What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
Did Oprah Pick Another Fibber?
Truth and Fiction in Elie Wiesel's Night
In his special
report Alexander Cockburn interviews former Wiesel colleague
and Holocaust survivor Eli Pfefferkorn. What Raul Hilberg, the
Holocaust's greatest historian, really thinks about Wiesel's
"Night". Also
in this special issue: Is Hugo Chavez Hitler or Father Christmas?
Larry Lack tells the full story of Venezuela's hand-outs to Uncle
Sam's Shivering Poor. Plus, Jeffrey St Clair profiles the Endangered
Visigoth and traces the rise and possible fall of Rick Pombo,
destroyer of nature.CounterPunch
Online is read by millions of viewers each month! But remember,
we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition
of CounterPunch. Please
support this website by buying a subscription to our newsletter,
which contains fresh material you won't find anywhere else, or
by making a donation for the online edition. Remember contributions
are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
Inherent in the policy of Iraqization
is the traditional strategy of an occupier--divide and rule--as
it means some Iraqi collaborators will be put in the employ of
the occupier in an effort to control other Iraqis. Thus, Iraqization
naturally means turning Iraqis against each other. And, having
Iraqis fighting between themselves--rather than uniting in opposition
to the occupation of Iraq--benefits the United States.
'Divide and rule' seems to
be central to the U.S. strategy to controlling Iraq. The U.S.
has used this strategy in other conflicts, and the closest ally
of the United States perfected 'divide and rule' during its history
as a colonial power. The British typically played one tribe or
ethnic group against another to maintain control of their colonies
with a minimal number of British troops. For example, the British
used 'divide and rule' strategies to gain control over India,
keeping its people divided along lines of religion, language,
and caste. The divisions created or enhanced by Great Britain
still cause problems in some of its former colonies.
Indeed, in the 1920 Mandate
of Iraq, the British worked to check the Shia majority's power
by keeping Sunni Arabs in senior positions in government and
the armed forces. And, created a country that had divisions,
Sunni, Shia and Kurd--divisions that still exist today.
It is hard to believe that
the Bush Administration did not realize the likely sectarian
strife between Sunnis and Shia. Not only die Saddam Hussein check
the Shia majority during his rule of Iraq, but the dispute
between these two sects dates back to the death of the prophet
Mohamed in 632. Sunnis are the majority sect in the Muslim world,
but Shias form as much as 60% of Iraq's population, whereas Sunnis
make up 35%, divided between ethnic Arabs and Kurds. This demographic
dominance of the Shia has not resulted in economic and political
power, until the U.S. occupation.
Indeed, during Saddam's rule,
the Shia community were particularly persecuted, especially after
the Islamic Revolution in Iraq in 1979. Saddam executed Ayatollah
Mohamed Baquir Sadr (the uncle of Moqtada Sadr a leading cleric
in Iraq today) after an attempted assassination of his deputy
prime minister in 1980 by Shia political activists. During the
war between Iraq and Iran, Saddam further cracked down on the
Shia community, expelling thousands to Iran or imprisoning them
as well as restricting religious pilgrimages to holy shrines.
Despite these historic divisions
and simmering rivalries Shia and Sunni in Iraq lived together.
There are mixed neighborhoods in Baghdad. And, there was intermarriage
between Sunni and Shia.
When the United States overthrew
Saddam in 2003 and began the occupation of Iraq one of the first
acts of the U.S. was de-Baathification--large numbers of the
Sunni elite were ejected from government and banned from politics.
They were replaced by Shia leaders. Of course, this was resented
by the Sunni population and not surprisingly led many into resisting
the occupation. And, as Shia took control of government and roles
in the police and military they became targets of the insurgency
against the occupation.
And, there have been numerous
reports of death squads operating within the Iraqi police force.
Sunnis have repeatedly claimed that uniform Iraqi police were
raiding homes and taking people who later turned up handcuffed
and shot in the head. More than 1,600 people have been killed
in this way according to Sunni leaders. There have also been
reports of abuse in Iraqi run prisons where Shia guards held
Sunni prisoners. These are classic 'divide and rule' strategies
giving those oppressed by the previous regime, official clothing
and the opportunity for revenge while in uniform. Of course,
there have been Sunni reprisals and a cycle of violence has grown
to what is now becoming a sectarian war.
None of this is a surprise.
As John Walsh recently wrote:
"Top analysts in the CIA
and State Department, as well as large numbers of Middle East
experts, warned that a U.S. invasion of Iraq could result in
a violent ethnic and sectarian conflict. Even some of the war's
intellectual architects acknowledged as much: In a 1997 paper,
prior to becoming major figures in the Bush foreign policy team,
David Wurmser, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith predicted that
a post-Saddam Iraq would likely be 'ripped apart' by sectarianism
and other cleavages but called on the United States to 'expedite'
such a collapse anyway."
Not only did the abuses of
the Shia police forces add to the divisions in Iraq, but so did
the Bush Administrations push for democracy on the U.S. timetable
and U.S. terms. The elections and Constitution in Iraq were not
about issues like socialism vs. capitalism--the United States
had already determined Iraq would be a free market especially
for foreign corporations. The elections were not even about whether
the occupation should end--that is something all the parties
supported. Rather, the elections were primarily about whether
a party or candidate was a Shia, Kurd or Sunni. And the outcome
of the election was measured by which ethnic or sectarian group
gained more power. In other words Bush democracy highlighted
and expanded the divisions in Iraq.
Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr
has appealed for calm among Iraqi Shiites following bomb attacks
in Baghdad. Sadr said Iraq was now in a state of civil war, but
he said he would order his Mahdi army militia not to respond,
the Journal of Turkish Weekly reported March 13. Sadr blamed
U.S. military forces for letting attacks happen and was particularly
critical of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld who said
last week that U.S. forces would not intervene if civil war broke
out in Iraq, "May God damn you, Sadr said of Rumsfeld. "You
said in the past that civil war would break out if you were to
withdraw, and now you say that in case of civil war you won't
interfere.
On February 25, 2006, Iraq's
Defense Minister,Saadoun al-Dulami, warned of a "civil war
that "will never end. And, U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad
said the "potential is there for sectarian violence to become
full-blown civil war describing the U.S. invasion as opening
a "Pandora's box of sectarian violence. The escalating violence--potential
civil war--has become an excuse for the United States to continue
the occupation with Khalilzad warning that if the U.S. leaves
violence will escalate.
Thus, the U.S. occupation escalates
long simmering conflicts between Muslim sects to the point of
sectarian war and then uses the violence, that the occupation
creates, as an excuse to stay in Iraq. As Dahr Jamail wrote in
a series of columns during the recently escalating violence--who
benefits? Quite clearly, he points out, the occupiers benefit.
Or, as Walsh concludes "The fact is that the neocons who
control U.S. strategy have no interest in preventing a civil
war but only in inciting one.
On March 5th, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps' General Peter Pace said
in a televised interview claimed that things in Iraq are "going
very, very well, from everything you look at. To most eyes the
escalating violence was bad news, but maybe the general knows
'divide and rule' is working out as planned.
More Information:
A Photo Essay of what 'Divide
and Rule' looks like in Iraq, photos American's don't see in
the U.S. Press can be viewed at: http://www.infoshop.org/inews
Kevin Zeese is Director of Democracy Rising
and a candidate for U.S. Senate in Maryland.
Finally
Available
from CounterPunch Books!
The Case
Against Israel
By Michael Neumann
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.
