Iraq: Battleground for waning factions settling scores
Al-Masry Al-Youm, Egypt, January 19
Living harmoniously between diverse components within a society is an achievable feat, as exemplified by nations like Switzerland and Malaysia. However, accomplishing this requires specific conditions, namely internal stability and an inclusive democratic system that values equality. These factors are integral to reducing tensions and fostering a sense of coexistence among citizens.
Regrettably, the situation in Iraq differs greatly. The modicum of peace enforced within Iraqi society, encompassing Shi’ites, Sunnis, and Kurds, was a direct result of the authoritarian rule and oppressive regime of Saddam Hussein. Following the disintegration of this regime, the societal components also dissipated, and the subsequent American occupation failed to establish a functional institutional state.
Instead, the occupation merely fueled existing resentments, exacerbating sectarian divisions for opportunistic gain. This was evident in the growing loyalty of Shi’ite groups to Iran over the interests of Iraq. Similarly, Kurdish factions sought independence and initially declared it before retreating due to unresolved issues with the federal formula under the Baghdad government’s oversight.
As for Sunni Muslims, their loyalties were torn between Ba’athists yearning for a return to past glory and those striving for closer ties with external powers capable of balancing Iranian influence within Iraq. These divisions have become glaringly apparent in recent months following the escalated Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people, supported by the United States.
One manifestation of this fragmentation is the missile strikes launched from Iraqi territory, targeting Israeli and American bases in Syria and Iraq. It is not my intention to pass judgment or endorse these strikes, but rather to emphasize that they are occurring under the nose of the Iraqi state. Naturally, the Americans respond with retaliatory strikes, violating Iraqi sovereignty and further embarrassing the central government in Baghdad.
Additionally, Turkish bombings have been ongoing within Iraqi territory, aimed at suppressing the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which operates from the Kurdistan region. Turkey’s actions serve to counteract the US effort to support the Kurds. Such actions reveal the Iraqi government’s inability to rein in organizations operating outside its authority.
A striking demonstration of this weakened authority emerged through recent attacks launched by the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps against purported Mossad headquarters in the city of Erbil. Under immense pressure, the central government condemned the Iranian assault and filed a complaint with the United Nations against this act of aggression. This grim picture reveals that all conflicting forces in the region regard Iraq as a battleground to settle their scores.
The current federal formula governing Iraq is incapable of restraining any party striking its enemies from Iraqi territory or confronting any party bombing its enemies within Iraq. This cycle of permissibility will persist unless the state’s components recognize the necessity of a comprehensive democratic order, wherein every faction understands the importance of a unified Iraqi state that transcends its sectarian interests. – Osama Ghareeb
Trump’s victory in Iowa and upcoming US elections
Al-Ittihad, United Arab Emirates, January 18
On the evening of January 15, Donald Trump won the Iowa caucuses with ease, marking the beginning of the primary season that will determine the Republican Party’s leader for the upcoming US presidential elections in November. Trump garnered slightly over 50% of the votes, while Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley secured second and third place, each receiving around 20% of the votes.
These results did not surprise observers, although the voter turnout was lower than usual due to severe weather conditions in the state. Iowa is by no means typical, with a population of just over 3 million people, 90% of whom identify as white. Known for its conservative leanings, Iowa favored Donald Trump by a 10% margin in the previous two presidential elections.
However, as the first state to cast its votes, Iowa’s election outcomes hold national significance. DeSantis and Haley campaigned extensively in the state for months, aiming to narrow Trump’s victory margin and bolster their prospects for the upcoming primaries in January and February. While they didn’t beat Trump, they did demonstrate that almost half of Republican voters preferred an alternative to his candidacy.
The prevailing belief, unless any unforeseen dramatic events occur, such as a health issue for Trump, is that the November election will reprise the electoral contest between President Joe Biden and Trump. This outcome is not what the majority of Americans desire, particularly considering the domestic and international challenges the country currently faces.
Biden is grappling with three international crises: in the Middle East, Ukraine, and East Asia. His immediate challenge involves providing additional aid to both Ukraine and Israel while simultaneously striving to prevent the escalation of the Gaza conflict, which has triggered military actions in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. Moreover, he confronts internal issues, primarily the uncontrollable surge of illegal immigration.
Republicans, who hold the majority in the House of Representatives, refuse to support increased aid to Ukraine unless it is coupled with new, stricter immigration policies. The immigration problem has not only expanded from border states to major American cities but has also fueled homelessness and street violence. One of Trump’s challenges arises from the deep divisions within the Republican Party, especially regarding providing more aid to Ukraine. Trump has yet to formulate a coherent and cohesive foreign policy, aside from touting that under his presidency, these crises would have never occurred and that he would swiftly resolve them if reelected.
Meanwhile, despite positive economic news, many Americans are feeling unease and apprehension. In his campaign, Trump will make promises of radically transforming the political system, including extensive purging of the so-called “swamp” of Washington. He pledges to appoint a new cohort of officials who prioritize loyalty to Donald Trump above all else, rather than the [US] Constitution.
These claims underpin arguments that a vote for Trump equates to endorsing an authoritarian, anti-democratic leader who would not hesitate to abuse his power for vengeance, settling personal scores, and steering Americans toward dictatorship. While this may be no more than electoral hype, Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans perceive it as a potential threat that must be combated on all fronts. – Geoffrey Kemp
Translated by Asaf Zilberfarb.