For most of the last decade, Iraq occupied center place in the Arab world, as it was swiftly occupied by the US armed forces in 2003 with the insurgency springing up to oppose the invaders and waves of sectarian strife making the country balance on the brink of a civil war. Order has gradually been restored and a government of national unity (played out mostly along sectarian lines) created.
On Dec. 15, 2011, the US finally pulled out of the country. Now the operation is over with the lives of 4,487 service members lost and about 33 thousand wounded. The war started to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction it did not possess. It showed complete disregard for international law and undermined the UN Security Council authority. The USA came under harsh criticism coming even from its closest allies, like Germany and France. It ignored well wishing friendly warning from Russia, the country rushed first to offer help after the 9/11 tragedy. And it plunged America and Iraq into the quagmire that brought so much suffering to so many people. The war ends without the sizable US military presence for which many politicians in the USA had hoped for. It leaves the USA with unintended consequences and Iraq with an uncertain future. It’s "harder to end a war than begin one" as said President Obama at the ceremony devoted to the event.
Now is the time to have a look at what the aftermath of the ill conceived military operation. Will the events in the volatile region turn for worth or there is a hope for peace and stability? With the USA gone does the Middle East have a chance to become a better place to live in?
SOME LESSONS TO DRAW
- The war in Afghanistan protracted because the troops (especially special operations units) were deviated to Iraq at the time the Afghan operation (real terrorists were involved) was in full swing. With those resources diverted then, the Taliban activities today might have prevented today;
- Iraqi insurgents perfected techniques of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that have become a real headache for NATO forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan (along the supply routes). The experience will certainly be used in case of NATO’s involvement in military hostilities in future;
- With Saddam Hussein and his iron hand power grip gone the lid was off. The Shiite-Sunni violence and other sectarian hostilities started throughout the region, complicating the what is called now Arab Spring. Just remember the killings of Coptic Christians in Egypt, to name a few.
- Iran boosted its influence in Iraq. With the USA embroiled in Iraq the power of Iranian hard-liners amplified, what in turn boosted Iranian military build – up and nuclear program (said to be destined for peaceful purposes) as well as eased the task of quashing vigorous urban opposition movement in Tehran.
- The United States proved its inability to effectively fight two simultaneous wars what. When US General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says in an interview with CNN published Wednesday (December 21, 2011) that preparations are being made for a possible strike in Iran a question pops up – has the US military brass absorbed any lessons of Iraq?
Iraq
Iraq faces a multitude of vexing problems the US failed to resolve, oil wealth division and sectarian reconciliation among them:
Weak points:
- The Iraqi government is shaky enough, divided along sectarian compromises, any agreements are hard to reach, the settlements are iffy, mutual distrust is no doubt a major element of life. The country still has a long time to go to become shaped as a politically stable entity;
- There are too many divisions that exert unfavorable influence on the country’s stability in general. Just to name some of them: the situation in the North still very much questionable. Kurdistan’s strive for independence is a strong trend to reckon with. A long standing dispute on power division between Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen still festers in Kirkuk and is an ominous harbinger of what may start a chain reaction in future. And some analysts strongly believe it’s a start of “Iran’s era” in case Iraq's Shiite majority wields unchallenged power. While the violence has gone down, sectarian rifts still flare. In some instances it remains unclear whether Iraq's security forces are loyal to their nation or their sect. Governors threaten Iraq's sovereignty at the local level;
- The country has been destroyed. Many places lack electricity and water supplies. The country has two million widows and five million orphans as an aftermath of the American invasion. Officially, there are approximately 1.5 million Iraqi refugees in Syria alone. The unofficial number is 1.5 times larger at least. They all live in poverty. The refugee problem is a long term festering headache for all – the Iraqis and the world. Some $61.8 billion in U.S. aid, and $107.4 billion in Iraqi funds overseen by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), and the Iraqi capital budget, have all failed to produce any clear measures of effectiveness;
- Iraq still has a long way to go to settle all disputes with its neighbors, mainly Turkey and Iran;
Every cloud has a silver lining:
- The Iraq's very considerable oil reserves are to foreign investment now (for the first time since 1974). So far, the Ministry of Oil has granted 12 licenses for fields in the south to companies from Britain, China, South Korea, the Netherlands, Russia and elsewhere, with just one going to an American company - Exxon Mobil. Though Iraq's oil output still has not rebounded to what it was like in the late 1970s, the government finds it plausible to state the goal of raising output to 12 million barrels a day by 2017, from the current 3 million barrels a day. Even if “the mission” is not accomplished fully, Iraq has great future as an petroleum exporting state. There is a solid ground to bank on to boost economic thrive that, as a result, will certainly alleviate (if not make go away) sectarian strife and the factors dividing the nation at present);
- Everyday life in Iraq has improved in some respects. Street life has returned to normal in Baghdad and some other major cities, bustling markets are back again. For instance the major world news agencies reported a new amusement park is opening in Baghdad and the circus coming to town this very year;
- The Iraqi armed forces are getting steadily better in spite of these problems, though at a much slower rate than planned;
- The war opened Iraq to the outside world. For the first time, Iraqis had easy access to satellite television, cell phones, smart phones and the Internet;
- Neither Iraq’s power players nor their regional supporters have an interest in allowing the situation to deteriorate into a full-blown civil war that could draw them in;
- The so-called Arab spring has little influence here. The demonstrators do not seek to topple their leaders but rather demand better government services after years of war and deprivation.
