- The mother of all strategic nightmares ...
TPSIPOL FORUM: NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
May 2007 Good Governance
http://buengobiernoperu.com/
IRAQ: The mother of all nightmares Strategic
By: Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero ( Geneva)
May 2007 About four years after President Bush, who celebrated victory in Iraq with his famous phrase "mission accomplished" U.S. casualties rise. At the time passed from 3.300 24 000 dead and wounded. Also, is estimated at 60.000 morethan Iraqi civilians dead lasfuerzas victims of occupation and the insurgency or delterrorismo. The cost of the occupation reached the fabulous rate of a billion dollars a week. Thus, Iraq, costs, today, at about 204 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars. Not then a surprise that most Americans want their country to withdraw from Iraq and Congress have introduced legislation for an exit in August 2008Ahora in almost all the analysis on Iraq raise the specter of Vietnam. Undoubtedly, the analogy with Vietnam if it is only in military terms is wrong because Islamic insurgents and losterroristas Sunnis and Shia militias are not an army under a single command as it was the Vietcong, but on the contrary, they are enemies in full civil war.
Also, unlike Vietnam, the fighting has not carried out in the rain forests but in difficult urban areas where the armed struggle and terrorism cause considerablesbajas civilians. Even less U.S. casualties Iraq are comparable with those of Vietnam. In Iraq, there is an average of two to four American casualties each day add up, while those from Vietnam arrived at 70diarias, rapidly accumulated amount in thousands of lost lives and brought about the massive protest in the United States. While the military analogy with Vietnam may be exaggerated, however it is not the political analogy.
Indeed, in Iraq as in Vietnam, most lapoblación rejects U.S. intervention. Even the political situation in Iraq is more complicated because the United States in Vietnam had large anti-communist allies and the government of Saigon, its military and the Vietnamese bourgeoisie, which are not in Baghdad because the new Iraqi government elected in January 2005, consists of a majority coalition of two Islamic HIIT partidosS ( laRevolución the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq and the Dawa) that are nothing less than allies of Iran and whose political aim is no other, to achieve an Islamic Republic in Iraq. Thus, the U.S. administration to hold elections in Iraq, has made the most incredible political fiascos. Installed in power to a Shiite Muslim majority coalition supported no less by his arch-enemy Iran's Islamic government. When did this election, the influential magazine The New York Review of Book published an article whose title was the epitome of this incredible fiasco. The article sarcastically called "Bush's Islamic Republic."
Today, the project of a Shiite Islamic Republic is supported by Iran and its large protected Moqtada al Sadr with his formidable army the Mhadi Shiite Army with over 60 thousand soldiers. This army will soon become a formidable rival of the U.S. military as it will be difficult for the new Iraqi armed forces, created by the United States, they face the Mhadi Army because they are formed mainly by elements also Shiites and Kurds who are more interested in preserving the current autonomy of Kurdistan to fight Shiites and Sunnis. The additional 21 000 troops sent by President Bush can not stop subversion and urban terrorism and it is likely that Iraq estaviolencia infernal unacruenta becomes protracted civil war that Iraq could build a territory other Shiite and Sunni independent Kurdistancasi. A prolonged civil war in Iraq debesorprendernos. The truth is that Iraq is a country invented by the British in 1921. Nation has never been viable UNESTO but always a territorial entity fraught with ethnic strife between Arabs, Kurds, Assyrians and Turkumanas, and 500 tribes, divided by two major Muslim religious tendencies, the Shiite and Sunni war today.
The apparent national cohesion and t rends all these Muslim ethnic groups was the result of Iraqi governments autocrats who enjoyed a good income with cruelty oil to suppress any attempt at autonomy. Since 1958, the Baathist party and the vicious petro-tyranny of Saddam Housein spending a billion dollars a year suppressing and fighting Kurdish insurgents, shite or both at once.
today's Iraq is no longer a viable state unified by repression but rather an ungovernable chaotic entity (ECI) and will remain so as long as foreign occupation, and while none of the major ethnic and religious groups may prevail in a civil war. Today the United States have no control over Iraq, not on Afghanistan, now become the largest exporter of heroin in the world. It also extended its armed forces suffer from a lack of recruitment. Neither the American superpower has been able to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons enPakistán, India, Iran and North Korea.
Finally, the economy of the United States today accused the most large fiscal and trade deficits in its history, the dollar has weakened and consumer society depends on the purchase of Treasury bonds by Japan, China and other Asia countries yEuropa. This whole situation has undoubtedly Adud on whether the world is as unipolar, as they say. However, despite the severe limits has demonstrated the unilateral action in Iraq and Afghanistan, this should not lead us to think we're in a multipolar world, because no other powers like the United Kingdom, France, Russia China can have unilateral or against global disorder and can not have a balance of military power against the United States.
The truth is that today all the powers are almost powerless against a chaotic, fragmented by civil war, countries collapsed, terrorism, genocide, nuclear proliferation and drug trafficking, weapons and people. Consequently, what exists today is, rather, a great world power deficit to meet the great global challenges of the XXI century. This vacuum of power we would be leading towards a new geopolitical era, where instead of unipolarity or multipolarity, would emergiendouna sort of "apolarity", ie a structure of world power without Sheriff and no multipolar balance of power, which stands the deficit of power of great powers to pacify an increasingly chaotic world and create a new world order.
The Vietnam War, the Soviet invasion deAfganistán, the actual conversion of that country into a narco-state and the Iraq fiasco, show that it is very easy to invade viable nation-states, militarily inferior, but very difficult to deal , to make them viable, democratic and retire honorably when the country has collapsed into a domestic hell. Therefore, the neocon utopia "win the war on terror" building a viable Iraqi democracy that radiates throughout the Middle East has today become the mother of all strategic nightmares.
0 comments:
Post a Comment