Leaving it at a mess, that old US tradition
Robert Fisk, a multiple award-winning journalist on the Middle East and currently based in Beirut, in a recent piece for The Independent wrote, “So after the grotesquerie of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 suicide killers of 9/11, meet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.” (Published June 12, 2014) Whoa! No punches held here. He states further, “The story of Iraq and the story of Syria are the same – politically, militarily and journalistically: two leaders, one Shia, the other Alawite, fighting for the existence of their regimes against the power of a growing Sunni Muslim international army. While the Americans support the wretched Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his elected Shia government in Iraq, the same Americans still demand the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad of Syria and his regime, even though both leaders are now brothers-in-arms against the victors of Mosul and Tikrit.”
Interestingly, it was as early as January 2007 that the Saudis had told Zalmay Khalilzad, the American Envoy at that time, that Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, was not to be trusted. Documents to prove the same were submitted. Zalmay Khalilzad was quick to launch a protest with the King of Saudi Arabia that the documents were forged. The Bush administration was far from happy at Saudi Arabia’s role in Iraq, which was offering financial cushion to Maliki’s opposing forces and framing the Iraqi prime minister as being an Iranian front person. Further, roughly half of the foreign fighters entering Iraq on a monthly basis hailed from Saudi Arabia. Their number ranges between 30 and 40. Inspite of this the US has not confronted Saudi Arabia, an ally to US on many global issues, openly.
In a piece in The New York Times, “The Saudi government has hardly masked its intention to prop up Sunni groups in Iraq and has for the past two years explicitly told senior Bush administration officials of the need to counterbalance the influence Iran has there. Saudi Arabia months ago made a pitch to enlist other Persian Gulf countries to take a direct role in supporting Sunni tribal groups in Iraq, said one former American ambassador with close ties to officials in the Middle East. The former ambassador, Edward W Gnehm, who has served in Kuwait and Jordan, said that during a recent trip to the region he was told that Saudi Arabia had pressed other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council — which includes Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman — to give financial support to Sunnis in Iraq.” (July 2007)
The ISIS fighting successfully today in Iraq reportedly has the backing of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. There is an opinion that ISIS may have been a part of the covert operations in Syria of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the head of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence services and a former ambassador to the United States. The fact that John Kerry travelled to Saudi Arabia on July 27, 2014, to discuss the situation in Iraq and the threat posed by ISIS both in Iraq and Syria, lends credibility to the claim.
Maliki, on France 24 television channel late on Saturday, March 8, 2014, accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of openly funding the Sunni Muslim insurgents in western Anbar province: “I accuse them of inciting and encouraging the terrorist movements. I accuse them of supporting them politically and in the media, of supporting them with money and by buying weapons for them. I accuse them of leading an open war against the Iraqi government. I accuse them of openly hosting leaders of al Qaeda and Takfirists (extremists).”
Saudi Arabia may have a number of reasons for their involvement in Iraq. One, a Shi’ite government in Iraq coupled with American invasion may lead to closer relations with Iran, more especially under the present changing political relationship, wary, but nonetheless changing, between Iran and the US. Two, Shia and Sunni warfare has engulfed many countries in their proxy games. Iraq is one of the playgrounds. Three, the Saudis never accepted a Shi’ite government in a predominant Sunni Iraq.
A report by the Associated Press in 2006 said that wealthy Saudis have contributed millions of dollars to Iraq’s Sunni insurgents mostly to buy state of the art weapons. Saudi government has denied the report. However, the report states, “But the US Iraq Study Group report said Saudis were a source of funding for Sunni Arab insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by the Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents.”
Two high-ranking Iraqi officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity, told the AP that most of the Saudi money came from private donations, called zakat, collected for Islamic causes and charities.” (Published December 8, 2006) In another report by CBS News (Published May 26, 2008), the Iraqi military exposed teenagers who were being trained for suicide bombing by a Saudi militant, the threat held over their heads was of the rape of their mothers and sisters should they refuse to fall in line.
