Agreed… and still, this sectarian war could be somehow prevented with a proper management of the post-war process… but it looks like it’s been a too long time since Eisenhower… americans forgot how to prepare smthg deeper than a military operation. Neither the occupation nor the management of the transition to a supposedly democratic process was planned in any way, and those who could have fixed a guideline for that transition failed strepitously… The fact that iraqis had ethnic or sectarian confrontations was smthg well known in advance… but this fact was simply left at the bottom of the task management list.
I laud the author in The Independent for at least attempting to escape the obsessive eurocentrism of the Iraq war:
The opponents of the Iraq war often claim that the invasion caused the bloody sectarian war that erupted between Iraq’s Sunni and Shia. This is far from the truth.
While it is indisputable that the failure of US post-conflict management in Iraq contributed to the disarray and violence that followed the toppling of the regime in April 2003, the US, her allies and the invasion itself, cannot be blamed for the ethnic and sectarian divisions that exist in Iraq.
Iraq has for long been a divided nation; it has been a state since it was created in 1921 after World War I in search of a united nation but which, to this day, remains divided along ethnic and sectarian boundaries.
Well, that’s true. But I’m very uncomfortable with Alaaldin’s dismissal…
View original post 521 more words