Friedman: Pretty Powerful: What to Do With the Twins? - The Conundrum of a Unified Iraq and a Unified Syria
Tom Friedman writes in The New York Times:
There is much talk right now about America
teaming up with Iran to push back the coalition of Sunni militias that has taken
over Mosul and other Sunni towns in western Iraq and Syria. For now, I’d say
stay out of this fight — not because it’s the best option, but because it’s the
least bad.
After all, what is the context in which we’d
be intervening? Iraq and Syria are twins: multiethnic and multisectarian
societies that have been governed, like other Arab states, from the top-down.
First, it was by soft-fisted Ottomans who ruled through local notables in a
decentralized fashion, then by iron-fisted British and French colonial powers
and later by iron-fisted nationalist kings and dictators.
Today, the Ottomans are gone, the British and
French are gone and now many of the kings and dictators are gone. We removed
Iraq’s dictator; NATO and tribal rebels removed Libya’s; the people of Tunisia,
Egypt and Yemen got rid of theirs; and some people in Syria have tried to topple
theirs. Each country is now faced with the challenge of trying to govern itself
horizontally by having the different sects, parties and tribes agree on social
contracts for how to live together as equal citizens who rotate power.
Tunisia and Kurdistan have done the best at
this transition. Egyptians tried and found the insecurity so unbearable that
they brought back the army’s iron fist. Libya has collapsed into intertribal
conflict. Yemen struggles with a wobbly tribal balance. In Syria, the
Shiite/Alawite minority, plus the Christians and some Sunnis, seem to prefer the
tyranny of Bashar al-Assad to the anarchy of the Islamist-dominated rebels; the
Syrian Kurds have carved out their own enclave, so the country is now a
checkerboard.
In Iraq, the Shiite prime minister, Nuri
Kamal al-Maliki — who had the best chance, the most oil money and the most help
from the U.S. in writing a social contract for how to govern Iraq horizontally —
chose instead, from the moment the Americans left, to empower Iraqi Shiites and
disempower Iraqi Sunnis. It’s no surprise that Iraqi Sunnis decided to grab
their own sectarian chunk of the country.
So today, it seems, a unified Iraq and a
unified Syria can no longer be governed vertically or horizontally. The leaders
no longer have the power to extend their iron fists to every border, and the
people no longer have the trust to extend their hands to one another. It would
appear that the only way they can remain united is if an international force
comes in, evicts the dictators, uproots the extremists and builds consensual
politics from the ground up — a generational project for which there are no
volunteers.
What to do? It was not wrong to believe
post-9/11 that unless this region produced decent self-government it would
continue to fail its own people and deny them the ability to realize their full
potential, which is why the Arab Spring happened, and that its pathologies would
also continue to spew out the occasional maniac, like Osama bin Laden, who could
threaten us.
But the necessary turned out to be
impossible: We didn’t know what we were doing. The post-Saddam generation of
Iraqi leaders turned out to be like abused children who went on to be abusive
parents. The Iranians constantly encouraged Shiite supremacy and frustrated our
efforts to build pluralism. Mosques and charities in Saudi Arabia, Turkey,
Kuwait and Qatar continued to fund preachers and fighters who promoted the worst
Sunni extremism. And thousands of Muslim men marched to Syria and Iraq to fight
for jihadism, but none marched there to fight for pluralism.
I could say that before President Obama drops
even an empty Coke can from a U.S. fighter jet on the Sunni militias in Iraq we
need to insist that Maliki resign and a national unity cabinet be created that
is made up of inclusive Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish leaders. I could say that that
is the necessary condition for reunification of Iraq. And I could say that it is
absolutely not in our interest or the world’s to see Iraq break apart and one
segment be ruled by murderous Sunni militias.
But I have to say this: It feels both too
late and too early to stop the disintegration — too late because whatever trust
there was between communities is gone, and Maliki is not trying to rebuild it,
and too early because it looks as if Iraqis are going to have to live apart, and
see how crazy and impoverishing that is, before the different sects can coexist
peacefully.
In the meantime, there is no denying that
terrorism could be exported our way from Iraq’s new, radicalized “Sunnistan.”
But we have a National Security Agency, C.I.A. and drones to deal with that now
ever-present threat.
Pluralism came to Europe only after many
centuries of one side or another in religious wars thinking it could have it
all, and after much ethnic cleansing created more homogeneous nations. Europe
also went through the Enlightenment and the Reformation. Arab Muslims need to go
on the same journey. It will happen when they want to or when they have
exhausted all other options. Meanwhile, let’s strengthen the islands of decency
— Tunisia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and Kurdistan — and
strengthen our own democracy to insulate ourselves as best we can.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home