Fast forwarding to present, ISIS’s takeover of Mosul brought with it a goldmine (literally) to the ISIS in the form of assets of the Mosul Central Bank, large enough not to be sneezed at – $500 million and a large heist of gold. Further, ISIS already has under its control the 310,000 barrel-a-day Baiji refinery, Iraq’s largest refinery. This windfall makes ISIS independent of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, at least financially. Sectarian violence has bloomed.
Iraqi state television announced that the Iraqi Premier Nouri al-Maliki turned down international appeals to accommodate Sunni insurgents in governing Iraq. In light of what I’ve written, I’m not very surprised. He is open though to starting a debate in Parliament within a specified timeframe to work out modalities to form a national government. In my last week’s op-ed I had dwelled upon the desire of the US to form a government on the three main Iraqi communities: Shi’ites, Kurds and the Sunnis. According to a report, the US believes Iran is flying drones in Iraqi airspace to collect intelligence on the ISIS. Another report states that the Syrian Army had sent their warplanes bombing the predominantly Sunni settlements on the western Iraq side. This is a serious involvement by Syria in Iraq.
So even if, and I mean a big IF, Maliki crumbles under international pressure and agrees to take Sunnis and Kurds on board, how long will it last? A diplomatic solution to the present malaise seems difficult. The day this op-ed is published is the deadline given by a leading Shia cleric Ayatollah Ali Sistani for a new prime minister to be chosen by Iraqi leaders. Iraqi army, reportedly trained at the cost of roughly $25 billion (local news report), was unable to handle insurgency on ground in the north once Mosul fell and the insurgency gained momentum.
Tailpiece: The US must learn from history if it will, to quote from Terrell E Arnold’s paper, “A US promised democracy has become Iraqi against Iraqi.” Award winning journalist Dave Lindorff, in his piece (06/19/2014) states, “Whatever one’s opinion of Maliki — and the truth is he has been a fairly typical Middle East strongman, brutally suppressing the Sunni minority on behalf of his Shia backers, and also playing hardball even against those Shia politicians who would be his rivals, including having them arrested — betrayal of allies noble and vile has of course been a long tradition in Washington.”
Invading a country is admittance of failure in dealing with a situation by more favourable means. Can the United Nations help without parroting US suggestions? Middle East is ready to blow up. Is the world ready for it?
Truth is; that there is confirmed multiple evidence that ISIS which is now IS only, hate Saudi Arabia and their Monarch and it is at top in agenda of IS to run over Saudi Arabia in order to throw away kings of Family of Saud.
Asad in Syria is also Shia, as Alawite is branch of Shiites. Alawites are in minor minority in Syria but they are dedicators of Syria from many decades and they have murdered hundreds of thousands Sunnis. So This is a reaction from Sunnis against oppression.
Same situation is in Iraq. Maliki Noori is an Iranian Stooge with narrow mind and since US left Iraq, Shia are cleansing Iraq from Sunnis under patronage of Shia Maliki. As a reaction, now Sunnis are stood up against that oppression. So for these disasters, in Syria and Iraq, only and only two Shiites Dictators Asad and Maliki are responsible. If both has dealt Shia and Sunni in just way; this problem that we see today could never arise.
US lends a helping hand to international issues reluctantly, restraint towards Iran is a good example. It has never relished the role of an occupying, or Imperial power, though it does have a strong presence, and enormous leverage. Best example would be trying to resolve Bosnia issue very late. It Folds, when the results are not as expected. People think, that they are being deceitful or cowards, not fighting to the last man, last bullet. They are just being logical, and pragmatic. They have lost two trillion dollars, thousands dead, and many more seriously wounded in conflicts, that are of no direct concern of theirs. This time let the Saudis, and Iranians sort it out.
Iraq was an artificial and unstable country kept together by a ruthless regime in a very fragile region. It was a great strategic mistake on part of USA to disturb the status quo. Unfortunately USA was then being ruled by Bush and Cheney who were mainly guided by oil benefits. The present development there may have disastrous consequences.
“Three, the Saudis never accepted a Shi’ite government in a predominant Sunni Iraq.”
