I was writing a comment, and it got so long I decided to make it a diary. It's entirely commentary and analysis.
Michael Ware was on Anderson Cooper last night for an interview. I saw Cooper, who has been a mouthpiece for support of this war, sit there astounded as Ware told him of realities that none of the MSM talking heads are even willing to acknowledge. Ware is a journalist who has FIRST HAND information and intelligence on the Iraq War, from the beginning until today, and he has risked his life to tell his story.
Ware said that the Iraq War isn't ONE war, it's FOUR WARS happening simultaneously in the same place.
First there is the war that we are most familiar with. It's the war to occupy Iraq into the far future, creating and imposing by force a colonial client state in Iraq. That's the war Bush started, and it's the war Bush is determined to "win."
Opposing American forces are the Iraqi insurgents, overwhelmingly Sunnis. They fight the occupation because they have a foreign army occupying their country and trying to take control of their land, their resources, their economy, their culture and their day-to-day lives. The insurgency is not primarily based on sectarian interests. The United States has sided with an Iraqi government controlled by a rival sect, and that has added a sectarian element to the insurgency, which has manifested in the form of a SECOND WAR.
The Second War that Ware related, is a war for control of the insurgency, and it is being waged by foreign jihadist fighters who were recruited, organized and trained by Zarkawi. Zarkawi was not originally affiliated with al-queda. He was originally affiliated with an Islamic jihad group that was dedicated to overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Zarkawi was left to operate freely because his presence in American-protected Kurdistan, before the war, was considered evidence that Hussein tolerated terrorists to operate out of Iraq! After the fall of Saddam, Zarkawi founded an al-queda-inspired cult and used it to organize elements of the insurgency.
This "second war" is a war to control the insurgency, and Zarkawi's group IS NOT stronger than the forces of the Sunni insurgency, but they are a threat to it because they have used sectarian violence to incite reprisals against Sunnis from the Shia militias.
This is the THIRD WAR that Ware describes, a civil war between Sunnis and Shia that has been sparked by al-queda's efforts to take over the Sunni insurgency. The Sunni insurgency has been obliged to fight Shia militia both affiliated with the Iraq government, and unaffiliated with it, in addition to fighting American forces. Zarkawi's fighters depend on radicalizing insurgents with al-queda propaganda and with tribal and sectarian violence.
The THIRD War is a civil war between Shia and Sunni for control of Iraq. American forces have lost the ability to identify the enemy in the FIRST WAR, because of this Third war. Shia militia will not stop short of killing Americans in order to further their interests in the Third war.
Because of this, the Iraqi Army and police force are not a reliable allies in the FIRST War, since many of them have tribal and sectarian ties to militias who are fighting the Third war. The government of Iraq has taken sides in this sectarian war, and has allied itself with leaders of Shia militias, many of whom have ties to the Iranian Revolution. And THAT has been the motive for the FOURTH WAR.
The FOURTH WAR is a conflict among the Shia militias. The government of Iraq tries to play a balancing act between Shia militias that have their base of power within Iraq, and those militias which have their base of power among ex-patriot Shia Iraqis who either live in Iran, or who have emigrated back to Iraq from Iran.
The invasion of Iraq was a dash to Bagdad that swept Baathist administrators, police and military forces out of power across Iraq. In the wake of this, Shia Iraqis who were either returned expatriots or domestic Iranian sympathizers, stepped in and took over local administration of the country, because the invading army did not have a plan of occupation.
It is the influence of these Shia sympathizers with the Iranian Revolution that has driven the foreign policy of the government of Iraq. It is the reason that the government of Iraq is pursuing formal diplomatic, military and economic cooperation with Iran. However, DOMESTIC Shia militias in Iraq view this development with alarm and as a threat to their authority. The recent Shia-on-Shia attacks as Iranian influence in Iraq grows is the beginning of this Fourth War.
These intersecting conflicts pose an IMPOSSIBLE military position for the occupying American Army. There is no "victory in Iraq." The First War will continue to inspire the Second War. The Second War will continue to inspire the Third War. The Third War makes the First War impossible to "win." The efforts to "win" the Third War by the Iraqi government, pursuing an alternative to the American occupation with an Iranian alliance, will continue to inspire the FOURTH WAR.
