They’re not saying it openly, but most of the Middle East’s leaders want the U.S. in Iraq
Since before the war started, the UK’s Guardian newspaper has been openly opposed to the war in Iraq. As a result, both The Captain and I are somewhat surprised to see this story featured: The last thing the Middle East’s main players want is U.S. troops to leave Iraq.
The so-called axis of moderate Arab states - comprising Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - dreads an early US withdrawal. First, because it would be widely interpreted as an American defeat, which would weaken these pro-American regimes while both energising and radicalising their populations.
The whole “defeat” thing doesn’t seem to be bothering Harry Reid and the Daily Kos kids, however. Of course, Al Qaeda would see it as a victory and a great propaganda tool.
Second, if the US leaves, the emergence of a Shia regime in Iraq - in itself an offensive prospect to them - would only be a matter of time. Facing Arab antipathy, this regime would be likely to look eastward and forge close ties with its Iranian co-religionists. In the view of most Arabs, this would present a formidable challenge, setting in motion a series of dangerous events - an Iranian-Iraqi alliance; political and material support from Arab countries being offered to disgruntled Iraqi Sunni groups; retaliation by Iraqi forces; and the threat of broader regional involvement.
Damn skippy. I believe I’ve said something similar in the past.
Third, a US departure risks triggering Iraq’s partition. As some Arabs see it, the occupation is what holds the country together. So long as coalition forces are deployed, a full-blown breakup can be avoided.
Now, I know I’ve made the same predictions.
For Israel too, an American withdrawal could spell disaster… An early withdrawal, coming in the wake of last summer’s Lebanon war, could put Israel in a dangerous position, handing a victory to Iran - the latest putative threat to Israel’s existence - and providing a boost to Syria which may be considering military options to recover the Golan Heights.
So, the only democracy in the Middle East and an ally of the United States would also be threatened. Of course, some American leftists like that idea.
If you read the whole thing, you won’t see the Guardian actually making the case for staying in Iraq. They gave plenty of reasons why we shouldn’t - despite all of the above. In all, they’re saying we’ve managed to box ourselves into a corner there. In many ways that may be true, but the reasons listed above are plenty enough to stick out this effort until its final resolution.
Category :
Uncategorized 
Tags :
Similar Posts:
- Similar advise given to soldiers in 1943 and 2003 about Iraq
- Some British expect ‘humiliating’ retreat from Basra
- The surge is working and the anti-war crowd is in denial
- The U.S. plans to stay indefinitely in Iraq - is that really surprising?
- How to win in Iraq
- Senate kills Iraq pull-out
- Iraq movies continue to tank
- Left cries foul over seperate restrooms at U.S. bases in Iraq
- Soldiers move from FOBs to COPs
- Don’t look now, but the U.S.-backed Iraqi government and army might be winning the war
Leave a Reply