Sectarian conflict in Iraq [Archives:2006/931/Opinion]

archive
March 23 2006

Mustafa Ragih
The last thing we needed was a sectarian war breaking out in Iraq like the one we now witness. It is true that stagnant stability during Saddam's dictatorship covered all this, but what is happening now goes beyond imagination. What happens in Iraq affects the whole Arab region. Many Arabs supported the foreign change that came via occupation because the Iraqi regime had reached a deadlock and change from within was impossible, as it had crushed and weakened all opposition during its 30-year rule.

Now the same effect is occurring because many Arabs who were longing for change and democracy are disappointed. Daily news of killings, corpses and sectarian cleansing have became as permanent a fixture as televised weather reports.

Everything has its cost. A totalitarian regime's cost was possible, but the future appears grim. Iraqi interrelations have disintegrated to an extent beyond hope of future coexistence.

The conflict is over traditional Shiite and Sunni (particularly Wahabi) legacies. It was unimaginable that a day would come when these Sunni Muslims would allege that the Shiite creed is a semi-new religion through which the Persians are trying to recover their usurped empire destroyed at Muslim hands.

On the other hand, Sunnis went to the extent of saying that a Shiite scholar said via satellite channels that Fatima was the Prophet Mohammed's only daughter, while the others were adopted. Is it sensible that this should be the basis for difference at the beginning of the 21st century, the era of globalization and the international village? Let's go back to the '60s. Did the Shiites and Kurds use to boast about being Shiites or Kurds? The answer is a definitive no. National identity was strong and used to dominate over ethnic and sectarian relations. So what's next?

There came a dictatorial Ba'athist regime that concentrated power in the Sunni sect. Inside the sect, power was confined to Al-Awjah clan and it was confined within this clan in Al-Majeed family. Al-Majeed family's power was in the hands of absolute ruler Saddam. Citizenship was wiped out and armed forces were built on sectarian domination and loyalty to the absolute ruler. The regime entered into ventures due to unilateral resolutions that couldn't take place in a democratic regime based on institutions and joint partnership resolutions. The regime entered into a long war with Iran, which we now see as sectarian proxy war between Iran's Shiites, supported by Syrian Alawis, and Iraqi Sunnis, supported by Wahabis centered in Saudi Arabia. The regime came out of the Iranian war and entered the adventure of invading Kuwait. And from there, he entered a 13-year blockade that ended in giving up Iraq to occupation. This removed the iron grip and the field opened to all hidden hostilities because stability was only an illusion. It was not based on persuasion, content or balance of interests. It is clear that Iraq returned to its preliminary elements: Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.

The Iraqi regime was deposed forever, but it seemed that the U.S. had opened a sack full of scorpions. The arrogance of the U.S. administration representative also contributed to this impression. With the advent of U.S. troops, all Iraqi army and employees were discharged. This was a message to Sunnis that punishment not only would be confined to the regimes' elites, but would include all. This caused Sunnis to create a suitable environment for the deposed regime's insurgents and terrorists crossing from neighboring countries. They found the environment they were looking for. Neighboring countries fearing Iraq's democratic model would trigger demands for change also considered Iraq a war front against all its external opponents stipulating democratic change and oppressing local ones. The situation ultimately reached what we see now, which will not be confined to Iraq but will include the whole area.

First, because there are majorities and minorities and the region is full of sectarian dictatorship models. Aren't the small minority Alawis in Syria dominating power there? It's shameful. The most dictatorial regimes in Iraq and Syria based their power on claims of Arab nationalism under Ba'ath, which ended up as ethnic sectarian rule. It turned out to be a blow to nationalism, confiscated citizenship and disintegrated community.

Fear of the dark end to which such ethnic and sectarian conflicts will lead can only be avoided by modernization and democratic projects, in addition to coexistence and freedom.

Mustafa Ragih is a Yemeni journalist.
——
[archive-e:931-v:14-y:2006-d:2006-03-23-p:opinion]