In 2010, US President Barack Obama backed Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki to form a government despite warnings that Al-Maliki harbored sectarian agenda.
Understandably, Obama was focusing more on making good on his electoral pledge to withdraw US troops from Iraq. Rather than embracing a democratic and inclusive policy, Al-Maliki pursued a combination of authoritarian and sectarian agenda thus alienating the Sunni community who had previously helped the US defeat Al-Qaeda.
Not long ago, Al-Maliki aligned himself with Iran, thus transforming Iraq into a safe conduit for Iranian weapons and fighters to reach Syria in an attempt to bolster support for embattled Assad. Meanwhile, Al-Maliki’s authoritarian governance and his anti-Sunni policies have stoked Sunni-Shiite rift.
Over the course of this year, Iraq seems to have plunged again in a kind of civil war in which more than 7,000 Iraqis have so far been killed. Undoubtedly, the ongoing war in Syria has contributed to a surge of violence in Iraq, but Al-Maliki’s polarizing policies have helped Al-Qaeda resurrect in Iraq.
Fearing the potential of losing the ground, Al-Maliki turned to Washington to enlist its support for his efforts to restore stability in Iraq. To convince the skeptical US administration to sell Iraq the necessary weapons to fight Al-Qaeda, he frames the challenges that Iraq is facing in a language that is appealing to the US.
By and large, the Iraqi premier positions himself in the anti-terrorist camp. His argument is simple: Iraq has become the victim of the war in Syria and homegrown insurgents have been empowered by the unresolved Syrian crisis. Al-Qaeda — the argument goes — would not have gained a foothold in Iraq were it not for the war in Syria.
While the US does not want to see Al-Qaeda winning in Iraq, it is equally important for the administration to step up the pressure on Al-Maliki to fix his relationship with the Sunnis and the Kurds.
Al-Maliki has neither the intention nor the capability to effect genuine reconciliation with the other component of the Iraqi people. Thus far, he has followed the Winner-Take-All-Politics and his anti-Sunni sentiments and policies can hardly be concealed.
Indeed, many senior US politicians have lost faith in Al-Maliki. In a letter sent to President Obama, a bipartisan group of senators criticized Al-Maliki in a harsh manner. “Unfortunately, Prime Minister Al-Maliki’s mismanagement of Iraqi politics is contributing to the recent surge of violence,” the letter said.
The senators emphasize that Al-Maliki and his cronies have disenfranchised the Sunni community and marginalized the Kurds. Equally important, his authoritarian rule has also alienated “the many Shiite Iraqis who have a democratic, inclusive and pluralistic vision for their country,” according to the letter.
With violence reaching a grave level, Obama must have realized that Al-Maliki, who is pleading for American security assistance, is vulnerable to US pressure. For this reason, Obama made it perfectly clear that his country was committed to help Iraq build “an inclusive, democratic and prosperous” country. Obama took advantage of Al-Maliki’s desperate need for weapons by saying that honoring the lives of those who lost their lives in the Iraq war entails Al-Maliki to work out a plan to build a functioning democracy in Iraq.
That said, it seems that Obama would agree to provide Iraq with weapons. Apparently, the last thing the US would like to see is Iraq slipping into a catastrophic civil war or Al-Qaeda victory.
Although stakes are high, if President Obama commits another mistake by accepting the argument that Iraq’s problem is security related. The root cause of the security problem is political. Hence, nothing short of forcing Al-Maliki or whoever in power to adopt an inclusive, pluralist and democratic blueprint will stabilize Iraq.
Email: [email protected]
