Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Adam's Official Chat 12/21/11


kcw
 Share

Recommended Posts

[Adam Montana] at this time, Iraq is still perfectly stable and I don't see anything to worry about.

The following is a brief overview written by Stratfor analysts regarding the geopolitical reality of Iraqs challenges. I share it not to refute Adams statement directly (I believe he is referring to economic stability) but to assist others here who have not been to the Middle East and are tired of the media spin at six oclock. I believe it is an accurate synopsis and worthy of consideration as we ponder, dream and hope for an RV.

Baghdad's Political System in a Post-American Iraq

December 19, 2011 | 1153 GMT

With U.S. forces having withdrawn from Iraq, the fate of the U.S.-facilitated post-Baathist state is in question. Putting together the new Iraqi republic has been a painful process, with a democratic political system having been essentially grafted onto a highly fractious ethno-sectarian landscape.

The continuing rifts among the country’s Shia, Sunnis and Kurds and divisions within each of these factions are issues that the United States has been struggling to manage since 2003 (these problems were held in check under the authoritarian Baathist regime and under the Hashemite monarchy before that). Now that the United States has left, Iraq has become more vulnerable to the maneuvers of neighboring states, and the competition among Baghdad’s stakeholders has become even more significant.

Iran’s ambitions in Iraq concern the United States as well as Sunni Arab states in the region, led by Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Factions aligned with or beholden to Iran dominate the new Iraq, giving Tehran more influence inside its western neighbor. Just as Iraq will be key to Iran’s ascendency as a regional power, so too will Iraq be essential to the United States, its Arab allies and Turkey for containing Iran. Neither Iran nor its opponents wish to destabilize Iraq, but its place at the center of a regional struggle bodes ill for its continued political stability. Each of Iraq’s three main ethno-sectarian groups will simultaneously attempt to negotiate with one another, but all have immediate goals that run counter to those of their rivals.

Shia

The Shia, the largest of the three groups and the largest beneficiary of the 2003 U.S. invasion, face two challenges after the U.S. withdrawal. Their first challenge is maintaining their dominance of the political system. To that end, they will try to ensure that the Sunnis do not pose a challenge to Shia governmental control and that Kurdish moves to enhance their own autonomy do not weaken Shia authority.

The Shia’s second challenge is addressing serious rivalries between three principal factions: the State of Law bloc led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the movement of radical Islamist leader Muqtada al-Sadr (the largest single Shiite party in parliament) and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq led by the al-Hakim family.

Each of these factions is beholden to Iran to varying degrees:

Al-Maliki’s nearly seven-year tenure as prime minister, during which he presided over the creation of the current political and security system, has helped solidify him as the head of the national political establishment and the Shiite political mainstream. His State of Law bloc seeks to balance its connections to Tehran with its connections to the United States and other regional players.

The al-Sadrite movement is perhaps the faction that Iran seeks to use most in influencing Iraq. Al-Sadr himself spends most of his time in Iran, where he is in the process of becoming an ayatollah. In addition to his efforts to establish himself as a religious reference, he is leveraging his popularity among the Iraqi Shiite masses and respect across the political landscape to position himself as the pre-eminent Shia leader. In other words, al-Sadr seeks to supplant al-Maliki in the future.

The Islamic Supreme Council is closest to the Iranians — it was created in Tehran in the early 1980s — but the group has weakened in recent years, especially after the death of leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim in 2009. His son, Ammar al-Hakim, has not proved to be an effective leader, and the group’s former militant wing, the Badr Corps, which now calls itself the Badr Organization, has evolved over the years into a political movement independent of the Islamic Supreme Council.

Sunnis

Iraq’s Sunnis have already suffered considerable disenfranchisement in the almost nine years since the fall of the regime of Saddam Hussein, and they fear further marginalization by the Iranian-backed Shia. Moreover, they face stark internal divisions as different tribal forces and political currents compete over who speaks for their community. These internal struggles have hampered their ability to increase their stake in Iraq’s security apparatus, civilian institutions and shares of oil revenues.

The minority Sunnis have few options in gaining leverage in the current political system. One such option is an attempt to make use of constitutional provisions that would allow the Sunnis to establish their own semi-autonomous zones similar to those of Iraq’s Kurds in Salah ad Din and Anbar provinces. However, they are facing resistance from internal disunity and from the Shia, especially in the al-Maliki government. For the Shia, autonomous Sunni regions puts at risk their hold over the central government.

