Any reasons to be optimistic over the situation in Iraq?

It's understandable to assume that the violence in Iraq which began  after the blitz of ISIL last month won't subside anytime soon.  But there are some realities to reflect upon. 

All Al-Qaeda categories are notoriously slack fighters, lacking in  leadership skills, discipline, battlefield strategy and worst of all, rife with infighting for power and money as the prime goal.  They probably would never be able to capture Mosul despite the incompetence of the Iraqi army  if they weren't helped by Baathist forces and the Naqshbandis.  No  Al-Qaeda group has yet been able to face a real army alone without  massive and steady assistance from the West via the GCC.  Since the  inception of Al-Qaeda, not a single incident shows the success of this  organization when it stood and fought independently.  It tried to do  that in Afghanistan in 2002 and was routed.  Events in Syria are no less discouraging for them.   In spite of support and benefits worth  billions of dollars from the West and their gulf allies for more than  three years, none of the Al Qaeda franchises have yet acquired a  solid and widespread victory against the Syrian Army, much less  threatening the fall of the Syrian government.  What we're seeing is the mercenaries' hide-n-seek tactics with the Syrian forces and also within  themselves.  ISIL's sudden decision to move away from Syria to Iraq is basically the outcome of its poor performance and total lack of success on Syrian battlefronts.  If cornered  in Iraq, rushing back into Syria wouldn't be an ideal option either.  

With Iran and Iraq seriously planning to coordinate and the Syrian air  force already pounding ISIL hideouts along its border with Iraq, if the  US and EU decide to mind their own businesses for a change and halt  their subversive policies, ISIL would be in hot water.  With that, the  incentive of the Baathists seeking alliance with ISIL would taper off as  well.  The presumed cooperation of the Baathists with ISIL is more an act of  the former's bitterness against Shiia post-Saddam Iraq rather than any ideological  compatibility with the latter.  Baathists have always been staunch secularists  who have never had a soft corner for reactionary movements, let alone  ragtag ones like ISIL promoting Western interest. 

As is obvious, the US and EU are in no hurry to help Iraq repulse ISIL  just as they aren't in Syria.  Why would they be?  After all, ISIL is  their initiation and their brand of high-priority mercenaries.  On rainy  days it's these obscurantists who do the rough-n-tough assignments  necessary for 'first world' expansionism.  A friend in need is a friend  indeed.  Coping with ISIL's tantrums is an indispensable investment for  the West.  The West isn't considering to fight ISIL any time soon.  But  just as long as it doesn't feed them might be enough for the survival of  Iraq as an entity.

Confronting ISIL in Iraq now depends largely upon the stance taken by  Iran.  According to recent reports Iran had expressed its willingness to  help stop the advance of ISIL and decided to send an entire fleet of fighter jets to Iraq.  Needless to say, Iraq isn't capable of handling the situation  on its own.  The $20 billion training imparted to Iraqi forces by the  US was only on torture techniques, not combat skills.   Iraq's dependency on the US would only make it weaker at the hands of  ISIL.   

United States' support for Shiia Iraq was on the rebound following  the fall of Saddam.  But that's water under the bridge.  The story is altogether different at the moment.  The United States (and Israel) now sees Iraq as  Iran's ally.  Consequently it has also acquired a partner of convenience  within the various Salafist camps that are sworn enemies of Iran, Iraq and Syria.  The need for promoting Zionist hegemony in the Middle-East has never been more for which Iran and Syria are seen as formidable obstacles.  As it would be simple enough to  gauge, United States is no longer interested in pampering the immediate  successors of Saddam whom it brought into power after toppling the  Baathists a decade ago. 

With the Syrian Army and Hezbollah taking care of Levant and its borders  with Iraq, now is the time for Iran to act jointly with Iraq.  Otherwise there is a huge possibility that optimism could be lost sooner rather than later.



  1. Don't you think the USA and Europe are enjoying breaking up Iraq?

    1. Yeah, that's an added plus for them. Whether or not Iraq breaks up, what's important to Western leaders is that Iraq should be chaotic and weak, and ready for easy bargains so that they can have smooth access to the country's natural resources. A strong Iraq with friendly allies after kicking out foreign terrorists won't be in the interest of the West.


Post a Comment

For all general Q&A visit the following link @ Zainab's Lounge. (Copy & paste link on browser)