Iraq is predominantly Shia (60-65%) and Sunni (39-37%), so how could this be a reason for Saudi’s non-acceptance?
On another note, most of the current mayhem in the Muslim world, is due to the policies and actions of Saudi Arabia. They are using their petro-dollars to advance an intolerant, narrow, and an extremist version of Islam; through madrassas financed by them – from Mali to Pakistan and from Dagestan to Indonesia.
Incidentally along with some Gulf States, they are also a financial supplier to the terrorist-sectarian organizations in Pakistan.
Yes Col. Saheb,
This time you are 100% right in all your deductions. But why should the western stooge not do what it is doing?
It is getting all the benefits of its luxury due to its policies!
—
Yes Col. Saheb,
This time you are 100% right in all your deductions. But why should the western stooge not do what it is doing?
It is getting all the benefits of its luxury due to its policies!
—
Ali Akhtar
Some sense must prevail in the governments of Saudi Arabia and Iran so they stop promoting Sunni/Shia sentiments amongst the Muslims. The sectarian divide sponsored by these two countries is badly hurting Muslims and image of Islam
A very well presented analytic piece, full of information. I have one observation. You wrote “the Saudis never accepted a Shi’ite government in a predominant Sunni Iraq”.
Writing on demographic picture of Iraq on religions wikipedia states, “Islam 99% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christianity 2.%, Mandaeism and other less then 1%. [5]".
This is just for information. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Absolutely with large other segments but larger portion are Sunnis.Almost 80% of Iraqis are Arab, while some 15-20% are Kurds — a distinct ethnic group with its own language, history and culture, concentrated in northern Iraq, eastern Turkey, northeastern Syria, northern Iran and southern Georgia. Kurds have struggled for their rights as a cultural minority in all of those societies, often suffering vicious repression, but have enjoyed de facto independence in northern Iraq under U.S. protection since the 1991 Gulf War.
Things certainly seem to be heading downhill.
Sometimes WIKIPEDIA does give some useful information. However, from my personal knowledge and confirmed by a Sunni Iraqi army officer doing an army course in Pakistan in the 1960s, 56 percent of the Iraqis were (are) Shiites and about 42 percent Sunnis and the remaining 3 percent others. It was never a PREDOMINANTLY Sunni state, though Sunni reulers have been in power for most of the time there.
Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)
Thank you.
Comprehensive.
Regards,
Shams
US is responsible for destabilizing the entire Middle East. Stable Govts in Libya, Iraq , and Syria have been destabilized by the US. They are being rent asunder into small sectarian powerless states. This is what suits Israel. I have no doubt that Israel has as usual used the US into doing it's bidding. Millions of Muslims have died and the suppressed sectarian differences have been brought to the fore. Saudis and Qatar have played a dirty role in bank rolling the jehadis / Sunni extremists to destabilize these countries. US will let Iraq be split into three independent states for ever fighting each other while Israel is left with no threat. It will absorb Golan Heights and the West Bank. It may at some stage also go for the East Bank leaving Jordan a small desert strip.
Leaving it at a mess, that old US tradition"
Thus creating more confusion and chaos around the Globe.
YAA Ji.
A well written note.
Very true, this is the essence of American Foreign Policy, if there was one.
At time one wonders "what is the American Foreign policies are, whether
these policies are made for the interest of American people or some one
else.
Rauf
Leaving it at a mess, that old US tradition"Yasmeen
The Saudi royalty has been having sleepless nights, specially over the last 12 months or so. The Shia influence raising its head in the region (sp with Iran's nuclear capability) has been very disturbing for them and however outlandish it may sound, but even the worst-case scenario of the two Holy Mosques under Shia control has been discussed in hushed tones in royal palaces. The developments in Bahrain first, then hostilities in Syria (with Assad digging his heels and surviving) combined with Rouhani's highly effective diplomatic moves with the USA have all gravitated towards this grave concern. Consequently, Saudi relations with the US have soured appreciably, after they backed off from striking Syria. Allow me to refer to this link.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/…
The US is quite comfortable watching these developments on Iraqi soil from the sidelines or at best with their covert operations. Kerry is going through the motions, virtually endorsing the creation of ISIS. Al-Baghdadi, the brand new Caliph believe it or not, makes Osama BL and Mullah Omer look like elementary school kids in the playground.
