Iraq-Iran: The Just Solution

There's going to be a bloody civil war if America stays or increases troop levels. Guaranteed. Everyone knows this. If they leave right now there's going to a be a bloody civil war. Guaranteed. Everyone knows this. Those are the Iraqi facts.

Dividing Iraq into three states is insane: no oil sharing agreement can ever be reached, civil war is again inevitable. Not to mention that the Kurds are being played by both Israeli and American black-ops right now and we know what happens to intelligence assets in the end: they get screwed.

Increasing Iraqi police and military numbers is pointless: 65% of them are
going to be Shiite and that's where their allegiance ultimately lies. Again, civil war.

What would the Roman army have done 2000 years ago? They would have gone in with overwhelming force and immediately rebuilt the territory to Roman standards, the people would quickly have forgotten the old tyrant and fallen in line, because their quality of life would have improved. But of course, Rome was intelligent and powerful and this Assinine Administration are stupid and weak.

My solution:

1. Shiite (65% of population) region containing about 40% of Iraq's oil is annexed to Iran - it's going to be part of Iran eventually anyway under ANY of the scenarios now being considered. Baghdad goes to Iran.

2. Sunni (25% of population) get the area from the Saudi border to Tikrit and about 40% of the oil (that's their incentive). They get Tikrit.

3. Kurd's (10% of population) get the land and oil north of Tikrit (20%). In addition Iran turns over a small area of it's territory adjacent to the new Kurdistan for their own Kurd population should they want that.

(The exact borders would have to take into account geological surveys and fresh water issues, but that would be a relatively simple task.)

Both Sunnis and Kurds are well looked after under this scenario. Shias, who are giving up the most in this transaction need to be compensated in some other way. The rebuilding of Shia infrastructure, hospitals, schools and housing would be guaranteed by Iran and Iran would guarantee and secure the new borders.

For their efforts Iran gets the new land and oil (obviously), a security agreement with Israel and the US, and a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

The SC seat is the most important concession as it finally gives the Middle East and Muslims the representation they deserve in a political arena now dominated and controlled mainly by the west. Considering the importance of the ME in the global economy the current lack of representation is simply Criminal. They must be treated as equals.

Iran's membership in the SC would immediately address so many problems:
Muslims would finally feel they are part of the desicion making progress; Israel would be incentivized to come to an agreement re it's borders; Iran would be pressured to keep the peace in the region...and so many other obvious benefits.

It's a no-brainer, imo.

•  tips

  by VoiceFromTheOuterWorld on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:29:34 AM PDT

•  Nice diary VFTOW

  Some fresh ideas are always welcome.  

  I believe that nothing as well thought out as your approach will take place.

  by craigb on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:35:29 AM PDT

•  Whew.

  I mean, what can I say but Whew!

  It is incredible, isn't it, that Iran must be/may be/will be part of the Iraqi solution and, in so doing, might - just might - turn out to be the exact opposite to the US than BushCo would like to paint them.

  In fact, if left to its own devices, the Middle East might just craft its own solution to their problems.  We might not like the overall look of that solution - and would be well advised to keep our eyes peeled - but it would be a solution, wouldn't it.  

  More than you can say for BushCo.

  Whew......

  by ShaShaMae on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:39:23 AM PDT

•  What makes you think "justness" has anything to

  do with the ME?  Sorry for being so skeptical, but while there are incentives for people in Iraq and Iran, there aren't any for the imperial-minded in the US.

  And therein lies the rub.

  by Fasaha on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:39:31 AM PDT

•  What would the Roman army have done 2000 years ag

  Actually, they would have offed anyone who disagreed with them.  Ruthless.  We could have done that but it isn't acceptable.  

  Annexing the oil to Iran would cause total war with the Sunni's.  Interesting but sure to cause more deaths than current situation.

  by kursk on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:43:16 AM PDT

•  Wonderful, common sense approach

  Unfortunately, it leaves out Israel. They would not begin to go along with this unless every Muslim state double-dog guaranteed Israel's right to exist, and signed solid non-aggression treaties, and declined to produce nuclear weapons. There is no trust there, and there never will be.

  Even with all that, Israel probably won't want to give up their chance to use their American big brother to strong arm their way into economic and military dominance over the entire Middle East.

  Israel has larger dreams than just the Palestinian turf. America can get them there if they just take down Iran.

  That's the deal Cheney has in with Israel -- they start the next war by bombing Iran, and America finishes it for them. With Iran flattened, Israel is the top dog all the way to Pakistan, and Cheney gets to turn America into a full blown police state.

  This is called a win-win situation in the White House.

  by antifa on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:50:06 AM PDT

•  what do you call 600,000+ dead Iraqis?

  I'd say that's pretty ruthless. The Romans would at least have built aqueducts and sewers, and made the country secure.

  by VoiceFromTheOuterWorld on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:50:25 AM PDT

  •  sorry, this was reply to kursk, nt

    by VoiceFromTheOuterWorld on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:51:43 AM PDT

  •  After they slaughterd

    all opposition.  We can do the same.  I don't think we want to go there though.

    by kursk on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 10:27:37 AM PDT

    •  you appear to be fixated on this Roman thing

      it's not really even part of what i'm saying, dude.

      by VoiceFromTheOuterWorld on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 10:39:47 AM PDT

      •  I commented on a post regarding the Romans.

        I'm not "fixated". I can just follow a conversation without getting distracted.  You commented back to ME. Stay on target.

        by kursk on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 11:00:52 AM PDT

•  Realpolitik

  I think you're on the right track.  My thoughts are more cynical, and more framed toward a "realpolitikal" solution:

  Divide Iraq into Kurdistan, a Shi'ite state, and a Sunni state.  This will necessarily involve a large internal displacement of people to ensure well-defined, contiguous borders.

  Give the oil to the Kurds, at least the bulk of it, and pull US troops back to Kurdistan.  Yeah, Turkey will piss and moan, but we can give them incentives and in the end they don't have much to bargain with.  What are they going to do?  Invade?  With their hopes pinned on joining the EU and a huge US garrison in Kurdistan?  Probably not.

  Now here's where it gets ugly:  Let the Sunni and Shia settle their differences -- a 1,400-year-old grudge, mind you -- themselves.  And yes, if we can involve Iran constructively, that's great, too.  But our presence just exacerbates the situation.

  Good diary.

  by Jon Stafford on Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 08:57:03 AM PDT