|
|
|
|
SPEAKING
FREELY
Weapons of
self-destruction
By W Joseph
Stroupe
Speaking Freely is an Asia
Times Online feature that allows guest writers to
have their say. Please click here
if you are interested in
contributing.
Iraq is dangerously
close to the threshold - the point of no return at
which an ideological-sectarian chain reaction is
triggered and a rapidly accelerated disintegration
along sectarian lines occurs. The blinding flash
of Iraq's disintegration will be followed closely
by a powerful shockwave radiating outward in all
directions, then by an irresistible reverse force
that will pull Iraq's neighbors into the vortex.
That is the point at which the US begins to suffer
an irreversible forfeiture in Iraq.
The
political detonation described here, in which
Iraq's enriched, fissionable sectarian factions or
elements are rammed together forcefully by the
current US-driven political process, finally reach
critical mass and then detonate to cause Iraq's
violent disintegration, is imminent. Consequently,
not only has the US finally uncovered Iraq's
political WMSD (weapons of mass self-destruction)
but it is also, knowingly or unknowingly, racing
toward the triggering of a political fission bomb
of enormous yield with widespread regional and
even global fallout.
Enrichment of
ideological-sectarian fissionable elements
To achieve a fission detonation you must
start with highly enriched fuel in which the
concentration of the radioactive elements is very
high in relation to the inert elements.
Several important factors have resulted in
the ideological-sectarian elements in Iraq
becoming very highly enriched. When the US
collapsed the entire Saddam Hussein regime, at one
and the same time it removed the damper block that
kept Iraq's sectarian factions under control. It
removed the force of suppression that had kept
Iraq's primary three disparate ideologies from
becoming concentrated, potent, radicalized or
enriched enough to be politically fissionable.
After the removal of Saddam's regime the US
replaced it with nothing to act as a suppressor or
damper. Therefore, the political-ideological
enrichment process, long suppressed, began to
flourish out in the open as each of Iraq's
sectarian factions dreamed of establishing (or, in
the case of Sunnis, reestablishing) itself in a
position of freedom and of control over Iraq and
its oil-rich regions.
Thus, the Kurdish
faction became highly enriched politically and
ideologically as respects its demand for an
independent Kurdistan in Iraq's north. Today, that
faction proclaims that it will not compromise on
its demands for Kurdish autonomy, retention of its
own heavily armed militias and control of oil-rich
Kirkuk. Neither will it submit to an Iraq governed
by Islamic law.
Likewise, the Shi'ite
faction is intent on establishing autonomous
control over Iraq's south and appears determined
to put forth Islamic law as the basis for Iraq's
judiciary and system of laws. It is allying itself
closely to Iran. The Shi'ite element has thus
become very highly enriched.
Finally, the
Sunni faction fears that federalism or outright
autonomy in the oil-rich north and south will
cause Iraq's breakup, leaving the Sunnis holding
the comparatively worthless central regions of
Iraq. It disdains Islamic law and has taken to
violent means to try to prevent an Iraqi scenario
that would leave it on the outside looking in. The
Sunni element has thus become very highly enriched
also.
Each of Iraq's ideological-sectarian
elements increasingly displays a high
concentration of radioactive elements as compared
to those elements that are inert. Radicalism
flourishes in an environment of instability,
violence and hopelessness. Such conditions
prolonged for nearly two-and-a-half years after
the destruction of the Saddam regime are causing
Iraqis to revert to their respective
ideological-political roots, to distrust, resent
and even to despise rival sectarian factions and
increasingly to push for the interests of one's
chosen sectarian faction to the exclusion of all
others. Iraq's three-way polarization is
increasing, deepening. The ideological positions
of each sectarian element are acutely hardening.
That is akin to the enriching of Iraq's
ideological-sectarian elements, making those
elements highly fissionable. Iraq does have
extremely potent, highly enriched fissionable
elements that have been uncovered by the US
invasion and occupation. As such, Iraq already has
all the elements and know-how for the production
of a very potent political WMD, one that will
result quickly in its self-destruction. It has
only to be assembled and triggered.