Ware says there IS NO GOOD OPTION in Iraq. I disagree. There is an option, but not one the Bush Administration is willing or competent to carry out. We should RETREAT. Not give up and admit defeat. I'm talking about a tactical retreat and redeployment. We could redeploy some troops to Kurdistan and Kuwait, to protect our interests in the region, and we could pivot most of the rest of our forces to deal a final blow to al-queda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
First, we need a diplomatic solution. We need to negotiate with the Kurds to host an American presence. In effect, we take sides in the battle for Iraq and decide to be the allies of the Kurds. We deploy enough troops to secure the Kurdish lands. We regulate and patrol the borders with Syria, Iran and Turkey. We create a long term plan for the development of Kurdistan as a model. We act as intermediaries to open diplomatic, economic and security cooperation in the Kurdish area.
We open diplomacy with Iran. We propose a security structure that includes a diplomatic effort among Syria, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and of course, Iraq. We ask other powers to form a consultative body to communicate with the Middle East Security Group. The powers I have in mind are Russia, EU, Israel, China, Egypt, Japan and South Africa. This group will advise the UN and the Middle Eastern Security Group.
The Kurdish negotiations will include guarantees of security for the Kurds, and even warfighting to establish their territorial claims within Iraq. In exchange, the Kurds will agree to remain an autonomous region within Iraq, and to respect the borders of Syria, Turkey, and Iran.
What about the rest of Iraq? We let them fight for it. We use the security structure to limit the involvement of Iran, Saudi Arabia and the others.
Doing this will end American involvement in the First War, and it will redirect the efforts of the insurgency toward the Iraqi goverment. It will undermine the influence of al-queda, because their actions will be considered a foreign interference in their affairs, just as much as the occupation was. We could even encourage that view.
The above provides a path to ending the first and second wars. The Third War is an internal Iraqi problem, and using the proposed Middle Eastern Security Group is the mechanism for limiting the involvement of Iran in that process and providing a path to ending the Fourth War.
The resolution of the Third War is the hardest of all. It is complicated by the other wars, and we can't do anything about the Third War in the present situation. Resolving the Third War, however, would become the main focus for all parties under the framework I propose.
Some commentary on the Bush Administration's efforts. Besides the vain and stubborn insistence on extending the occupation, the Bush Administration has a war plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons. Their plan is to discard diplomacy altogether and create MORE chaos by starting a FIFTH WAR with Iran.
Bush's war plan is insane, and it RELIES UPON a major terrorist attack on the United States to provide a cause for war. A major terrorist attack on the United States would, from the Bush Administration's perspective, provide a bloody shirt to wave to justify attacking Iran with nuclear weapons. They are counting on it to trump Congress. They are counting on it to fool the American people into believing that the nuclear attack is a response to an attack on the United States by Iran, REGARDLESS of who carried out the attack.
Just in case this strategy doesn't work and leads to massive unrest in the United States, they are prepared to put police state powers in place in the United States. Thye have mass detention centers. They have the power to use the National Guard as a parmilitary police force. They have abolished habeas corpus. They have the power to close the borders. They have immunized themselves from war crimes prosecution. They have databases on political opponents and access to personal records that could be used to manufacture evidence for public consumption. In other words, they are planning a SIXTH WAR on the American people.
Even if the above weren't true, the Bush Administration is incompetent. They couldn't accomplish the diplomatic and military strategies I proposed above. None of their policymakers even imagine what I have proposed.
Michael Ware couldn't imagine what I have just proposed either, but I was only able to imagine it myself from listening to his analysis, which I have heavily borrowed here.
One last note to clarify what I have said above. Iranian influence in Iraq stems from humanitarian assistance by Iran's government to Iraqi expatriot refugess fleeing the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. The sympathy for the Iranian Revolution among Iraqi Shia shouldn't be interpreted as sympathy for the domination of Iraq by the government of Iran. Rather, it is sympathy for the Iranian Revolution, which ushered in a theocratic republic in Iran after the Shah was overthrown. It is sympathy for a type of republican government that differs from the form of Iraq's present government, not a sympathy for Iraq to become a client state of Iran. It's a fundamental misunderstanding that forms part of Bush's desire for war with Iran.
Bush has other reasons for war with Iran. He wants to destroy their nuclear fuel industry to take Iran out of the international market for that commodity. Bush's assertions that Iran is developing nuclear weapons are FALSE. There are 150 international inspectors in Iran, monitoring the nuclear program, and NONE of them have confirmed Bush's accusations.
As I finish this diary, Hadley is holding a press conference. He is arguing for Bush's policies, and his argument is that the "surge" offers the only strategy to address a resolution of the war. He recognizes the problems, but not the solution. He is blinded by the imperative to secure an American colonial presence in Iraq, and he disasterously relies upon the Iraqi Army and police force to succeed. He believes that focussing on Al Anbar and Baghdad is the key. Asked what happens if the surge fails, he says they are developing "contingincies."
We must remove Bush and Cheney from power.