Just as 2011 in Iraq ended with a political crisis following the
issuing of an arrest warrant by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
against Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi on allegations of running a
death squad, so 2012 has rounded off with another political crisis:
this time involving the Finance Minister Rafi al-Issawi, a member
of Ayad Allawi’s Iraqiya bloc.
In this case, the arrest warrant is not against Issawi himself,
but rather some members of his security entourage, charged with
aiding Hashemi’s men in the Vice President’s alleged death
squad.
As always, media outlets were
quick to note the ethno-religious backgrounds of the men
involved in this current political crisis: namely, Maliki as a
Shi’ite versus Issawi, who is a Sunni Arab.
Reporting on demonstrations that subsequently arose in the
predominantly Sunni Arab province of Anbar in protest at the move
against Issawi, an
Associated Press piece printed on the Guardian’s
website came with the headline, “Iraq protests signal growing
tension between Sunni and Shi’a communities.”
The piece then affirmed in the main text: “The unrest is part of
broader sectarian conflicts that threaten the stability of the
country.”
On this view, the current political debacle is indicative of a
deepening Sunni-Shi’ite crisis in the country. So is the
Maliki-Issawi crisis a sectarian affair?
In short, the answer is both yes and no.
Start off with some of the evidence that points in the
affirmative direction in answer to the question. Both Maliki and
certain opponents of his in this crisis have played the sectarian
card, hurling accusations at each other of stirring up sectarian
strife, while portraying themselves as defenders of the
ethno-religious communities they claim to represent.
For example,
in an interview with al-Hayat, Tariq al-Hashemi
claimed: “What is happening to my colleague Dr. Rafi al-Issawi is
further proof that there is a plot to exclude Sunni Arabs from the
political process.” Hashemi went on to say that Maliki is “an
extremely sectarian man,” even as he also affirmed that Maliki’s
targets are not limited to Sunni Arabs.
Hashemi has portrayed the arrest warrant against himself in
similar terms, urging Iraqis not to allow Maliki and his allies to
get their supposed wish of “sectarian
strife.” In a similar vein, Maliki has accused the reaction in
opposition to his move against Issawi of taking on a “sectarian”
dimension against Shi’ites.
Further, people on both sides have depicted the crisis as a
sectarian game instigated by foreign powers in the region. Thus,
protesters in Anbar have burned Iranian flags, with
one Iraqiya MP accusing Maliki and his allies of being traitors
serving Iran, and some banners calling for a “Sunni” liberation of
Iraq from Iranian occupiers.
Meanwhile, Maliki himself has hinted that there might be a
Turkish and Syrian rebel hand behind the protests, drawing
attention to the fact that some protesters were holding portraits
of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Free Syrian Army
flags.
Similarly,
Press TV — Iran’s English-language outlet — claims that
“Turkey is working closely with Qatar, Saudi Arabia and al-Hashemi
to design tensions with the present Iraqi government,” a sentiment
shared by many of Maliki’s supporters.
What this rhetoric foremost illustrates is how many of Iraq’s
politicians play the sectarian card in an attempt to rally support
when they feel that they are under fire.
Concomitant with this approach is a mindset of victimhood that
naturally entails allegations of foreign powers playing a role in
stirring up unrest. This rhetoric in turn helps to arouse sectarian
sentiment in demonstrations and counter-demonstrations.
Jack in Wi| 1.2.13 @ 8:08AM
We have been inteferring in Iraq for 30 years. First Hussain was our ally, then he became another Hitler. Now we have made a far worse mess then when he was in charge. 5000 Americans killed, 60 thousand wounded and disabled, millions of Iraqis killed, wounded and displaced, the price of of oil sky high, and the Republican Party destroyed. Tell me again how lying us into the Iraq war was a good idea?
cicero| 1.2.13 @ 8:54AM
The West has to get rid of the silly idea that the Arab countries are just waiting for an opportunity to embrace Jeffersonian democracy. All we ever do is remove one dictator, and help another assume his place. We are fooled into fighting their wars of sucession. Time to butt out.
We used to meddle on the pretext that we needed to maintain a stable flow of oil. Now that we know that we don't need their oil if we drill our own, even that reason is gone. Let them go bvack to their time honored was
y of regime change - assassination and sectarian wars. We have enough problems of our own.
Pecos Pete| 1.2.13 @ 9:23AM
Follow the money. Who is getting rich in this Iraq mess?
BBT!