The Sunnis 

The Sunnis

Juan Cole very judiciously explains that the U.S. is now fighting in Fallujah with the support of international law--the Allawi regime is recognized as the government of Iraq, and a series of Security Council resolutions now support the attempt to defeat those who are trying to prevent the establishment of a democracy--or even of a stable state.

He also says there is no real comparison, much less a moral equivalence, between what a specific Marine did in killing someone who had recently been an enemy combatant, and what the insurgents did in slaughtering a famous aid worker (Margaret Hassan).

Cole is still worried that U.S. actions have been rife with incompetence from the beginning. He worries about ongoing violations of international law by the U.S., and he worries that Mosul will actually be a bigger fight than Fallujah. But his words about Sunni insurgents ring out strongly:

But the basic idea of attacking the guerrillas holding up in that city is not in and of itself criminal or irresponsible. A significant proportion of the absolutely horrible car bombings that have killed hundreds and thousands of innocent Iraqis, especially Shiites, were planned and executed from Fallujah. There were serious and heavily armed forces in Fallujah planning out ways of killing hundreds to prevent elections from being held in January. These are mass murderers, serial murderers. If they were fighting only to defend Fallujah, that would be one thing; even the Marines would respect them for that. They aren't, or at least, a significant proportion of them aren't. They are killing civilians elsewhere in order to throw Iraq into chaos and avoid the enfranchisement of the Kurds and Shiites.


In other words, many Sunnis remember the glory days, when they were kind of a ruling class in Iraq, regardless of the exact government, despite being a minority of the population. A sizable number of Sunnis--obviously a number that continues to astonish the brain trust around Bush--is willing to commit extreme violence simply to prevent a new status quo from being born--a status quo in which Shiites would be recognized as a majority, and Kurds would have a definite constitutional role. Do the insurgents actually have any postiive alternative in mind? It's difficult to know. No well informed person seems to think they really have much to do with Al Qaeda, or Syria, or any outsider--again, to the apparent amazement of Washington.

Not that Fallujah is completely resolved but: next, Mosul. Matthew Yglesias summarizes, drawing on an article from a few months ago by Peter Galbraith. "You have an ethnically mixed city in which Sunnis Arabs are fighting against a combined Kurdish/American force. The distinction between 'government' and 'insurgent' is less relevant than the simple ethnic divide."

The bad news: there may be a bigger, tougher fight than Fallujah ahead for the U.S. The good news (I guess): the Sunnis (or the radical Sunnis) have once again isolated themselves as, really, enemies of ordinary Iraqis who want peace and prosperity. This should mean that in principle the enemy can be treated as an enemy.

Juan Cole, in the post linked to above, also says that while elections should go ahead as quickly as possible, Sunni areas of the country shouldn't be simply left out. If there is no law-abiding way of choosing Sunni representatives, some may have to be practically appointed to a new legislature.

I think this is in the same spirit as David Adesnick, who says a war against insurgents is only likely to succeed if it is a serious attempt to promote democracy. Propping up a more or less friendly dictator won't cut it. (via Kevin Drum).

We should all fervently hope that the U.S. keeps on promoting democracy in Iraq.

Return to Main Page

Comments

Comment Create

Sat Oct 15, 2005 11:44 pm MST by Lakers Tickets

Add Comment




Search This Site


Syndicate this blog site

Powered by BlogEasy


Free Blog Hosting