The Latest Blunder: de-Sunnification in Iraq

I usually try to steer clear of political commentary. For the most part the field is filled with intellectual masturbators whose specialties are rhetoric and debate rather than intellectual, informed, and, most importantly, logical discussion. However, an article posted today on NYtimes.com has infuriated my senses and led to a feeling of utter frustration. I had to comment.

The article covers the polemical discussion on the way forward for Iraq. It’s titled, “Iraq Takes Aim at Leaders of U.S.-Tied Sunni Groups”. For the past two years there has been a growing movement of Sunni leaders using their community ties to battle against extremist groups. Wikipedia describes the purpose that these coalitions serve, “Awakening movements in Iraq are coalitions between tribal Sheikhs in a particular province in Iraq that unite to ensure security.” Before 2006, the United States military and Iraqi security forces were battling uphill in the rain towards their goal of establishing local security. When these local religious leaders began banding together to quell violence, it brought a ray of sunlight onto the battlefield. Since that time, the Awakening movements have gained increased momentum and brought attacks in some areas to a halt. So why is the Iraqi government now attempting to disband the very groups that have given Iraqi and US forces more operability by allowing them to focus on building security infrastructure rather than fighting an endless battle against religious extremism?

The article’s opening sentence relays one of the major concerns, “The Shiite-dominated government in Iraq is driving out many leaders of Sunni citizen patrols, the groups of former insurgents who joined the American payroll and have been a major pillar in the decline in violence around the nation.” Two very important sections of that sentence tell the real tale, “Shiite-dominated government” and “groups of former insurgents”. These two opposing factions are polarized on several fronts--religious ideology, legal practice, and historical ethnic conflict to name a few. Why should they trust each other?

Iraq’s Shi’ite majority has every reason to be skeptical. Sunni leaders who have opposed the new Iraqi government since its inception are now finding themselves in positions of political leverage. As the article states, “...Awakening members are eager to translate their influence and organization on the ground into political power.” It’s a legitimate concern, that these former members of extremist groups--including Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia--will be in positions of political power. But the Iraqi government should learn from past mistakes of disenfranchising military or militia leaders. De-Ba’athification (removal of political and military leaders loyal to the former regime) left thousands unemployed. Many military professionals whose past political ties left them no place in the new Iraq were forced to seek employment with extremist groups. Whether or not they were ideologically opposed to the new power structure, they were given no other option to support their families. The same dynamic occurred with Shi’a religious leader Muqtada al-Sadr’s followers. When Sadr’s faction was barred from participating in the al-Maliki government, his militias were given incentive to take security concerns into their own hands. If the Awakening movements are disbanded then at least some of those militia members who are now helping the situation will once again become part of the problem. This is confirmed by Abu Azzam, a political leader in the Awakening movement, “Part of [the Awakening militia members] will fight the government if they are not recruited into the security forces.” A senior military spokesman echoes this sentiment, “If [diminution of the Awakening coalition] is not handled properly, we could have a security issue...You don’t want to give anybody a reason to turn back to Al Qaeda.” Iraq cannot move upward when it keeps tripping on the same step.

Yet, the Iraqi government has no intention of acknowledging the Awakening movement’s members. Statements by Iraq’s politicians, quoted in the article, make their stance very clear:

“The state cannot accept the Awakening,” said Sheik Jalaladeen al-Sagheer, a leading Shiite member of Parliament. “Their days are numbered.”

An even more biting conviction from an Iraqi Army commander ordered to round up Awakening leaders conveys the government’s attitude towards the coalition, “These people are like cancer, and we must remove them.”

Emotions like these have understandably led to severe frustration of US military efforts. For months, the US has been building up these militias to provide local security. If control is handed over to the Iraqi government, which to be fair it should since the Iraqi government is ultimately responsible for providing security, there’s a real danger that the past two years of effort will be devitalized, or even become obsolete. Iraq cannot afford such blunder, nor can we.

The US must make every diplomatic effort to ensure that the Awakening movement’s members are not disenfranchised. If modern Iraq is to remain one state--and one could make a strong argument here for federalization--then all political players must be given a chance to express their thoughts and concerns. Continued suppression of factions or ideologies in lieu of logical discussion will inevitably lead to further conflict. In this global era Iraqi government leaders cannot dismiss non-state actors on grounds of past indiscretion, especially if those actors represent a community under the sphere of governance. Reconciliation must become common practice. Otherwise Iraq is doomed to failure and all its citizens subjected to a future filled with violence.


View the article.

As always, I encourage you to leave your thoughts.