Will Iraq be the Next Syria?

The news coverage given by the mainstream media about the growing violence between the different factions in Iraq has been very slanted in order to shield the Shiite Muslims from responsibility for mass violence while heaping all of the blame upon the Sunni Muslims and especially al-Qaeda terrorists. The only groups being covered fairly are the Kurds who are, as much as they are able, living their lives independent from any governance from Baghdad while exercising as much autonomy as they possibly are able. During the past week there was reported in some of the international media of the Shiite commanders in the military ordering their troops to disperse unarmed groups of Sunni protesters using live fire from the main machinegun of Abrams M1A1 heavy battle tanks. Also not given much coverage at the time was after United States President Obama allowed the Shiite leadership of the Iraqi government to order the segregation of the United States military forces to an isolated base out in the middle of the dessert and restrict any United States military movements or maneuvers under restrictions allowing only those actions approved by the Iraqi Shiite dominated government that charges were drawn up for treason against the Sunni Vice-President of Iraq. Following soon behind this was the purge of most of the Sunni and Kurdish representatives within the government, especially any who held positions of consequence. The United States backed candidate to lead Iraq, President Nuri al-Maliki, has taken complete and unchallengeable control over the reins of power and now rules as the Shiite version of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

 

The most evident difference between al-Maliki and Iraq under Saddam Hussein is that under Saddam the Christians were among those who were protected along with the favored Muslims who were the Sunnis while they are the Shiites under al-Maliki. Surprisingly, in many ways al-Maliki is just as vicious and strident in his hatreds as Saddam ever was. The main consequence of this along with numerous other positions supported by President Obama is that the Sunni Muslims, who are over seventy percent of all followers of Islam, will never again trust the United States to stand behind their promises and protect those whom they promised security when their assistance was necessitated by the tactical situation. The Sunni were the Iraqis who assisted the surge troops brought into the Sunni Triangle in order to take on al-Qaeda in Iraq on their home ground and drove them from Iraq enabling the establishment of the Iraqi’s first honestly and freely elected government. This brought al-Maliki to power with the blessings of the United States under both President George W. Bush and then under President Barack Obama.

 

What was even more troubling was the fact that as time passed it became unavoidably evident that al-Maliki was really a puppet willing to do the bidding and give his loyalty to Iran. One might have expected his showing his allegiance to Iran would have made al-Maliki a nonstarter for any position supported by the United States considering the efforts by the United States and their allies to prevent the Iranian nuclear program from reaching its goals. Despite this, al-Maliki has consistently moved closer and closer to Iran to the point that he has blessed with protection the Iranian transfers of supplies across Iraq in order to bolster the dictator Bashir Assad in his fight against the rebel forces in Syria. This travesty and complete waste of all the efforts which were committed in the removal of Saddam Hussein simply to allow al-Maliki to make Iraq into a subsidiary nation under Iranian control is an insult to the brave Americans who fought and even died to free Iraq from one oppressor only to place them under a new and different oppressor. This also completed the Iranian dream of a Shiite crescent reaching from the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea along the path starting in Iran and passing through Iraq and Syria and terminating in Lebanon which is controlled through Hezballah. The two weakest links in this chain are Syria and Iran as both have sizeable non-Shiite populations. What we have witnessed in Syria where Christians are being targeted by all sides while there is a fight between Bashir Assad as the pro-Iranian influence, against two rebel forces one of which is pure Sunni Islamists represented by the al-Nusra Front, and the Muslim Brotherhood represented by the Free Syrian Army. What is often left out is that even should Bashir Assad fall it would not automatically mean the end of the Iranian influence as Iran has also built a semi-rebel force consisting of Basenji Militia, IRGC and Hezballah who would continue to be content to control as much area as they were able with a concentration on connecting Damascus and its international airport with the coastal Alawite and Shiite areas of Syria.