Along general lines:
There is still plenty of conflict in Iraq. Many Sunnis perceive the Shiites dominated government as a hostile factor. Violence is still endemic in the northern cities of Kirkuk and Mosul, where Kurds, Arabs and other groups jockey for control. Post war devastation is a factor. But the country has a “silver lining” to rely on. Far more than Afghanistan, Iraq is a nation with abundant resources and the middle class with the education and vision to come together and lead - but only if Iraqis can rise above the corruption and old suspicions that seem to be dragging them backward. What they need is “Give peace a chance” remembering the John Lennon’s call.
USA
The Iraq War was costly with a price tag over a trillion dollars. Tens of thousands of Americans have been crippled or killed. Human tragedies cannot be counted in any material form and that is a challenge for decades to come.
President Obama scored a few important points in his election campaign for keeping his word. No matter some leading Republicans say the USA withdrawal takes place too early, it is all too clear that most Americans want the war to be over and done with. As Gallup poll in October showed 75% approved of President Obama’s withdrawal of the troops, although Americans are divided sharply along parties lines: 96% Democrats, 77% independents, and 43% Republicans. There is a solid justification of the feelings. In spite of U.S. military successes in reducing the internal violence in Iraq, by and large the war has been a failure having in mind the costs compared to its benefits. But the Obama administration cannot be blamed for most of those failures. Besides the USA still preserves some presence in the region. As Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton emphasized the U.S. will have "a robust continuing presence throughout the region, which is proof of our ongoing commitment to Iraq and to the future of that region, which holds such promise and should be freed from outside interference to continue on a pathway to democracy." No doubt the ’robust presence’ includes combat forces in Kuwait, 4000 troops – a considerable emergency capability strongly supported from sea in a pinch. The withdrawal is very important against the background of the present financial woes the USA faces nowadays.
On the other side the Republicans are justified in a way saying the Obama administration has not provided any picture of the strategy it now intends to adopt in the Gulf region as a whole, or how it will deal with Iran. It has not specified how it intends to deal with the US allies in the Southern Gulf in particular and the Middle East as a whole and the force levels it deems necessary to stay in the region. Clear vision, well worked out strategy and goals distinctly defined would have been a virtue when it comes to getting votes in November.
THE SITUATION IN THE REGION
U.S. and Western power in the region is weakening due to their own mistakes, Iran's readiness to fill that vacuum is a reality. The recent aggravation of the situation in Syria (Iran's rare Arab friend) has a prospect of creating a new battlefield. The NATO and U.S. officials have said repeatedly they believed Tehran provided support to the Assad's government abandoned by the Arab League. Saudi or other Arab backing for the growing armed opposition could escalate the events further, potentially producing a lasting sectarian civil war spilling across Syrian borders into neighboring states, including Iraq. A possibility of Iran and Sunni Arab neighbors intervening in Iraq through proxy militias is strong.. At worst, that could rekindle the Sunni-Shia infighting that nearly tore the country apart a few years ago during American occupation days. A proxy Saudi-Iranian war in Iraq would represent a considerable threat to oil supplies Europe and Japan depend so much on.
Some of the increased friction with its neighbors could be a symptom of a power struggle within Iran. Some experts construe the temperature rising between Iran and others as reflection of the temperature rising in Tehran itself.
