|
March 26, 2003
The media are reporting a popular uprising in the town of Basra in southern Iraq. This is good news---the Iraqi people----the Shi'ite opposition group---are taking things into their own hands. Rejecting both the rule of Iraqi regime and the future rule of the Anglo-American army.
Remember the history. The Shi'ite Muslim population, rose up against Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein in 1991, and is broadly hostile to the Iraqi regime, was sold down the river by the Americans. The US refused to intervene and the rebellion was crushed. Would the Iraqi regime have fallen if the US had supported the Shi'ite rebellion?
The Americans would be seen to be better than the Iraqi regime but still not trusted. They are still foreigners. It is not their country. Given the distrust the best way for the Anglo-American army to help is support the popular uprising, bring in lots of humanitarian aid, and enable the Iraqi's to establish a more democratic and federal regime. Or will thre Americans be seen to be occupy the country?
It is Tony Blair's credibility that is online here. It is he, rather than Bush or Howard, who has made the moral case of enabling the Iraqi's to have a better future and a more flourishing life. It is he who has taken up the mantle of the failures of the past. The burdern of distrust is on his shoulders. Howard has washed his hands of all that history.
|
it's not a general uprising...some blogosphere speculation that it could be Iranian operatives sent in to foment unrest amongst Shi'ites. The uprising could be against both US and Sunni if that is so. Iran tried many times to capture Basra - let's hope they don't try to strike again now if they detect weakness in any way. PNAC dictates, however, that Iraq will be the staging point for an invasion of Iran - a much stronger, tougher foe that Iraq. Iran may therefore decide to preemptively invade the new US ally in order to secure a vital gulf port.