« IS Diary - 10 August 2014 | Main | Blah! Blah! in and about Iraq - 11 August 2014 »

10 August 2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The beaver

Colonel

Did you see or hear about that one in June?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/ahmad-chalabi-pariah-iraq-prime-minister-bush-us-despair

Chalabi was looking for Maliki's job and was in DC and Wolfy is his backer.

Heywood Jableauxme

Col Lang,
If this turns out to be a Maliki move against the Sunnis, do you think this will accelerate Sunnis still on the fence making a move to back ISIS/ISIL?

Aka

Maliki may depose the Iraqi president and the parliament but he can't depose the IS (ISIS). If he somehow thinks that a full dictator is going to be better than a dictatorial PM he and the ones that support him are insane (Better in the sense fighting IS). This will further weaken the Iraqi government.

I fear there is a real danger of a wider regional war whose outcome will be beyond anyone's wildest guess.

swerv21

This is the middle of the beginning of the partition.

confusedponderer

If there was a US hand in this I couldn't help but chuckle: The solution to the mess in Iraq, of all things, is supposed to be ... regime change?

If so the general idea would be familiar:

Obviously, if only that dreadful devil Maliki was gone, the Shia would start to love the Sunni, adequately address their grievances and undermine their support that ISIS enjoys among the former Baathists and Sunnis in Iraq.

Of course, someone less sarcastic would point out that the Iraqi Shia government is in dire need of competent leadership in the military and political realms anyway, insofar anything else is an improvement, but still ...

Fred

cp,

Nah, this is just desperation in action. Maliki thinks his political enemies within the Iraqi government would go after him if he stepped down. They would. On top of that the ancient animosities between Shia and Sunni have been enflamed. ISIS is winning, Maliki's army is shot. Why back Baghdad - what army do they have to defend the place with and retake the country? I suspect the Sunnis (not yet backing ISIS) won't trust yet another change in government in Baghdad (US backed or otherwise) if they are not a powerful part of it.

turcopolier

CP

The US hand in this was that we were trying to get a new PM in Baghdad. pl

confusedponderer

PL,
as in the US pushing Maliki to resign, which weakened his position internally and prompted others to make their moves?

Or: As in asking people to actively consider giving him the boot?

Or: Both?

turcopolier

CP

Both, pl

Bill H

The US procliams during our elections that "you don't change presidents (presidential parties) in the middle of a war," in our case a foreign war, and is calling for regime change in Iraq while it is in the middle of a war on its own soil. Awesome.

Harper

I understand the high court in Iraq has ruled that as the head of the largest plurality bloc in the parliament, Maliki is to be next PM. The court ruled the president is obligated under the constitution to give Maliki the first shot at forming a government. All US officials have made clear that further US military assistance versus IS is to be based on Maliki's ouster and the formation of a national unity government if such a thing is still remotely possible. We are getting in the middle of a mess with Obama acting without Congressional approval, with Cameron in Britain under pressure to call back parliament before any further UK ops are launched, etc. So we have unitary executive action by Obama demanding regime change in Baghdad as a precondition for deeper US military action which the American people overwhelmingly oppose. What a pile up of madness! Cong Alan Grayson wrote in USA Today that Obama has to come to Congress, noting "it's our money, it's our blood, it's our decision." Ben Cardin says we cannot become the new Iraq Air Force. If Colin Powell was right (which I doubt) when he said "if you break it, you own it," then Iraq should become the 51st state (or 52nd if you count Israel first).

The beaver

Colonel

From the Guardian a minute ago:

"Maliki 'forced out' as Iraq's prime minister
Embattled leader reportedly ousted as president and coalition of Shia parties nominate Haider al-Abadi to form new government"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/11/nouri-al-maliki-iraq-forced-out-prime-minister

John

Send back Paul Bremer... to reap what he helped sow.

confusedponderer

Absent specific instructions (as with the CPA's Executive Order 1) from Washington, Lord Bremer would probably just let the market decide and wait for it to create spontaneous order.

To top it off, he would gather all the usual suspects and tell them that they are in charge to shape their own destiny and then he would lean back expectantly and wait for things to happen.

After all, who governs less governs best. Correspondingly, the unwillingness to govern at all is expression of the highest virtue.

Looking at Iraqs power market, ISIS stocks are on the rise, so that may turn out not what DC has in mind.

Even though for his numerous screwups he would richly deserve to be in the Greenzone should ISIS overruns it one day.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad