Obama's Iraq Disaster.

Sub-titled: What I was doing before Sharon died.

Upon winning the 2008 Presidential Election Barack Obama realised that American voters were weary of the wars in Afghanistan and particularly in Iraq. Calculating that this might adversely effect his chances of winning the 2012 Presidential Election Obama made it his mission to pull all US troops out of Iraq before that election regardless of the cost. The problem was that the situation in Iraq was nowhere near ready for a US troop withdrawal.

Under the rule of Saddam Hussein Iraq's Sunnis and Shias were played off against each other in order to justify the continuation of the dictatorship. So when Hussein fell Iraq's Sunnis and Shias embarked on a brutal sectarian war. As the Sunnis were linked to al-Qaeda and the Shias were better organised the US looked to the Shias to build a new Iraqi government. The problem was that the sectarian strife continued after the formation of the government with Iraq's Sunnis largely refusing to co-operate with the Shia dominated government and the Shia dominated government acting in a way that was biased towards Iraq's Shias at the expense of the Sunnis. Some progress was made in improving the situation during the 2006/7 "Awakening" or "Sahwa" in which Sunni tribal leaders in mainly western Iraq were persuaded to side with the US military against al-Qaeda militants. Unfortunately this alliance didn't really transfer to the Iraqi government so when the US military left it collapsed and Sunni V Shia sectarian violence returned to Iraq with a vengeance.

The US might just have got away with leaving a very violent Iraq but one in which the Iraqi government remained in overall control if the US hadn't at the same time been supporting the war in neighbouring Syria. That conflict has never been about a popular uprising against an illegitimate government and these days isn't even about the overthrow of the Syrian government. Instead it is a conflict being carried out by the most extreme Sunni extremists. The most active of these groups recently has been the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). As their name suggests they are originally from Iraq and don't want to liberate Syria so much as re-establish the Levant which is a nation from the time of the Prophet Mohamed made up of parts of Syria, parts of Lebanon, parts of Turkey and parts of Iraq. The reason why they want to re-establish the Levant is that according to Sunni prophecy it is the place where the Messiah will appear atop of a white minaret in order to start the ultimate war between good and evil that will eventually bring about the end of the world. Of course according to Shia prophecy the Levant is where followers of the false prophet (Sunnis) will raise the army that will eventually be destroyed by followers of the true prophet (Shias) paving the way for the arrival of the Messiah. Not that we're dealing with complete lunatics or anything.

The support in terms of finance, weapons, training and diplomatic legitimacy that the international community including the US has been giving to these insurgent groups in Syria (al-Nusra Front and other are just as bad) has caused them to become increasing strong and increasingly powerful. So in October 2013 ISIL which controls most of north-eastern Syria turned their attentions back to Anbar province in Iraq and by January 2014 had expelled the Iraqi government from the province that makes up much of western Iraq. This makes it increasingly likely that Iraq will fragment into a Kurdish region in the north and a Shia region in the east with the west becoming part of the wider Levant warzone. Obviously this caused the Iraqi government to turn to the US for help to defeat the ISIL and re-take Anbar province. Unfortunately in order for the US to help Obama would first have to admit that he'd made a horrific mistake by withdrawing US troops from Iraq in the first place and then also admit that he'd made another horrific mistake by supporting the insurgency in Syria. So as has become something of the hallmark of his Presidency Obama instead ducked the issue and did absolutely nothing.

This lack of leadership obviously has a negative effect on US interests in Iraq but also has a wider knock-on effect on US interests in Afghanistan. As you've probably worked out by now Obama is hell-bent on withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014 in the hope this will boost the Democrats chances at November's mid-term elections. The problem is that everybody knows that it is far too soon for the US to withdraw from Afghanistan and it is universally accepted that following that withdrawal large parts of the country will fall back under the control of the Taliban.

This is so obvious that even the US have given up on negotiating a way to stop the Afghan government from collapsing. Instead they're trying to strike a deal with Karzai and his cronies that would see just enough US troops remain in the country to protect Karzai and associates economic interests such as so-called rare earth mineral mines. In return Karzai and associates would of course be expected to give US companies preferential treatment in concessions to operate those mines. Unfortunately the way the US has left the Iraqi government hanging in the wind over Anbar is only likely to encourage Karzai and associates to look towards more -shall we say informal - relationships to protect their economic interests and a complete withdrawal of US troops. Having been the lead actor in the formal invasion and occupation of Afghanistan the US would of course be the least well placed to enter into this type of informal arrangement.



(Originally Posted) 16:30 on 20/1/14 (UK date).