 

Meanwhile, in Iraq the Sunni are likely to revolt and to form around al-Qaeda on one side and possibly with Saudi Arabia Wahhabi influence as another front similar to the Muslim Brotherhood rebel forces in Syria and the latter will attempt to forge an alliance with the Kurdish forces in the north of Iraq. The Kurds would be well served to stay out of such a revolt and instead declare themselves a state using the Palestinian Authority as their precedent for establishing Kurdistan in an area which minimally includes the northern forty percent of Iraq and pull as many of Kurdish ancestry from within eastern Turkey and northern Iran to solidify their new country in the north of a fractured Iraq. What is actually the most ironic, sarcastic and completely insane quality is what likely lies just over the horizon for Iraq, the distinct possibility that Iraq will end up splitting into three states, Shiite Iraq, Sunni Iraq (also could be called Southern Iraq and Northern Iraq), and Kurdistan, just as Joe Biden had suggested it should have been divided up to start with. Who knew that Biden was not just somewhat strange and spoke insanities from time to time, but could actually be prophetic. Wait a minute, let’s not get carried away just because old Joe finally got one right, after all, a stopped clock is correct twice a day.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

How North Korea with Nukes Defines Iran with Nukes

A good number of world leaders are currently sweating nervously while hanging on every threat that the new North Korean Dear Leader Kim Jong-Un utters with their nerves fraying even more each time the satellites or other intelligence sources report any activities taking place anywhere near missile sites or nuclear instillations. Even China, the one who usually is called upon to calm situations emanating from North Korea, has placed additional troops on their border with North Korea and appears to be just as concerned as anybody else. Russia has made statements which could be seen as indicating that they are also in the dark as to what this new, young and untested North Korean leader is likely to do. The concerns are spread throughout the whole gambit of possibilities. Will he launch a middle-range missile or two or many more? Will he launch the reported untested long-range missile? Will the missiles be armed with active warheads? Would he honestly choose to place a nuclear weapon atop one of the missiles and if so where the nuclear warhead would be aimed? Everything is very much unknown largely due to no clear intelligence on North Korea and absolutely no history or even inklings of information about the new leader of North Korea. The entire world is in the dark forced to take guesses and attempt to be ready for any and every possibility. And as unclear everything is concerning this confrontation that has thus far been simply words and false moves without any actual belligerent acts, the world does have the one calming hope that all of this will result in simply meeting some demands for easing sanctions and some other mostly political compromises and food aid or other trade items as this has been the scenario in the past when his predecessors, his father and grandfather, had taken similar actions of saber rattling and boisterous threats. The level of trepidation which seems to have gripped our leaders where they have taken precautionary measures but at the same time are tip-toeing so carefully around the problem refusing to stand up against the threats coming from North Korea as if they are quiet enough things will calm down on their own. Such a timid approach only emboldens Kim Jong-Un and allows him to appear far more powerful than he actually is which is exactly what he desires. Where part of this strutting and bellowing out threats is done for intimidation and effect in order to have his demands met once they are stated, the other part is for propaganda on the home front where Kim Jong-Un will have reports for the foreseeable future regaling how the world was hanging on his every word and willing to grant him whatever he demanded and their sacrifices have not been in vain as North Korea is so powerful they can virtually stop the world from spinning. Maybe things would end quicker and Kim Jong-Un could be denied the endless ranting under the spotlight if he was confronted and somebody demanded him to simply state what this was all about and after he makes some demands instruct Kim Jong-Un that he will accept exactly what the rest of the world is willing to give him until he compromises and allows some freedoms and begins to serve his people instead of his ego. But the world does not seem to work like that which is why people like Kim Jong-Un and his fathers before him can get away with such antics.

