Way back in February I expanded on a
report in the Christian Science Monitor that suggested
al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) had set up shop against the Assad regime, in
Syria. Writing both
here, and for the Foreign Policy Association, I joined
the chorus of analysts, academics, and pundits who urged caution
against arming Syrian rebels — precisely because it’s unthinkable
to equip battle-hardened veterans of an Iraqi insurgency who cut
their teeth fighting American servicemen in the street of Fallujah,
Tikrit, et al.
These initial warnings surfaced around the time al Qaeda’s
de facto leader, Ayman al Zawahiri, urged Levatine
Islamists of all shapes and sizes to take the fight to Damascus. In
essence, he was appealing to members of the most-radicalized
membership of the Ikhwan movement and violent Salafists, many of
whom live on the eastern side of the shared, 600 mile border
between Syria and Iraq.
Needless to say, rank-and-file types serving in such
organizations as AQI, the United Jihad Factions, Jaish al-Rashidun,
and the Islamic Army in Iraq weren’t necessarily produced by a
monolithic, indigenous militant Islamist movement in Iraq. They
came from other countries. Many of them came from Syria. And now
they’ve returned home.
This latter statement was
confirmed by Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, on
Thursday. AP reports suggested leadership in Baghdad feared an
extremist toehold in Syria — Zebari elaborated cautiously, but did
state his main concern is “extremist, terrorist groups taking root
in neighboring countries.”
An understandable concern, given the current state of Iraq — a
country so fragile, it exists in a perpetual state of simmering
self-implosion. A famous German proverb states that a long war
leaves a country with three armies — an army of cripples, an army
of mourners, and an army of thieves. While the latter force
occupies the parliament in Baghdad, one might argue a fourth army
manifested itself in the Iraq war, and it’s now pitched camp in
Syria.
Lest we make the same mistakes again… let us recognize the
latest confirmation of collateral damage wrought by war in Iraq —
when first we beheaded (if not quite literally) our unlikely
Iranian counterbalance and ally in the war on radical Islam, Mssr.
Saddam Hussein. The Butcher of Baghdad was a vile despot. His
tyranny represented the petty archaism of socialist Pan-Arabism,
and his iron fist throttled the lifeblood of his countrymen. But
coalition war on Iraqi Arabs cultivated popular protest — the sort
of social upheaval that resulted in the ouster of two of America’s
most unpopular proxies, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia and
Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. Of course this was before the NATO bombing
campaign over Libya created a migration crisis that ultimately
destabilized Mali.
Before the next Turkish plane gets
shot down, I’d expect Ankara to demand a contingency plan from
fellow NATO members. Well, it’s time to “just say no,” and tone
down our insatiable instinct to intervene.
Bob K| 7.7.12 @ 8:56AM
Mr. Smith,
I am currently reading George F. Kennan's "At a Century's Ending--Reflections 1982-1995" and I marvel at how clear, fluid and precise his writing style is in these 40 or so essays relating to America's foreign policy during that period. (The last one was written when he was 91 years old!) It is a style that is unchanged from his "Memoirs 1925-1950" which is based on his diaries over that period.
I wonder why everybody here who writes articles or blogs on issues of that concern America's Foreign Policy can't write about it in like manner since it is done routinely on matters of Domestic Policy?
George Orwell's famous essay, "Politics and the English Language" comes to mind.
And since no country's Foreign Policy is inseparable from it's Domestic Policies why is this not emphasized more in articles like these?
Bob K| 7.7.12 @ 9:03AM
A correction here to the last sentence of the above, if you please?
"And since no country's Foreign policy is SEPARABLE from it's Domestic Policies.........."
Teflon93 | 7.7.12 @ 1:43PM
He tried to assassinate George H.W. Bush in Kuwait. Some acts simply cannot be tolerated.
C Bowen | 7.7.12 @ 4:40PM
Did Curveball tell you that one? It was just another lie--figure it out already, research the story.
Teflon93 | 7.7.12 @ 5:37PM
Read it yourself. Here's the DoJ/FBI report:
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/.....5bush2.htm
Funny, but I do find them more credible than you.
Oldefarte| 7.7.12 @ 9:05PM
To some of us, a great service might be performed perhaps by simply evacuating all of our military service personnel from the middle east, dropping the F&F armaments from the D of J operation overhead out of flying B-52's and letting them all go at it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 1:37AM
In Syria, I just don't see a motive for intervening. It will earn no points from the side that we intervene for, it will cost money, and it will be useless. Better to drop a one megatonner on Damascus and be done with them. Or boot a thousand Paulbots from 500 foot altitude onto Damascus---just as destructive.
Occam's Tool| 7.8.12 @ 1:37AM
Excellent point (as usual), Teflon.
Mike Daly | 7.8.12 @ 3:14PM
The problem is Iraq is in far better shape now than it was five years ago. It's actually becoming a democracy - so much so that even the NY Times did a front page piece all but admitting such some months back. Citing Iraq as a mistake is wrong.
Bob K| 7.8.12 @ 6:02PM
Maybe that's why Al Qaeda is using Iraq as a staging point send terrorists into Syria? Just goes to show you can use democracy to justify anything. Before we can make the world safe for democracy we have make democracy safe for the world!
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.9.12 @ 10:06AM
encyst the moslem world, withdraw our technology...and technicians. Watch their jihad implode from actual starvation.
www.americaalonesaidno.com