The Abadi government in Iraq already has enough reasons to be pessimistic about their chances of beating ISIS and reunification of the country afterwards, since they lose seemingly every major battle against ISIS. Analysts are increasingly concerned, however, that pessimistic comments out of the US are going to really weigh on them.
Testifying to the House Armed Services Committee last week, Defense Secretary Ash Carter offered a pretty negative assessment on the Iraqi military. But the real eye-opener for some was the revelation within his comments that the Pentagon is already opening planning for the contingency that Iraq will never be reunified at all.
Though the US is still operating under the assumption that ISIS, as such, will eventually be defeated, they see it entirely possible that the post-ISIS Iraq will mean the Shi’ite-dominated existing government will lose the Sunni Arab west as well as the Kurdish north to two separate independence pushes.
And while the Obama Administration has talked up how important Iraqi unity is to them in the past, Carter didn’t seem particularly bothered by the possibility, saying that the US would eagerly “enable” the militaries of all three of the Iraqis “if they’re willing to partner with us.”
This fueled warnings from some analysts that the Shi’ite-dominated government is going to see this as the US “backing away” from their previous pledges to support unity. Everyone has obviously known Kurdish secession was going to remain an issue after the ISIS war, and that the treatment of the Sunni Arab minority would as well, but this is the first time the US government is willing to admit as much, which is undercutting their narrative that the war is all going to plan.
the idea actually was presented by Joe Biden long time ago, in the other hand it shows that present USG is not against such rotten idea which has its roots from when Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright used the Albanian terrorism dividing Yugoslavia, when Saudis sent their barbarian to behead people in Yugoslavia, the same story in different time.
This is shocking? I recall seeing a segment on 60 Minutes several years ago with correspondent Bob Simon who referred to Northern Iraq as "Kurdistan". This is good news for Israel.
The breakup of Iraq has been a Zionist dream for decades. Other breakups nearby sovereign States in the planning stages right now. Libya maybe next.
This was the idea from the very beginning according to the Oded-Yinon Plan.
And this statement is another evidence that Washington is fighting the wars for Israel since 2003 and that half of the US-Gov. are zionist stooges.
Let Sunni tribes rule again — Only way for unity again
For hundreds of years did the Sunni tribes rule Iraq, in unity and harmony without a single rebellion.
Then came Empire USA, our invasion of 2003 and the idea that if we destroy Sunni rule, forever will be our dominance over Iraq oil.
Comes now the Islamic State, which should be called the Sunni State and it to establish again, by it’s superior ability to war again, that if the West pulled all of it’s troops and bombs out of Iraq, surely there would be peace and unity again.
"For hundreds of years did the Sunni tribes rule Iraq, in unity and harmony without a single rebellion."
In your imagination, maybe. In the real world, Iraq has existed for less than a century, has experienced a number of violent convulsions since its creation by Winston Churchill after World War One, and was experiencing the same types of convulsions between religious and ethnic groupings for millennia before that.
Iraq may fracture into three, but the US will have to undertake a long-term supply mission to the Kurds. They'll be staking a claim to some pretty hostile territory.
A year ago GLOBAL RESEARCH published an article arguing that breaking up Iraq was exactly the plan.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-chaos-in-iraq-is…
Wouldn't be surprising at all. But plan or not, Iraq is just such a terribly artificial creation that it's hard to imagine any future in which it remains a single polity. The Ba'athists managed to hold it together for decades after it would have otherwise collapsed, but only by operating it as a totalitarian police state.
"…US would eagerly “enable” the militaries of all three of the Iraqis “if they’re willing to partner with us.”"
This was the most salient point of what Carter said. Arming the militaries of the 3 segments of the former Iraq will undoubtedly continue the discord between them. I look forward to the US spinmeisters convincing the American people why it would now be OK for the USG (and the American taxpayer) to support the currently labeled "terrorists" of ISIS. Of course, if the intent is to foment and sustain violence between the players in the region, then I guess it will be another case of "Mission Accomplished."
I read Carter's comments the other way.
He could have said the breakup is necessary. He could have promoted it. That would be in line with our actions toward the Kurds and Sunnis.
However, he only said that we were prepared for whatever happens, and that it just one possibility.
To me, he backed away from the opportunity to kill Iraq. He did not back away very far. He did not refuse the possibility. However, he did not do it when he was offered the chance.
This tells me the DoD just hasn't decided. It doesn't know what to think. Clueless and drifting is how it reads to me.