Saudis are slowly moving into the comfort zone. The US does not consider anything humiliating. The shoe thrown by journalist Al-Zaidi at President Bush in Dec 2008 is symbolized in a New York museum. Bush's side-kicks still admire the President's sharp reflexes in dodging the show while he was speaking.
We in the US do not care if Hans Blix did not find any weapons of mass destruction either. All what you see is exactly how US and Israel want it played and things are being done with overall US interests in mind. The new political boundary lines will be drawn and we should be cognizant of the fact that these dynamics are at work in
PK too.
The new Muslim caliphate may not last very long but Muslims vs Muslims conflict will. Call it Josh vs. Hosh. That foundation work has been successfully accomplished. Simply put, that good old British wisdom of divide-and-rule
is the only way to keep Muslims in the pool. The world did change on September 11, 2001…perhaps forever.
Siraj
Thank you very much Siraj for the input. Grateful indeed. The Muslim Ummah needs to evaluate the strategic design of Zionism that has a direct bearing on the regional geo-political & get-strategic scenarios & moves in the Arab world. Their ultimate aim is to destabilize and control the Muslim world and its resources.
You echo the sentiments expressed in my concluding paragraphs.
Unfortunately, most of (what you refer as) the Muslim Ummah, are merrily carrying on with blazing guns to outdo each other with self-created sectarian violence. It is a paradox but in reality today, when you look around you find that you are not afraid by a non-Muslim but your own fellow brethren. What we see in Iraq today is basically history repeating itself. The seeds laid by a devout Muslim Yazid (the 6th Caliph) in Karbala, just 60 miles away from Baghdad, is now like a giant tree, fruit-bearing.
Thankfully, Islam will survive only because Arabs are just 22 % of the Muslim world.
Araldite binding any nation has a life, no bond is for ever……
My friend Mohammad Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi announced that he will march to Meeka and demolish Kabba to sqare one.
That will be time for a good hajj. That implies end of monarchy. Bad times for American in region is it by design or default.
Afzal Sahib, did Khalifa Ibrahim (Abu Bakr AlBghdadi) really say that he would demolish Ka'aba? I missed that bit.
Ghayur Ayub sahib I was pleased to see that tweet of his meeting yesterday night. I am happy I shall join him for first hajj. Did you read on ISIS and why we name Operation as Zarb e Momin Zarb E Asb etc.
There is just one problem with such a stance.
The analogy that comes to my mind is of our traditional weddings.
In response to the the qazi, the groom has to say "I do" three times loudly to give his explicit agreement at the nikah while the dulhan's silence is itself taken as an implied consent.
Your pen is mightier than the AK-47. May no dust ever settle on it.
Why don't we accept that the situation in Iraq and the Muslim world is not the doing of the Ummah. Yes, some Muslim countries are dancing to the tune of the west and thus making these things happen as desired by their 'Masters'. This situation has been deliberately created by the USA, which is responsible around the world to create the environment to implement their Agenda related to the New World Order.
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) (Sunnis) and Muktadar Sadar Forces (Shias) will fight with each other as per plan of USA/NATO…. It is to divide the Iraq and Syria on sectarian basis…. Iran and KSA should be careful and not to play in the hands of CIA/Mousad/MI 6….. Infact its the dirty game of redrawing the boundaries of Middle East and to protect the State of Israel…… and also to unhinge the KSA….
I do not understand why my comments are censored, where as other poorly written, incomplete comments are published.
Why don't we accept that the situation in Iraq and the Muslim world is not the doing of the Ummah. Yes, some Muslim countries are dancing to the tune of the west and thus making these things happen as desired by their 'Masters'. This situation has been deliberately created by the USA, which is responsible around the world to create the environment to implement their Agenda related to the New World Order.
Comments are closed.