In addition to the sectarian rivalry with the Shia, the Sunnis are locked in a bitter territorial struggle with the Kurds, who wish to expand the frontiers of their autonomous northern enclave. The status of oil-rich Kirkuk region is particularly contentious because the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds have been unable to reach a consensus on how to divide the region’s energy resources. Currently the parliamentary clout of the Kurds and Sunnis in Kirkuk is evenly split. At a provincial level, Kirkuk is a competition between the Sunnis and Kurds, but the Shia do not wish to see either faction completely dominate the politics in this energy-rich region. Therefore, the status of Kirkuk will likely continue to remain unresolved for the foreseeable future.

Kurds

The Kurds would like to hold onto the autonomy they have had in the northernmost three provinces (Dahuk, Arbil and Sulaymaniyah) since the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, and they would prefer to expand these autonomous zones to include northern parts of Ninawa, Kirkuk and Diyala provinces. However, the Kurds understand that they are opposed domestically by the Shia and Sunnis and externally by Turkey and Iran. The Shiite-dominated Iraqi central government has been working to erode the Kurds’ current autonomy, attempting to prevent them from striking deals with international energy firms.

The Kurds’ main backer was the United States, and its departure from Iraq leaves them vulnerable to pressure from all sides. The Kurdistan Regional Government is trying to work with both Ankara and Tehran while positioning its forces along the borders that separate Kurdish and Arab lands. But the Kurds can only push so much without risking serious clashes with Sunnis in these contested areas and with the forces of the Shia-dominated central government, which could result in civil war. The two main Kurdish parties also are divided over several issues, including who will dominate Kurdish politics, and these divisions could hamper their ability to act in a unified manner.

Furthermore, the central government and the Sunnis in central Iraq take comfort from the fact that both Iran and Turkey have an interest in limiting the autonomy of the Kurds. The Shia will work through Tehran and Ankara to deal with the Kurdish ambitions for enhanced autonomy.

Conclusion

Both Iraq’s domestic stakeholders and interested regional entities, particularly Iran and Saudi Arabia, will attempt to avoid a breakdown of the political system. However, the current situation is uncomfortable for all involved, and all are likely to attempt moves to enhance their relative positions. Such moves could lead to unintended consequences, and Iraq will remain a fragile entity politically for the foreseeable future.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Adam for the chat and Kcw for posting! Merry Christmas everyone! My gift to all of you was a plu-ah-palooza. All of you just got an extra plus one. I like to do these kind of drive bys when a thread, like this one, is 100% positive.

We have a lot to be thankful for as IQD holders, 2012 is going to be am amazing year!

Enjoy Holly Hunter. Love her. 2012, here we come!

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That in country RV does not sound good. Hopefully it does not come to that.

With banks all over the world owning Dinar and the Dinar wants to get on forex, do you really believe that such a thing would happen? Come on now! Look at it and tell me again, do you really think they would do that?

If they did so such a stupid thing their currency wouldn't go anywhere but down. No one in this world would trust them. Go RV.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Adam and kcw for posting. wink.gif

One more lap around the circus just for good measure.... ahhh, but the main event is about to take place... better sooner than later... but "better" is the key, it be good when it does come!biggrin.gif

Come on boyz... gitter dun! smile.gif

GO RV Already Baby!!!cool.gif

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been some time since posting but with occasional reads I have never regretted being a member of this site. It has been gratifying from many aspects.I would like to take this opportunity to wish Adam Montana and family plus all of the DV family a very Merry Christmas and a New Year of good health, good spirits and prosperity.

I look fwd to opening up once again the DV site after New Years eve. God bless all.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much football talk, I will put my question as if this was a football game.

Seems like around Thanksgiving we were all standing on our feet as it seems our team was in the red zone and was about to score. Thanksgiving past and we still did not score. Would you say, at this point, we are now out of field goal range and it's 4th and 20? Or did we fumble and no longer have the ball and just have to play defense for awhile? Or are we still in the red zone and it's 2nd down and goal from the 4 yard line?

I know dumb question, but what the heck. Maybe too much eggnog!

Blessings for a wonderful Holiday season to everyone!!!

Read more:

Didn't score on this drive so I guess it's time to play defense for awhile.[/size]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.