Now look down the road about three or four years, or maybe by the end of this year depending on which report is correct on the Iranian nuclear weapons program and imagine how the world will react to the Iranian President, whomever wins the election this June to replace Ahmadinejad, along with whatever supporting role the Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei decides to play making demands of the world. Imagine, if you can, Iran and the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) along with their terrorist branches the world over, like Hezballah, threatening to detonate nuclear devices in multiple capital cities around the globe if their demands are not met. How would the world react if Iran decided to annex Iraq claiming they were simply reforming their rightful lands as the inheritors of the lands that belonged to Persia? They could then annex Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan all with the same claim. At what point would the world leaders decide it was too much and take a hard stand? Would it take having them attack a NATO country such as Turkey? Would the Europeans even flinch if they attacked Greece or would the Europeans see that as good a way as any to rid themselves of a problem? What if Iraq, Syria and Lebanon simply announced that they desired to form a confederation under Iranian rule with their retaining some amount of autonomy but falling under the protection of the Iranian nuclear umbrella? If the world is apoplectically paralyzed by North Korea when they presumably do not possess ballistic missiles capable of striking anywhere on the globe, what would be the reaction to Iran who by then will almost certainly possess such missiles? Would the United States go to war over Israel or would Israel become literally the Czechoslovakia of World War III? How about over Kuwait or Saudi Arabia? Would the world rise up to protect any of the Sunni Islamic countries if they began to fall under Shiite Iranian hegemony? After Iran crept across North Africa, would we then rise if they laid claim to Andalusia which is what the Islamic powers called Spain when they held much of it until 1492 when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella marshaled the Spanish people and threw off the Islamic rulers. What if there were to be a modern battle of Tours in southern France. Iran is not a poor and economically desperate nation despite the effects that the sanctions have had on them. The Iranians are still managing to trade some of their oil and other goods and as the Western nations fall deeper into their own economic troubles we might very well see a resurgent Iran with many Asian and other nations discarding the sanctions and resuming trade with what would appear to be an Iran with a brighter future than the debt ridden Western nations. We need to remember that North Korea has a controlling power on its northern border and China would not allow the situation over North Korea threaten to bring a nuclear exchange to her southeastern border. Russia also would have something to say about such a possibility. North Korea also is far smaller and does not possess the natural resources that Iran does. Iran with nuclear weapons is a completely different and extremely dangerous threat which really cannot be compared to North Korea. If the nations of the world are unable to squelch the protestations and threats of Kim Jong-Un out of North Korea, then we will be in even worse position should Iran start to make similar noises backed by nuclear weapons. That is something to consider but not too close to bedtime if one wishes to sleep free of nightmares.

Beyond the Cusp

Jordan is Next to Fall, Will Saudi Arabia Follow?

Pressures have been slowly building quietly and just below the sight of most Western observers which aim to topple Jordan’s monarchy of King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein. These pressures are being exerted by two competing forces, the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran through assistance by al-Qaeda. Contrary to what has served as a basic understanding in much of the West, al-Qaeda is allied with Iran in the power struggles for dominance in the Muslim World, something that initially makes little sense for those who placed al-Qaeda firmly in the Sunni camp. Slowly but ever so surely the base of al-Qaeda has drifted from its Sunni origins into an orbit with Iran and a balance in membership between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. This is making for strange possibilities which would have originally been unthinkable and for many purists is still beyond imagination. The current challenges for dominance in the Muslim World is being played out between the two main forces, Iran with al-Qaeda against the Muslim Brotherhood, in two major theaters, Syria-Lebanon and on a quieter but just as serious confrontation in Jordan. So, what are the likely results and what will follow in the future?

Syria has been front and center in the coverage of the Middle East with its violent clash which is destroying the entire fabric of society sending thousands fleeing over the borders or being murdered in the streets. Often civilians who are not among the combatants often become the targets of both sides as the civil war spreads through every corner of the country. The real problem is trying to explain the sides of this conflict as it is more than simply the rebel anti-Assad forces against the Syrian army which has remained loyal to President Assad. There are also the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) and Hezballah also fighting and supporting Bashir Assad while the rebel forces are actually several groups who, even should Assad fall, would soon be at each other’s throats conflicting over who would take over in a new government. Some of the Rebel forces are backed by the Muslim Brotherhood while others by al-Qaeda with still others belonging to other interests be they Kurdish, Christian or even aligned with Turkey.