However, as is often the case with the
development of WMD, Iraq is receiving outside help
to propel it along the destructive path. How so?
State of critical mass
The
achievement of an actual fission detonation occurs
when highly enriched fissionable elements are
quickly compressed together by outside forces to
reach a state of critical mass. This can be
accomplished by ramming those elements together or
by spherically imploding the fissionable elements
together. The result is a catastrophic fission
detonation that releases far more energy than that
used to achieve the initial implosion.
The
US-driven political process in Iraq seeks to
prevent the breakup of the country by creating a
new democratic Iraqi government and constitution
that bind Iraq's sectarian elements together. That
is a noble goal. However, the means employed by
the US in an attempt to achieve that goal are very
problematic and are inherently dangerous. So is
the highly compressed timeframe for its
achievement currently being pushed upon Iraq by
the US. In effect, the US-driven means and
timeframe amount to ramming or imploding Iraq's
fissionable sectarian elements together, rather
than carefully and methodically binding them
together. The US is foolishly risking a
catastrophic political, ideological-sectarian
fission detonation in Iraq. It is not only
assembling the political fission bomb, but it is
also flicking the trigger mechanism to see if it
can get a light.
The US massively
over-reached in Iraq when it launched its
invasion, occupation and nation-building effort
(collectively, "regime change") in March 2003. Its
costs (to the US) in terms of lives, money,
political and diplomatic capital, global
credibility and goodwill and military readiness
have been colossal, and such costs continue to
mount. The US is desperate, therefore, to
significantly reduce its military presence and to
try to put the Iraq crisis and all its
implications and repercussions behind itself. That
desperation is driving the extremely short, highly
compressed timeframe for the achievement of
political goals in Iraq. That highly compressed
timeframe is entirely impractical and acutely
dangerous. You simply cannot thrust Iraq's highly
enriched sectarian elements together so rapidly
without risking an enormous and potent detonation.
Not only that, but the actual methods
being employed by the US to try to consolidate
Iraq's ideological factions are far too dangerous
and forceful. When the US drove the process of the
drafting of the interim Iraqi constitution in 2004
when it handed sovereignty back to the interim
Iraqi government, it pitted Iraq's factions
against one another out of fear one faction might
rise to the ascendancy. Thus the interim
constitution played well to Kurdish hopes, goals
and interests but it simultaneously sought to
undermine those of the larger Shi'ite faction.
Sunni interests were largely ignored, or at least,
grossly understated. At the same time, for fear
that the Kurdish faction would gain inordinate
potency, the document denied certain rights and
goals sought with great determination by the
Kurdish faction. The US has played the Kurdish and
Sunni factions against the Shi'ite in various ways
for fear the Shi'ite would gain the ascendancy.
Such shortsighted methods bring to birth increased
frustration, resentment and violence between
factions.
Additionally, US policies and
actions in Iraq have all too often employed
inordinate force and even cruelty. The brutal and
indiscriminate siege of Fallujah and the
widespread Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal are
notable examples. Such methods sow the seeds of
deeper and wider resistance to the presence of
foreign forces and foreign influence over domestic
political processes. Far too large a percentage of
Iraqis view the US as the oppressor rather than
the liberator, and that percentage is growing
rather than declining. Consequently, attempting to
promote democracy at the barrel of a gun tends to
fundamentally undermine the credibility of the
invading force, resulting in eventual forfeiture
of that political objective as the sectarian
factions succumb to deep-seated suspicion of the
real motives of the occupying forces. And as
Iraq's environment slides ever faster toward
greater sectarian violence and less security and
stability, the US-driven political processes
become less and less relevant and increasingly
serve merely to showcase the fundamental
incompatibility between Iraq's factions. That fact
greatly increases the tension and resentment
between factions.
