Politics is not something I cover very often, or want to, although it is of the utmost importance for sentiment in investing and in life generally, as we have seen since 9/11. But I can now see the opening for a solution regarding brutal sectarian violence in Basghdad.
The past twenty four hours are perhaps the most interersting twenty four in the Iraq war since 2003. Mind you, no one thinks George Bush speeches will rank in history with Lincoln's or FDR's, but they may be just as important in their 21st century wordy, rambling manner. No one north of the Mason-Dixon line or east of the Mississippi River (or west of the Sierras) can stand Bush's diction, accent, or delivery, so he just gets tuned out automatically, even by republicans. "Yawwwnnnn, what's on channel 93, dear?"
So Bush said last night the Iraqi government would put more troops into Baghdad, and we would train them if necessary, and we and they wouldn't tolerate any more private militias. And we were not going to tolerate Iranian and Syrian complicity in arming the terrorists and Shi'a militias. Also the oil money would be shared among the three groups. Blah, blah, blah. We've heard it all before, right?
But yesterday already there were reports on Reuters and elsewhere that the Iraqi parliament would vote to let western (read mostly US) oil companies develop the Iraqi oilfields and retain 75% of the profits until their infrastructure and training costs were covered when it would revert to 20% oil company/ 80% Iraqi government. And the governmenrt revenues would be shared amongst the Sunni, Shi'a, and Kurdish regions and Baghdad.
Then overnight US troops invaded an Iranian consular office in Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They seized computers and papers and held some employees in custody. This follows the seizure (and subsequent release) of Iranian diplomats elsewhere last week, and it suggests we knew what we were looking for on computers and in documents. The grounds of the consulate were turned over to the Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers afterwards.
Ok, big deal you say, but I have been following Kurdish affairs for over 40 years, and this is a big deal. I immediately had in mind four possible scenarios which could account for doing an Iranian consulate in Kurdistan right after Bush's speech. Without going into all of that and why, let me tell you the final reason.
Mr Barzani, the leader of the Kurds of the Arbil region, whose family goes back so many generations in the Kurdish fight for freedom, wanted to prove to the US forces and government his committment and his strength to take the heat. Plus he wants the Americans "in" since we have protected Iraqi Kurdistan from the Iraqi Government from the Gulf War in 1990 to now. Also he realizes that the Kurds will not get an independent nation out of all of this. They have never managed it and never will, alas. But now the other Kurdish major leader, Talabani, also a long term family player, is president of Iraq. So Kurds are gaining prestige and power in Iraq where they have always been the odd man out. And this comes after they have established their own safe and secure federal state or Iraqi region under our protection.
Then later in the morning west coast time we first heard that the troops that Bush had described the Iraqis deploying in Baghdad to root out the terrorists would KURDISH! Not Arabs! So the Sunni Arabs and Shi'a Arabs of Baghdad would be patroled and policed by the Kurds who are not terribly fond of either group, but they, the Kurds, are Iraqi citizens and generally competent. The Kurds do not hate the Shi'as as they have had little personal experience with them. Kurds were always tormented and ruined by the Sunni Arabs. So this gives Maliki and other Shi'a leaders cover in letting the Kurds do the job. Shi'as will not take down Shi'as. Also it introduces a bit of Kurdish competition as the Barzani and Talabani families have always had their differences except in very extreme times for the Kurdish people. Maliki probably agreed to this whole deal on the basis of these last two widely accepted beliefs about the Kurds.
Believe me, the Barzani Peshmerga Iraqi Kurds are not tree-hugging anti-war liberals. They will not be afraid, with cover, to do the job that needs doing. They are tough. They mostly all speak Arabic and many of them speak or understand Farsi, the language of the Iranians. Farsi is as close to Kurdish as Catalan is to Italian. This is not something that US troops can claim as a trained language skill.
So we can see the plan in all its elements: oil development by American oil companies; oil revenue splitting amongst the three Iraqi regions; the American troop "surge"; Kurdish police and anti-geurillas in Baghdad to wipe out the militias and terrorists; anti-Iranian (also anti-Syrian) interference; mostly Iraqi implementation. Just brilliant! If implemented.
If I am right, as I believe, who is the hero of this new offensive? No one other than the American citizen and voter! The citizens have stuck with Bush's assessment of the importance of Iraq, but they rejected the Iraqi resistance to getting the violence settled. Without the new narrow democrat majority in Congress, which is hourly and daily promising to withdraw US troops completely, Bush would never have had the cover to accept such a plan as we have seen unfolding in the past two days.
Recent Comments