The real question will come down to what will Iran do should Bashir Assad be killed or effectively overturned from office? Will Iran send divisions of regular army with supporting armor and air power or will Iran simply accept the loss of both Syria and Lebanon and their over-ground link with the Mediterranean. Iran has made huge financial and logistical investments in Lebanon as well as in Syria and should Iran lose their surrogate, Assad, in Syria they will also lose their supply line to support Hezballah which controls Lebanon as an Iranian proxy. Already interests in Lebanon which oppose Iranian and Syrian influence are threatening Hezballah leader Hassan Nasrallah over his using weapons and arms supplied Hezballah against the Syrian people despite his original claims that they were to be solely used against the Zionist Entity, Israel. Iran currently enjoys an unhindered path through to the Mediterranean through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Iran is known to be using transit across Iraq to start to impose their will on Jordan. This has come about as the Bedouins have been steadily radicalized and their youth are no longer supporting King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein and his rule in Jordan. This poses an additional threat on Israel originating from Iran and is a result of the United States being unable to negotiate an agreement with the leadership of Iraq that would have allowed for continued American presence and prevented Iraq from entering into the Iranian orbit. This was facilitated by the appearance of a weakened United States no longer willing to lead in the Middle East. One thing which is becoming evident is that either through Iran and their surrogates or by the hand of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Jordanian monarchy is being undermined and is losing its authority and influence. It appears that the fall of Jordan to the more radical forces of Islam has already been written into the near future. That begs the question of what comes next.

The future will depend to a large extent on who will gain the upper hand in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. It will also depend on in which direction the Muslim Brotherhood and through them, Egypt, take in making alliances in the near future. Currently the main forces are the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Iran with their influences in Iraq and gaining influence in Afghanistan. The wildcards are Turkey and the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia. Turkey will eventually need to ally with either Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood and give up on their aspirations to return to their place as the leadership of the Caliphate as they were during Ottoman rule. The one thing that should be feared beyond all else would be a pragmatic alliance which joined together the forces of Shiite Iran and Sunni Muslim Brotherhood. This may become an alliance of convenience as both find themselves in competition with the Saudi Wahhabis for preeminence in the Muslim world. If Iran should manage to retain their grip over Syria and Lebanon along with their new found influence over Iraq, then if they add Jordan to their sphere the Muslim Brotherhood may have little choice but to join forces with the apparently rising Shiite Iran and put the Sunni Shiite differences aside. This would not be the first time this divide has been overrode in the interest of Islam and would lead to a force that would be difficult to contain should they also become nuclear armed. Should Iran become the obvious preeminent power of the Muslim world, then the countries of the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) would be facing an unavoidable threat from said force. Bahrain and Oman would likely be the initial targets, especially the islands claimed by them and also by Iran in the Gulf, be it called Arabian or Persian which the winner will decide, and particularly those in the Straits of Hormuz. Once the smaller nations have been neutered and footholds be made by Iran one can expect that Iran would then begin to pressure Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The Iranians do not need to necessarily conquer all of Saudi Arabia to gain their desired goals; they only need take the predominantly Shiite northwest of Saudi Arabia which includes the vast oil fields. The Iran can simply wait for Saudi Arabia to fall as their financial goose that lays the golden oil eggs in Iranian hands. In time Iran would then gain the real gem held by Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina.

As for which result would be preferable for the Western nations of Europe, the United States and the rest, it is more of a pick your poison than a choice between a positive and a negative result. Neither Iran nor the Muslim Brotherhood is amiable to Western interests. Both see themselves as the eventual rulers of all of humanity and both are incompatible with the freedoms and liberties that the Judeo-Christian world has become accustomed to enjoying. This has already been made evident by the riots over what in the West is viewed as a guarantee under the ideals of free speech. As long as Islam insists on the validity of their notion that the world will be rendered under their rule and that this is inevitable and it is the responsibility of every Muslim to work toward this goal, there is likely to be conflict existing in numerous places where Islam and the rest of the world border each other. Fortunately, there are some within Islam who have begun what they see as a necessary reevaluation of the tenets of Islam which call for the use of force and rejection of all who are not Muslim. The struggle for the heart of Islam between those who desire an Islam which is able to coexist with the rest of the world and those who insist that Islam is the sole religion of truth and all else is a blaspheme is the struggle which should be encouraged in favor of the former over the latter. The struggle between Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood is a disagreement without a difference as far as those outside of Islam are concerned. That is the truth that the powers in the West need to learn and understand. It unfortunately seems thus far to be beyond the capacity or understanding in much of the Western world’s leadership.

Beyond the Cusp