That was the case with
respect to the Iraqi elections in January. Rather
than serving to alleviate Iraq's sectarian
rivalries as hoped, the election results announced
on February 13 significantly added fuel to the
already raging fire in Iraq. The prospect of
Shi'ite dominance, the Sunni minority status and
Kurdish strength in the north were demonstrated by
those election results. The incompatible goals and
ideologies of Iraq's three main factions were thus
showcased. The result? Iraq's insurgency kicked
into high gear, Kurdish radicals launched more
deadly attacks against Turkey and Turkish
interests and Shi'ite militias resorted to revenge
attacks against Sunnis. Some of Iraq's most
prominent leaders have recently stated without
equivocation that Iraq is already descending into
the beginnings of a civil war. While the political
process is not dead yet, each of Iraq's main
sectarian factions has moved outside that process
in significant ways to secure its interests and
goals as hopes for success of the political
process fade into oblivion.
Draft
constitution as the final trigger?
Against
that background the US is driving Iraq's factions
hard to complete by the August 15 deadline the
drafting of Iraq's new constitution. The US has
openly entered the fray, pushing hard to ensure
the document reads as it wishes. But such
political pressure merely amounts to more of the
same - a forced imploding together of Iraq's
highly enriched sectarian elements, elements that
are now easily fissionable. The US is playing with
nuclear fire in a political sense, therefore.
In the current situation in Iraq it will
not require much additional in the way of outside
pressure and force to finally implode Iraq's
highly enriched sectarian elements into a state of
critical mass, resulting in a detonation no sane
person wants. The imminent end of the process of
the drafting of Iraq's new constitution, or the
failure of that process, is very likely to
constitute the trigger for the detonation of
Iraq's political WMD. Whether that process of
drafting a new constitution "succeeds" (highly
unlikely) or fails, it will signal Iraq's arrival
at the threshold of an ideological-sectarian state
of critical mass and a resulting detonation. How
so?
The process of drafting Iraq's
constitution is ramming, or imploding together its
fundamentally incompatible, highly enriched,
fissionable sectarian factions. No workable
solution to Iraq's sectarian divisions exists – at
least not in the acutely accelerated timeframe
being pushed hard by the US.
On the issues
of autonomy and federalism, the role of Islamic
law, survival of Iraq's sectarian, heavily armed
militias and a number of other important issues
Iraq's factions have hardened their respective
positions, are far apart, and are getting even
further apart. Any "breakthrough" that might be
achieved in the foreseeable future will be nothing
more than an attempt to paper over such
fundamental differences. Such a breakthrough will
do nothing to alleviate Iraq's volatile sectarian
tensions. In fact, it would likely accomplish the
precise opposite, outraging each faction because
cherished, non-negotiable interests and goals of
the respective factions would be watered down for
the sake of an agreement that satisfies few if any
fundamental goals and demands of those respective
factions. Such an agreement would most likely be
seen merely as an attempt to pacify the US
occupier. Subsequently, abandonment of the
US-driven political process in favor of strident
self-interest would be the most likely course for
each of the three main factions. In effect, a
political fission detonation in the form of a
breakup of Iraq, likely under conditions of a
full-blown civil war, would quickly ensue.
If, as is most likely, Iraq's factions
come to the conclusion by the August 15 deadline
that the political process is dead or dying and
that the drafting of a new constitution has failed
or is in serious trouble, then what? US pressure
for the Iraqi representatives to go back to the
table to iron out their differences and complete
the drafting of the constitution will be enormous,
but also very counter-productive, again amounting
to a dangerous ramming or imploding together of
Iraq's fissionable elements. Such US pressure
could actually trigger a nationwide political
detonation.
As the August 15 deadline
approaches Iraq is nearing the threshold, the
point of no return, when a political chain
reaction starts under rapidly building US pressure
and moves quickly to a full-blown detonation. The
US has removed all the safety mechanisms and is
going for broke, as it were, with respect to
Iraq's political process. Iraq is therefore like a
nuclear weapon that is already fully armed, and
the countdown to detonation begins when parliament
receives word on the state of the draft
constitution. Iraq, as a nation, cannot survive
the coming detonation.