The recent UK embassy storming could be a sign of rising clout of hardline clerics and Revolutionary Guard brass hats. With the international sanctions tightening the hardliners stance may become strengthened. Or remember the October events when the United States said it had caught Iran plotting to blow up the Saudi ambassador to Washington in a restaurant. True or not and no matter what’s behind it, the event means the situation in the region is worsening. Israel and the United States both make clear they view special operations teams activities as a sound alternative to conventional military operation. Last year's Stuxnet computer worm damaging Iranian industrial software is generally believed to be an attack to cripple Iranian nuclear program. A number of Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed or mysteriously disappeared. Is a deliberate precision guided munitions air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities a possibility? The issue is a subject of discussion in the coming months, experts are divided. Many say the costs would be too high to take a risk. Or the results may be contrary to the anticipated ones. It could simply encourage the regime in place and provoke it into intensifying nuclear efforts or making Iran really roll up sleeves to start it, for the very existence of the Iranian program to go nuclear is still far from being a proven fact.
Iraq has raised renewed fears that the Middle East will be engulfed by sectarian bloodshed if Syria's President Bashar al-Assad is deposed as the country falls into civil war. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gave unequivocal support to the Assad government and even let know that its downfall could force Iraq into an Iranian-led alliance against the Arab world's Sunni states. He said the removal of President Assad may trigger an internal struggle between two groups and this will have an impact on the region. Many in Iraq share fear that if Syria's Sunni majority were to come to power, it could revitalise Sunni militants in Iraq's Anbar province who may harbour secessionist intentions. Iraq was also one of only three states in the 22-member League that declined to support Syria's suspension from the bloc.
Turkey is a powerful actor that has great clout on the regional situation developments. The US unmanned aerial vehicles were transported to Turkish Incirlik air base in December 2011 to fly missions over northern Iraq. Turkish instructors training Iraqi military is a point of ongoing discussions within NATO agenda framework. Many say Turkey is an actor powerful enough to counter Iran. Especially taking into consideration Turkey’s good relations with Muslim brothers coming to power as a result of Arab spring. Egypt is a good example.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar have made open their intention to boost ties with Iraq after the USA is gone.
The Middle East is the most volatile region in the world. With the USA leaving Iraq the struggle for influence is to start with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran and to some extent Syria as major actors while the internal sectarian drive for power is a feature of Iraqi political life today. Too many factors, all intertwined, make the Middle East political map a tangled knot with unpredictable future and blur prospects dooming any attempt to make forecasts to be a highly risky business.
RUSSIA
Russia spoke out in support of the 2010 elections in Iraq and expressed readiness to cooperate with the independent state on equal terms. The move had been preceded by the decision of the Russia’s government to write off the Iraqi $12 billion debt in exchange for a right to invest in Iraqi economy and respect of the contracts signed before. The very same year Lukoil won a tender to develop the Western Qurna-2 oil field. With due respect to Iraq’s sovereignty and limits imposed by its autonomous status Russia boosted ties with Kurdistan. A consulate has been opened in Arbil and the Voice of Russia radio broadcasting state company launched Kurdish language broadcasts. The Russian Minister of Foreign relations Sergei Lavrov’s visit to Iraq in May 2011 opened new opportunities for multilateral ties development, military-technical cooperation among other issues. Iraq’s 70% of all industry, many railroads, energy network facilities etc. are built with the help of Soviet experts. "Our country is interested in restoring dialogue and developing full-fledged cooperation with Iraq," President Medvedev said in his speech after receiving credentials from 13 new ambassadors to Russia, including Iraqi envoy Faiq Fariq Abdel Aziz, during a ceremony at the Grand Kremlin Palace in October 2010.
As the only major power not dependent on Middle Eastern oil and gas, Russia has an open hand to establish economic relations in all spheres. Not so much affected by the financial crisis like its Western partners and as an aspiring global power, thus, it is normal for Russia to be concerned with developments in Iraq and the wider Middle East. Russia is on speaking terms with all actors. It’s adherence to international law is well known. Thus dealing with Russia you play by clear rules. And Russia has a long history of close ties with many states of the region. All this makes it a unique moderator in any attempts to negotiate deals and a partner that has a lot to offer.
CONCLUSION
No matter how complicated the things are there are two major options - sectarian division or unity and coming to terms on major disagreements and using oil reserves as a starting point for general economic prosperity asserting itself as a truly independent state. With Americans gone it’s up to Iraqis to decide their fate.
