Break up Iraq?

home.cogeco.ca...

Speaking of Iraq as a single, integrated country is a form of lying. Its borders were drawn by grasping European diplomats almost a century ago, with no regard for the wishes - or rivalries - of the local populations.
Today, the Iraq we're trying to herd back together consists of three distinct nations caged under a single, bloodstained flag. Our problems are with only one of those nations, the Sunni Arab minority west and north of Baghdad.
Favored by the British, the Sunni Arabs took power at Iraq's formation and maintained it through massacre, torture and imprisonment. Saddam Hussein was the ultimate expression of Sunni Arab tyranny over Iraq's Kurds and Shi'ites.

The break-up of Iraq should proceed in two stages.
First, we should provisionally divide the country into a federation of three states, giving the Sunni Arabs one last chance to embrace reform.

* One state would encompass the Shi'ite region in the south, encompassing all of the southern oil fields.

* The second would be an expanded Kurdistan, including historically Kurdish Kirkuk and Mosul, as well as Iraq's northern oil fields.

* The third would be a rump Sunni Arab state sandwiched between the other two.

* Baghdad would become an autonomous district.

Stop worrying about Shi'ite extremism. If we mean what we say about democracy, the Shi'ites should be free to choose whomever they want as their leaders - even fundamentalists. Although the odds of theocratic rule emerging or enduring in southern Iraq are lower than the media imply, the Shi'ites, who long have been oppressed and persecuted, should be free to determine their own future.
Democracy means letting people make their own mistakes. We've made a few ourselves. The only thing upon which we should insist is strict supervision to ensure an honest vote.

I don�t know, but this makes sense to me. Separate the Sunnis, the Shi�ites and the Kurds and give them all the opportunity to create their own governments.

Thoughts?

There are only 2 "nations" : arabs and kurds
Shiism = Muslim sects that make up around 10 per cent of the Muslim world
Sunni = the form of Islam for the majority of Muslims

In Iraq, most of them are Mesopotamian Arabs.
And by the way, Turkey would never accept the creation of a Kurdish state!


[Edited on 13-4-2004 by harap.alb]

screw turkey!!! who cares what they want
Iraq should be divided and the U.S. can keep the part with the oil fields.

just kidding, i don't think dividing Iraq will be a solution, it will only create more unmangeable issues.

I reckon if you separate all these tribes it gonna be even worse than it is cos they will fight for land what if the Sunni's have a bigger area of land than the others?

Originally posted by harap.alb
And by the way, Turkey would never accept the creation of a Kurdish state!

Why not?

Originally posted by Mycroft

Originally posted by harap.alb
And by the way, Turkey would never accept the creation of a Kurdish state!

Why not?

because Turkey has a large kurdish population who has been wanting their own independent state, the border that turkey and iraq shares is the area in which most of the kurds live. If you make a kurdish state in iraq, the kurds in turkey will demand the same and tensions will increase there.

Originally posted by worldwatcher
because Turkey has a large kurdish population who has been wanting their own independent state, the border that turkey and iraq shares is the area in which most of the kurds live. If you make a kurdish state in iraq, the kurds in turkey will demand the same and tensions will increase there.

I can see a conflict if a hypothetical Iraqi Kurdish state wanted to expand into Turkish territory, so something about that would have to be worked out in advance, but I don't see how Turkish problems with its Kurdish minority inherently makes the idea of a state of Kurdistan unfeasible. If anything, having a place for oppressed Kurds to flee too might relieve pressure on Turkey and Syria.

It also made sense in Ghandi's time to seperate Inda and Pakistan; and look where they are today - at the brink of nuclear war almost every day. If peace is to be reached with them, it must be reached now, and if divided, situations can only get worse.

Originally posted by RedDragon
It also made sense in Ghandi's time to seperate Inda and Pakistan; and look where they are today - at the brink of nuclear war almost every day. If peace is to be reached with them, it must be reached now, and if divided, situations can only get worse.

India and Pakistan have unresolved territorial disputes over Kashmir, I fail to see any logical reason why dividing Iraq will inherently make things worse and not better. For example, it seems to have worked out well for the Czech and Slovak republics.

And so would have Turkey and a Kurdish state!

Obviously you don't remember how many problems with kurdish terrorists Turkey had!
They claim part of Turkey.
The situation is completely different from the old Czechoslovachia.

And anyway, the problem now is not that the kurds fight the sunnies or that the sunnies fight the shiites but that some of them fight the coalition!


[Edited on 13-4-2004 by harap.alb]

The Three State Solution to Iraq,

by Leslie H. Gelb, President, Council on Foreign Relations

www.cfr.org...

note: Gelb, who is Jewish, succeeded former CFR president Richard N. Haass who was also a Jew. Jew Abraham Lowenthal is VP of the CFR. More fodder for the Neo-con conspiracy.

Well, let me remind everyone that the Turks have already said that they might intervene with troops against the kurdish guerillas or a kurdish state in northern Iraq!

www.smh.com.au...

Here is another article on why dividing Iraq would have disastrous consequences:

www.aina.org...

[Edited on 13-4-2004 by harap.alb]