Repercussions
for Iraq, the US and the region
A breakup
of Iraq along sectarian lines, most likely violent
and bloody, is becoming ever more likely as the
political process advances. That is because Iraq
is itself an artificial creation composed of
sectarian factions that are fundamentally
incompatible with each other. And as the political
process advances those fundamental
incompatibilities are brought painfully to the
surface to be showcased for all to see. The
participants in that process are becoming ever
more convinced that their future lies along the
path of regional autonomy, or even secession.
However, a Kurdish-dominated autonomous or
independent Kurdistan in the north that lays claim
to Kirkuk will spark intervention by Turkey and
perhaps Syria. Against the backdrop of increasing
terrorist attacks on Turkish interests, ongoing
ethnic reconfiguration of north Iraq in favor of
the Kurdish faction but detrimental to Turkomen
and Arabs, and the growing restiveness of Kurdish
minorities inside Turkey, Syria and Iran,
Turkish-Syrian intervention is imminent. It could
occur at any time.
In the south of Iraq
the Shi'ite faction already is moving much closer
to Iran. It also is prepared for Shi'ite autonomy,
or even secession, if it deems that action to be
in its best interests. It has Iran's promise of
economic, energy and security assistance. Thus,
the formation of a new Islamic state governed by
Shi'ite ideology is becoming a very high
probability, whereas not long ago that eventuality
was considered somewhat unlikely.
In the
Sunni triangle the anger, frustration and violence
is the greatest, and that will only worsen as the
Sunni faction becomes ever more disenfranchised
and isolated from Iraq's oil wealth potential.
With all three factions heavily armed and intent
on preserving their respective interests at all
costs, a full-blown civil war simultaneous with
Iraq's breakup is a high probability.
The
US will either be stuck in the middle with the
Sunnis, trying in vain to keep the warring
factions separated or it will be forced by events
to withdraw its forces under fire, letting Iraq go
in whatever direction it may go. Either way, the
US loses in a colossal way. Its democratic goals
and energy security interests in the entire region
will be forfeited as Iraq disintegrates and its
neighbors (Turkey, Syria and Iran) rush in to pick
up the pieces, discounting completely US interests
in the process.
The rise of Turkey, of
Syria, and most notably of Shi'ite Iran allied
closely with a new Shi'ite Islamic state in south
Iraq will receive a giant push forward. The rise
of Iran in particular will have far-reaching
consequences for the US and the world. And
insurgents and terrorists now operating in Iraq
will be flung far outside Iraq, region-wide, to
threaten the safety and stability of oil-rich
pro-US regimes in Kuwait, Oman, the United Arab
Emirates and Saudi Arabia. These developments and
others like them will constitute the toxic fallout
of Iraq's political fission detonation.
The US considers this to be the true
nightmare scenario, and for very good reason.
However, not only it is now powerless to stop that
scenario from coming true, it is foolishly helping
to bring it about! The US cannot possibly face a
withdrawal of its forces from Iraq under fire in
the scenario detailed above and at the same time
leave Iran intact, enabling it to be catapulted to
the status of the new Islamic nuclear superpower
at the head of the Persian Gulf. However, the
risks of hitting Iran militarily on the way out of
Iraq are enormous, even colossal. The
after-effects of such a strategy are almost too
terrible to consider when one looks at the
political, ideological and economic repercussions.
Yet, the Bush administration will soon have to
choose which of its self-made evils is the lesser,
and it is not yet safe to conclude there will be
no US or Israeli military hit on ascendant Iran.
The imminent forfeiture and disintegration
of Iraq will live up in every way to the analogy
used here of a detonation of a weapon of mass
self-destruction. The approaching August 15
deadline for the completion of Iraq's draft
constitution will likely be an important marked
point in time, when the shortened countdown to
that detonation begins.
W Joseph
Stroupe is editor in chief of Global Events
Magazine at www.GeoStrategyMap.com, and online
magazine specializing in strategic analysis and
forecasting.
(Copyright 2005 W Joseph
Stroupe)
Speaking Freely is an Asia
Times Online feature that allows guest writers to
have their say. Please click here
if you are interested in
contributing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
