generalspeaking

Smugly Canadian

There remains a polarizing view among Canadians whether or not Canada, under Prime Minister Jean Chretien, was right to remain uninvolved in the "coalition of the willing", the joint American-led-British-go-along invasion of Iraq. To which, in short time, a host of other U.S.-friendly NATO allies joined. Eventually there were 170,000 coalition troops in Iraq, two months after the initial events of the joint invasion.

It began with tens of thousands of U.S. and British soldiers, bolstered by 7,000 U.S. Marines in the opening hours of the attack. Hundreds of jet fighters were involved. There were five aircraft carrier battle groups. Turkey had refused to permit the United States to base another 60,000 troops on its territory, making the initial total numbers invading Iraq fewer than might have been anticipated. In the end, it little mattered.

And to protect Iraq from the foreign invasion there were no fewer than 400,000 Baathist-led Iraqi troops. Who put up a brave front and appeared to do their utmost at first to defray the assaults by the Western allies, but failed quite spectacularly to halt their inexorable advance. And then, suddenly, they were gone, those hundreds of thousands of Saddam Hussein's faithful soldiers, melted into the scenery, no longer actively engaged.

The American command refused to allow them to aid in re-forming an Iraqi armed forces. They were to have no place in the future of the Iraqi military. All their experience and their training, and their allegiance to their country simply dismissed out of hand. And the consequences were dire. The command that knew the country far better than the invaders ever could was absent. And no one was left to separate Shia from Sunni, each unleashing traditional hatred for one another in a series of bloodbaths.

The invasion removed Saddam Hussein, a murderous, threatening dictator, who had by his iron will, maintained order and discipline, keeping sectarian adversaries from one another's throats. In his absence the simmering hatred simply freed itself from its former restraints and launched murderous raids. At night unprotected Shia districts were invaded by Sunnis, and the Shias returned the compliments, stealthily and well-armed entering Sunni areas, and butchery was widespread.

So much for the naive belief of the Americans that the oppressed Iraqi population would adoringly welcome their invading release, and instantly take to democratic action, in a celebration of freedom to choose. Iraqis chose instead to exhibit how deeply tribalism and sectarian animus remained entrenched and how deadly it could be, as passions were released and bodies piled up. So much for the civilizing atmosphere the West would bring with it, in offering liberty to those who had only known repression.

Few troops representing the Coalition became casualties. And it was estimated by U.S. General Tommy Franks that perhaps 30,000 Iraqi troops had perished. And the rest, they simply vanished. Into the vacuum of security, despite the presence of almost two hundred thousand Western troops, came Islamists filtering mostly through Syria, and representing al-Qaeda Sunnis. The atrocities they inflicted on Iraqis disgusted even Iraqi Sunnis.

And the American generals displayed the wisdom to encourage Iraqi Sunnis to form their own militias which were armed and trained by American soldiers, to oppose the lethal butchery of al-Qaeda whose predations were beyond mere slaughter; they indiscriminately butchered anyone, Shia or Sunni. With the U.S.-approved temporary Iraqi administration in place with Sunni, Shia, and Kurds sharing key ministries, the U.S. smugly thought that all was in order.

The Kurds established themselves in their one-third corner of the country, semi-sovereign and well administered, while the dissenting suspicion of Shia and Sunni, and the interference of Iran, made for a restive combination. Violent attacks inspired by sectarian and tribal hatreds continued, although the general slaughter had abated, finally. And those violent attacks continue to this day. Made inevitable, likely by Iraq's Shia-led government bringing criminal terrorist charges against his Sunni counterparts.

Yes, the invasion of Iran removed a dreadful tyrant. No, his removal did not substantially benefit the population of Iraq.  Tens of thousands of Iraqis perished in their brief but violent civil insurrection, and they are still dying, but at a more leisurely pace. And Iraq, which once fought a protracted, bitter and male-youth-demographic-costly battle with Iran, is now securely in the social-political-religious camp of Iran.

This would be the very same Iran that has threatened the Great Satan and the Little Satan. This would be the Iran of nuclear technology and one that is steadily advancing toward atomic bombs. This would be the Iran that supports those proxy militias-cum-Islamist governments of Hezbollah and Hamas. This would be the Iran that has sent its Republican Guard to fight alongside the Alawite Shia regime of the butcher al-Assad.

What an irony; the one-time Butcher of Baghdad, with his Sunni Baathist party and his close friendship with the Butcher of Damascus with his Shia Baathist party; the former a staunch enemy of Iran has seen the country become an ally of Iran; while the latter, a long-time ally of Iran, is busy butchering his Syrian Sunni population.

Exemplifying the solidarity and brotherhood of Arabs of Islamic conviction -- or should that be submissive persuasion? Canada, it can be said in its defence, had no part of any of this. Not that, in the final analysis, it matters all that much within the Middle East.

Labels: Conflict, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Iraq, Islamism, Societal Failures, Syria, Terrorism, United States

posted by Pieface @ Wednesday, March 20, 2013