|
Observers continue to ask, "Will Iraq descend into
civil war?" The answer is that civil war is already
underway in Iraq. Most people do not see it, because
it is not following the Sunni/Shi'ite/Kurd fault
lines on which we have been lead to focus. As is
usually the case in war, we are the victims not of
deception but of self-deception.
In Iraq's civil war, the most prominent faction is
what America calls Iraq's "government." It is, of
course, not a government, because there is no state.
The "government's" goal is to recreate an Iraqi
state and become a real government. What are its
chances of success?
At the physical level, the "government" is
undoubtedly the most powerful faction in Iraq's
civil war. It has more money and more troops than
any competitor. It also has the U.S. military behind
it, as we have seen recently in Fallujah, where the
Iraqi "government" has approved and even provided
intelligence for American air strikes.
But at the moral level, the Iraqi "government" is
probably the weakest faction, weaker even than the
elements still fighting for Saddam. The reason is
that it is an American creation and puppet - a
Quisling regime, formed and propped up by a
now-hated invader. If it is to have any hope of
legitimacy, it must cut the strings to the American
puppeteer. So far, it shows no ability to do that.
Its one serious effort to date has been to hint at
some sort of amnesty for anti-American resistance
fighters, a move that could help split its
opposition. But that move was stopped cold by the
United States, in a way that demonstrates to Iraqis
and the world who is really in charge. According to
the July 18 Cleveland Plain Dealer:
"[T]he new U.S. ambassador, John Negroponte,
disputed suggestions that a proposed amnesty for
Iraqis who have opposed the U.S. occupation could
include those who have killed U.S. soldiers. …
"'There may have been at one point some language
that was ambiguous and led to the interpretation
that somehow people would be given amnesty who
assaulted U.S. troops,' he said. 'My understanding
is that ambiguity is no longer there.'"
Not only does that let the puppet strings show like
chemlights, it also renders any amnesty meaningless,
since it does not apply to the people who are doing
the fighting.
Fourth Generation war theory suggests that the Iraqi
"government's" strength at the physical level and
weakness at the moral level means it has already
peaked. Physical strength plays its greatest role
early, while the moral level works most powerfully
over time. As has been true ever since Saddam fell,
time is on the side of America's enemies, and time
is a powerful ally.
What are the other factions in Iraq? Both the Sunnis
and the Shi'ites appear to be splitting into
smaller, mutually hostile elements. There are
indications that among the Sunnis, the secularists,
who are mostly Ba'athists, and the Islamists are
starting to go at it. Several secularist militias
recently made a public announcement that they want
the head (severed or otherwise) of al-Qaeda's local
rep, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Shi'ite leader Muqtada
al-Sadr's recent war with the Americans had less to
do with resisting the occupation than with
positioning himself within the Shi'ite community.
Fourth Generation theory says that once the
fracturing begins in a post-state region, it
continues.
The resulting civil war may still have Sunni vs.
Shi'ite aspects; in fact, it is almost certain to
include that fault line. But there will be many
other fault lines as well, some within the Shi'ite
and Sunni communities, some cutting across them. At
the physical level, this works to the "government's"
advantage, in that its relative power increases. But
at the moral level, virtually all the other factions
have greater legitimacy than the "government." And
just as the strategic level trumps the tactical, so
the moral level trumps the physical. That is one of
John Boyd's more important insights into the nature
of war.
Not all of King George's bombers nor all of his men
can put Mesopotamia's Humpty together again. Since
Sen. Kerry's policy on Iraq differs from President
Bush's by only the finest of nuances, it is safe to
predict that a future King John would fare no
better.
About the Author:
William Lind is Director of the Center for Cultural
Conservatism at the Free Congress Foundation. He is
a former Congressional Aide and the author of many
books and articles on military strategy and war
Source :antiwar.com
Top |
®