Iraqi instability washes over neighbors
By Ehsan Ahrari
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's death, though it is a major development related to Iraq,
is hardly a reason for a prolonged celebration. That is the message that is
emerging from a number of informed sources in Washington and in Iraq's
immediate neighborhood.
Jordanian intelligence is claiming that it played a crucial role in bringing an
end to Zarqawi's short life (he was Jordanian and wanted in that country for
acts of terror) and highly turbulent career.
But the same sources are proffering highly sobering analysis of the depth of
anger that currently prevails in Jordan, Iraq and the occupied territories
toward the United States and toward Arab
regimes that are seen as friends of Washington, and, by extension, toward
Jerusalem. That anger needs to be watched in the coming months.
An important driving force in and around Iraq is the US-Jordan-Israel nexus
that is trying to stabilize the region in light of those countries' respective
interests. The US wants to stabilize and democratize Iraq; Israel wants to
pacify the Palestinian population and "resolve" the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict unilaterally, and hopes that by doing so, the problem will go away.
Jordan would very much like to see this conflict resolved, but feels powerless
about its resolution.
Zarqawi's death has done nothing to resolve the continued US predicament about
staying in Iraq. As long as the US forces remain in that country, the
insurgency will not lose its intensity. The only uncertainty is whether the
Islamist aspect of the insurgency can maintain its pace now that Zarqawi is no
longer in the picture.
If that were to happen, then another question is whether the insurgency will
remain as bloody as it has been during the leadership of Zarqawi. Intelligence
experts are certain that the insurgency will be less bloody, at least for the
next several weeks.
Then the successor of Zarqawi will have to establish his own pace and the level
of violence. Another variable is how the successor will be received by other
insurgent elements - ex-Ba'athists, Saddamists, members of the Republican Guard
and the Fidayeen-e-Saddam, and pan-Arabists - who are the real purveyors and
experts in the asymmetric war that is being waged so effectively against the
American and Iraqi security forces.
On this issue there are two related obdurate factors. First, given the present
state of internal turbulence in Iraq, the Americans cannot leave without
creating a powerful image of "humiliating withdrawal", as was the case in South
Vietnam, or without reliving the humiliating withdrawal of the Soviet Union
from Afghanistan in 1989.
Even if one were to ignore the symbolic aspects of a potential US withdrawal
from Iraq, realistically speaking, such a development would plunge the country
into more of a bloody mess than it is in now. It appears that the US is stuck
in Iraq for some time.
Second, as long as the US remains in Iraq, the very legitimacy of the
national-unity government will remain shaky, at best. With the presence of US
forces, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki will have to prove constantly that he is
not an American puppet.
He has already made some tangible gains by announcing the names of his nominees
for the Defense and Interior ministries and for national security adviser, on
the same day that Zarqawi's death was announced. He is also demanding from US
military authorities a rigorous inquiry into the killings of civilians at
Haditha.
However, the only true and durable source of legitimacy for the national-unity
government stems from the ability of Maliki to take concrete steps aimed at
improving the living conditions of Iraqis.
Israeli interests
The Palestinian conflict continues to intensify anti-Americanism, not just in
the immediate region, but also in the Muslim world at large. Arab public
opinion did not miss the fact that Zarqawi and Jamal Abu Samhadana, the founder
of the Popular Resistance Committees, were killed the same way, through the use
of air power.
What is most significant about the death of the Hamas official is that the US
did not utter a word of protest, even though innocent bystanders were killed.
At the same time, in the wake of the refusal of Hamas to recognize Israel,
renounce violence and negotiate with the Jewish state, Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert insists that his government will unilaterally determine the
modalities of peace and borders with the Palestinians.
The Palestinian nation is becoming increasingly divided because of the
intensification of differences between President Abu Abbas of the Fatah
organization and the duly elected Hamas government.
Rightly or wrongly, Arab public opinion holds the administration of US
President George W Bush responsible for this state of affairs. Why, they ask,
is it that the US insists on establishing high standards of observance of
international law from the Arab side while there is no insistence that Israel
should do all it can to resolve the Palestinian conflict? These are the
developments that also fuel the insurgency in Iraq and elsewhere.
Concerns for Jordan
Jordan is the weakest link in this nexus. It is increasingly worried about the
seething anger within its borders. At the same time, it remains convinced that
the Iraqi insurgency might become even bloodier than before.
Amman is also alarmed about Iran's growing influence in Iraq and in Lebanon.
Jordan's concerns cannot be dismissed, since it has the highest number of
Palestinians outside the Israeli-occupied territories. This sector of the
Jordanian population remains unhappy about their country's prolonged friendship
and cooperation with the US and Israel, while their brethren in the occupied
territories continue to struggle for their independent homeland.
Amman's close ties with the US and friendly relations with Israel are making
their own contribution to the potential political combustibility of that
country. From the US perspective, it is very important that Jordan closely
cooperate with its "war on terrorism".
However, that cooperation has never been a two-way street in the sense that
Washington has paid scant to no attention to what is of vital concern and
interest to Jordan. Few, if any, US officials concede that their country's
highly visible and proactive role in the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict would create an enormous amount of goodwill in Jordan, which King
Abdullah direly needs.
In the absence of that US role, Jordan remains a highly unsettling place, with
a large number of Palestinians watching the growing violence and killing of
their counterparts in the occupied territories. One only wonders how many
Zarqawis are being created as a direct outcome of frustrations related to that
reality.
King Abdullah is certainly mindful of this issue. At the same time, Jordan is
palpably concerned about the growing influence of Iran in Iraq - not that
Jordan is unaware of the historical ties between Iran and Iraq emanating from
Shi'ite Islam that is shared by most people in the two countries.
What worries Amman is how that particular bond will be exploited in creating
the ever-increasing influence of Iran in Iraq in the coming years.
The implicit aspect of Iran's mounting significance in Iraq is that the Sunni
neighboring states are increasingly faced with the reality of growing Shi'ite
clout and strategic significance, not only in Iraq, but also in Lebanon.
This is something they have never experienced, or anticipated. That is one
reason President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt publicly questioned the national
loyalties of Iraqi Shi'ites in April.
Why is it that no Shi'ite politician similarly questions the political
loyalties of Sunnis? The sad aspect of Mubarak's insensitive remark is that he
stated what many Sunni leaders have been thinking regarding the Shi'ite
populace within their borders.
As an integral aspect of their information war, and to make a point worldwide
that the Iraqi insurgency is largely composed of "foreign Islamists", the US
military deliberately made Zarqawi a larger-than-life figure. His death, though
it is a major event within Iraq, does nothing to stabilize that country or
legitimize its government.
A turbulent Iraq continues to feed the instability of its immediate
neighborhood. Jordan knows that its own stability is also getting wobbly. Thus
it is doing the only logical thing by cooperating with US forces and hoping
that it will win in Iraq and, in the process, stabilize the region.
What is also destabilizing the region is the ever-obdurate Palestinian-Israeli
conflict, to which regional and global jihadis are becoming increasingly
committed.
Only the proactive and judicious participation of the US could create the
momentum to resolve the conflict. Other than this, there is nothing Jordan can
do about it. That is the ultimate source of its frustrations.
And Jordan's aggravations reflect the frustrations of all actors who wish to
see their region turn into a peaceful and stable area. They know how such
conditions may be brought about, but they themselves are not powerful enough to
materialize them.
Ehsan Ahrari is the CEO of Strategic Paradigms, an Alexandria,
Virginia-based defense consultancy. He can be reached at eahrari@cox.net
or stratparadigms@yahoo.com. His columns appear regularly in Asia Times
Online. His website: www.ehsanahrari.com.
