Good News / Bad News alert.
By Moe Lane Posted in Foreign Affairs — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The good news: the Iraqi Kurds are apparently doing just jim-dandy for themselves these days, thank you very much, thanks for asking and thank Allah for the USA.
The bad news: they are also apparently not sanguine about the long-term viability of a federal Iraq. And by 'not sanguine' I mean 'setting up the infrastructure they'll need to go it alone'.
Read on.
There are times when you almost have to be grateful to the antiwar movement: they've made it impossible for the Democrats to come up with an almost-smart plan wrt Iraq. An almost-smart plan would be for the Democrats to:
1). Give unforced plaudits to the Bush administration for 'carrying on Bill Clinton's rescue of the Kurds', as well as a grudging approval for 'bringing the butcher of our Kurdish friends to final justice';
2). Recommend the permanent relocation of significant American air and training forces to Kurdistan, with an eye to building up the Kurdish military. 20,000 troops total sounds about right;
3). Dump a good deal of reconstruction money into Kurdistan (in exchange for American contractors being used for the work);
4). And then take the hard line on the rest of Iraq that they so badly want to look as if they're taking.
I call this an 'almost-smart plan' because it'll still eventually mean a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia once we leave, which is (I suspect) the other reason why we're not letting the Kurds just walk away*. Fortunately or unfortunately for the Democrats, they're currently stuck. Most of the people that are running the "antiwar" movement hated the no-fly zones that saved the Kurds in the first place; they'd react ... badly ... to any suggestion that they were wrong about that, too.
And with that crowd? Better a million people that they don't know burn than one person that they do - and like - have to admit that he or she was wrong. I almost feel sorry for the Democrats, really.
Almost.
Moe
*The first one? Turkey.
...and I always have. We can keep the semi-fiction of a federal Iraq going, but encourage (and protect) independent economic and legal structures in the north. As I've said elsewhere, the big marker I'm waiting to see is the emergence of private commercial and retail banking.
Hmm. This depends on a permanent US presence, doesn't it? Something in the manner of Germany and South Korea. Well, given the political consequences of outright failure, I'm not as certain as I once was that the next President (whatever her name is) will automatically bail on Iraq.
I'm also not inclined to accept the kneejerk reactions that war with Turkey and/or a proxy war involving Saudi Arabia will automatically ensue. In the best-case outcome, the Kurds will be too busy getting rich to fight with anyone.
"a permanent US presence, doesn't it? Something in the manner of Germany and South Korea. "
Kurdish Iraq would be a good place for a permanent presence - the Kurds need our support to protect them from both Iraq and Turkey.
to have a US military base or two within their borders.
I think the sad thing for Iraq is that the Kurds seem to have their act together while the Shia and Sunni can't seem to figure it out-they are too busy hating each other.
supply its military bases in a land locked Kurdistan surrounded by enemies? When the Kurds can get to the Med, we can talk basing.
...serious question. I'm not a military logistician and never have been one, so the most honest answer I can give is "I don't know." How are we supplying Iraq, which is immediately to Kurdistan's south? How do we trade with (and send military materiel to) Turkey, immediately north?
The premise of your question is where the flaw is located. If the Kurdish region is indeed to be surrounded with enemies constantly at the edge of war, then there's no question of establishing an autonomous region that can become economically productive.
I heard President Bush this morning say that Iraq's new government budget is $41 billion. That's $1,600 a head. If you let me assume that Iraq is like the rest of the world as regards the proportion of government spending to the total economy, that might indicate a per-capita GDP of a bit more than $3,000. That's about where Venezuela and Iran are now. Let non-Kurdish Iraq stay about that level, and stick to preventing civil war as its primary activity in life.
But a secure and autonomous Kurdistan might aspire to three times that level, which would put it in the same rank as Mexico (and Turkey). For once, I'd like to see an oil-rich nation (I didn't say state) actually do something right and develop a real economy.
Turkey's problem with Kurdistan is that the Kurdish populations in Turkey will want to secede and join a greater Kurdistan. Obviously it's in everyone's interest to keep that from happening. That's part of why I think it makes sense for Kurdistan to stay formally a part of federal Iraq but informally to have autonomous administrative structures, including a US security guarantee.
Will Iran strike at Kurdistan as a way of thumbing Saudi Arabia in the eye? They'll think twice about it if our troops are there. Especially if the Kurds trade with the Iranians. I'm hoping the Kurds will be too busy making money to remember that they're Sunni and the Iranians are Shia.
I hate to say it, but it may be that only a Democratic President (after she is elected, not before) can dare to speak the truth: our future includes a permanent military presence in Iraq.
attack US military convoys heading to "Kurdistan"
It's an interesting question, though
...to transit their territory on the way to Kurdistan. So military supply has to come from the south.
I can't speak to the issue of whether the Turkish Kurds will destabilize Turkey in a drive to form a greater Kurdistan. That's why I think that a clearly-stated US policy against such an outcome is so important. Together, crucially, with an economic harmonization of southern Turkey with northern Iraq. By which I mean lifting the condition of Kurdistan up to roughly Turkey's level.
Again, leave the rest of Iraq to spend their lives engaged in low-level guerrilla warfare, if they so choose. If they really have that much anger and hatred in their blood, they'll never do anything good anyway, and we shouldn't try to put lipstick on that pig.
I love his replies at 01:51PM and 01:55PM to the comment from 'Mike' at 01:39PM. Bet you Mike never discloses who he really is.
---
Internet member since 1987
Member of the Surreality-Based Community