Plan afoot to split Iraq in three.

Gulf News ^ | 10/9/06

[Ameritopia]

Sources have revealed that an independent commission set up by the US congress may propose dividing Iraq up into three separate regions, UK based newspaper The Times reported on Sunday.

The report, which is being prepared by the Iraq Study Group with the approval of President George W Bush, is preparing to report after next month’s congressional elections amid signs that sectarian violence and attacks on coalition forces are ever increasing and threatening to spiral out of control.

“The Kurds already effectively have their own area,” a source close to the group, told The Times, “The federalisation of Iraq is going to take place one way or another. The challenge for the Iraqis is how to work that through.”

However, former senior US statesman James Baker told ABC television on Sunday that he thought the idea would end in further civil turmoil. "If we do that, that in itself will trigger a huge civil war because the major cities in Iraq are mixed," said Baker.

[tdewey10]

I'm all for splitting it into 3 countries.

[kinoxi]

The sunnis would be screwed.

[KoRn]

Sounds good to me.

[Jeff Head]

This is a mistake and will lead to forfeiting all our people have fought for IMHO, as ultimately three much weaker nations orm that are then at the mercy of their much more powerful neighbors.

It's way past time for ourselves and the new Iraqi government to get absolutely tough and brutal with any dissenters, insurgents, and terrorists and any city or region that abeets them or that gives them refuge...World War II kind of tough.

[KellyAdmirer]

This makes way too much sense, I've long wondered why they didn't want to do this all along. I sense major opposition from the French.

[Alter Kaker]

No. Border fighting and fighting in the cities will be horrendous. The Sunni state will become another Taliban state unless -- if we're lucky -- the Saudis take over (which is unlikely). The Shiite will become Tehran West, and the Turks will occupy the Kurdish region. Unity or death.

[Jim Noble]

This was the Jim Noble plan on March 19, 2003, as I posted here repeatedly.

(Actually, it was part II of the JN plan, summary execution of Saddam Hussein being part I).

It's still a good plan.

[snoringbear]

Me too. In fact, I am for partitioning France, UK, Germanny, and Michigan as well....

[middie]

Neither Turkey nor Iran will ever sit by and allow an independent Kurdish state. Especially Turkey has devoted a significant amount of its military budget and manpower resources to suppression of their Kurds and their move for nation-statehood out in the area proximate to Iraq. A Kurdish state with all the attributes of a nation-state will make it impossible for Turkey to control its Kurd minority. It would be an action that would stir up additional conflict and cause us even more grief in a region of relative quiet now.

[Jim Noble]

The Sunni state will become another Taliban state unless -- if we're lucky -- the Saudis take over

The Sunni part should have been offered to Jordan.

If Turkey had helped us, we could have screwed the Kurds for them, but not now.

[KellyAdmirer]

I don't know the future, your characterization might be right. But I do know this, the casualty rate of US troops is not something the Republicans in power can long endure, and it sure isn't going to be endured by liberals in power (which you have to admit is a possibility).

So, I don't know if "getting tough" is even possible for the US. And if we don't "get tough," how does this ever end?

[Don Corleone]

"Mr. Kruschev..tear down that wall!"

[Dilbert56]

How nice of the U.S. Congress to decide what kind of government the Iraqis should have. Of course they've already ratified a constitution for a different form of government but why should that matter? The U.S. Congress rules the world.

[streetpreacher]

I think we need about a half-million boots on the ground to do what you suggest. I don't understand Rummy's thinking and why we haven't funded our conventional forces to pre-Clinton era strength.

[Dog Gone]

Very bad idea.

What needs to happen is a pluralistic nation that can live with itself.

We don't want to embrace tribalism, especially in the Middle East.

[piasa]

The plan isn't like Yugoslavia and it isn't splitting Iraq into separate "countries." The idea is to make it more like a Federal Republic by dividing it into states. The intent is to limit the power of the central government and reduce the effects of "mob rule" much as our own union of states was designed to do back when we were a better Federal Republic than we are now. If Iraq is left to a mob rule parliamentary plan, the Shiites would be able to screw the Kurds and the Sunnis, much as big American cities' populations essentially screw over the more rural people of the states they are in becuase the mob determines who the senators are.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Two would be better. Iraq and Ubreaq.

[Williams]

I don't understand how this helps. If the Sunnis are the problem they will remain so. The Shia will align with Iran. Kurds will be a problem for their neighbors. Bagdhad will continue to fight between Shia and Sunnis. How does this lead to stability that allows us to withdraw, or guarantees a non-terrorist Iraq? Syria will control the West, Iran the East.

I know they are saying there will be one foreign policy, etc. Ok, but I still don't see how this change ends the violence. Won't Sunnis still fight to control the national government?

[Alter Kaker]

How nice of the U.S. Congress to decide what kind of government the Iraqis should have.

The US got the right to decide what kind of government the Iraqis should have when it invaded and deposed the previous Iraqi regime. It's called Right of Conquest.