun]

29. "Fairly quietly" is not anything I said.

I said "didn't break up quietly", which has a whole other meaning.

I don't dismiss the problems of either the former Soviet Union or the former Yugoslavia at all.

[The Sushi Bandit]

36. I think we should offer it

at least

[Igel]

10. I've seen a few such maps.

I'm always surprised that there's the unspoken assumption that any Arab population in an area means it must be considered Sunni Arab.

[razors edge]

11. how does the oil distribution overlay look?

[zulchzulu]

22. Sunnis would hardly have any oil... the maps need oil reserves in key

You would immediately see why the Sunnis would not like it. The Kurds and the Shiites would have nearly all the oil.

[catzies]

23. Google image search reveals this:

[sendero]

16. I think it's the only..

... proposed solution that has a snowball's chance of working.

[The Sushi Bandit]

17. thanks!

[ButterflyBlood]

19. The thing is, there would be a serious problem with each new state:

The Sunni areas don't have any oil. It'd be an economic disaster.

The Shiite country would almost certainly end up becoming a puppet state of Iran.

The Kurdish state would almost inevitebly go to war with Turkey, and possibly Iran and Syria as well.

I think the best solution is something similar to the Dayton Agreement that partioned Bosnia, yet still kept it a unified country legally: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subdivisions_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina

[Erika]

20. There is NO such think as an Iraqi, not at all

These are tribes with no loyalty to other tribes. Saddam was able to control most of them but never controlled Northern Iraq.

[Ravenseye]

35. I'll have to tell that to my relatives

The hundreds of them (shia and sunni) who consider themselves Iraqi and don't belong to any tribe.

There IS such a thing as an Iraqi. There are plenty of Iraqi's who don't belong to a tribe.

[zulchzulu]

21. The Sunnis would revolt immediately due to having no oil

Add that the bigger cities in Iraq have both Shiites and Sunni neighborhoods... not likely that there wouldn't be violence there either.

[zulchzulu]

24. The Iraq map with overlay of oil refineries, deposits and pipelines

I was curious, so I grabbed from another graphic and superimposed to the other graphic. The Kurds and the Shiites would have most of the oil and the coasts, hence making this plan really not working for the Sunnis.

[leesa]

26. It's not our decision. Period.

[LynneSin]

30. It's not our decision but that's what I see could happen

These people do not want to share the same government and were forced under the same roof. The only problem I see with the 3 governments is the fact that everyone wants a share of those oil fields - can they also be divided up fairly?

[MadHound]

31. No, it is time we got the hell out of there and let the Iraqi people

Determine their own future. Is this going to mean violent, bloody, civil war? Yes, it's already going on, and it will continue to rage no matter what we do. Dividing the country will simply exacerbate the situation. What the US needs to do is march the troops onto the carriers, pack up the bases, and head home. And along the war, pay massive reparations for destroy their country, and apologize profusely to eacha and every Iraqi.

We have meddled to much in others' country and society. It is past time that we stopped doing so.

[MrCoffee]

32. why not? it worked really really well for India and Pakistan...n/t

[warrens]

37. If you want 50 years of non-stop war, sure

Only one of those "countries" would have significant oil reserves. And no matter what the deal is, it will be violated so the Shia can keep control of all or most of the oil. There's no way this can work.

[AtomicKitten]

38. It's time to break this administration up into three pieces ...

all destined for the dustbin of history.

[conscious evolution]

39. Any idea of James Baker is a bad idea.