Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Conflict With Iran Over Iraq Canít End Until America Withdraws
The Federalist ^ | 01/23/2020 | By Willis L. Krumholz

Posted on 01/23/2020 9:08:22 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Iran was dealt a severe blow with the strike that killed Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani. Yet because of Iran’s core interests, the danger to U.S. servicemembers in Iraq is far from over. Instead of playing politics, Washington must realize that risking the lives of American forces in a gamble to reduce Iranian influence in Iraq isn’t worth it and may be self-defeating. Just look at the history of America and Iran.

Many Americans view this history as starting in 1979 when, during the Iranian Revolution that overthrew the shah, Islamic radicals stormed the U.S. embassy in Iran and held more 50 Americans hostage for more than a year.

Yet for Iranians, America’s involvement goes back much further, at least to the 1953 overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favor of the shah. Both America and Britain sponsored the coup. Although one motivation was keeping Iran from selling oil to the Soviets, another was the nationalization of British oil interests by Mosaddegh’s government.

The shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was a Cold War ally, but he was brutal. His secret police, the SAVAK, were notorious. Torture methods included “electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails.” Iran’s current regime commits a host of human rights abuses, but at least some of the support for the ’79 revolution stemmed from a backlash to the shah’s brutality.

The Role of Religion in Revolution

But the chief motivation of the revolution was, of course, religious. Iran was now the world’s only Shia theocratic state. Shias are the majority in Iran but make up only about 15 percent of the world’s Muslims, while Sunnis make up about 85 percent.

In 1980, Iraq’s Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein, coveting Iranian territory and insecure about Iran’s Shia regime because Iraq was also majority Shia, invaded Iran. The Iran-Iraq War lasted until 1988 and resulted in half a million dead Iraqi and Iranian troops, and another half-million injured or maimed, not including civilians. Child soldiers and chemical weapons became the norm, as did suicidal “wave attacks” reminiscent of World War I trench warfare.

America and European powers funded Saddam’s efforts, and Iraqi forces counted on American support throughout the war. America became more explicitly involved in the Persian Gulf toward the war’s end after a U.S. ship, assisting the Iraqis, was struck by an Iranian mine, leading to the events of Operation Praying Mantis, wherein American forces sank half of Iran’s navy.

Now fast-forward to 2003, when America invaded Iraq and overthrew Iran’s enemy, Saddam, without Iranian opposition and even with some covert support. But the Iranians quickly soured, as American forces were adjacent to Iran’s west in Iraq and to Iran’s east in Afghanistan. And with Saddam removed, Iran could easily seek expansion into Iraq.

Today, Iran, Islam’s only explicitly Shia state, sees dominating Iraq as imperative, since Iraq is the Middle East’s only other large, Shia-majority country. In general, the 1,400-year divide between Sunnis and Shias explains much of what we see in the Middle East. Iran intervenes in areas where fellow Shias are fighting Sunnis: Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Sunni countries such as Saudi Arabia intervene to fight non-Sunnis, even if that means aiding jihadists such as al Qaeda or ISIS.

American Troops Need to Leave Iraq for Several Reasons

Yet religion doesn’t explain everything, which gives some hope for Iraq. Many Iraqis — even Shia Iraqis — resent Iranian influence. Possibly to deflect popular anger in Iraq against Iran, and to increase the cost of American involvement, a Shia militia attacked a U.S. base and killed an American contractor. There were also threats to America’s embassy, leading to the White House killing Soleimani.

But after Iran responded to the Soleimani killing with a face-saving, casualty-free attack, many in Washington are spiking the football. To them, America flexed its muscles and won. Yet given Iran’s interest in Iraq, and Washington’s “max pressure” campaign of sanctions that has failed to give Iran an off-ramp, further escalation is likely. This won’t take the form of open war, but Iran will continue aiding Shia militias in attacking American troops in Iraq. That puts American lives at risk for no good reason.

Let’s get realistic about Washington’s position in the Iran-Iraq relationship. Geography and demographics both ensure Iran will have influence and interest in Iraq, and totally countering that influence is not a vital U.S. interest. If it were, it would call for installing another Sunni strongman like Saddam in Baghdad.

Many Iraqi people resent Iranian involvement, but they also resent American involvement, which carries a silver lining. Iraq needs a dose of nationalism to overcome sectarian division. If Iraq is to remain a unified state, Iraqi Sunnis will have to join Iraqi Shias to reject jihadists such as ISIS, and Iraqi Shias will have to join Sunnis in rejecting Iranian influence. It isn’t America’s job to sit around in Iraq until this happens, especially if this puts our troops in harm’s way.

Worse, America’s presence provides an excuse for Iran’s influence among Iraqi Shias and may delay the day Iraq’s Shias and Sunnis unite to push Iran out. Said differently, the American safety net allows factionalism not to destroy the Iranian state, which probably delays Iraq’s “adulthood” — if it ever is to happen. Washington should take the training wheels off and withdraw.


Willis L. Krumholz is a fellow at Defense Priorities. He holds a JD and MBA degree from the University of St. Thomas, and works in the financial services industry. The views expressed are those of the author only.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2020election; djibouti; dnctalkingpoint; dnctalkingpoints; election2020; eritrea; hassannasrallah; hezbollah; iran; iraq; lebanon; nevertrump; nevertrumper; nevertrumpers; nevertrumpertrolls; qasemsoleimani; qudsforce; sudan; thefederalist; troops; willislkrumholz; withdrawal; yemen

1 posted on 01/23/2020 9:08:22 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

‘You can’t win until you quit’.....


2 posted on 01/23/2020 9:14:51 AM PST by G Larry (There is no great virtue in bargaining with the Devil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The idiot writer has stuffed way too many hash brownies up his crumb hole.

There can be no peace between Iraq and Iran until there is no Islam and there are not both Arabs and Persians.


3 posted on 01/23/2020 9:16:40 AM PST by MrEdd (Caveat Emptor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Iran and Iraq have been at war with each other for 100 years. Obama gave Iran 80 billion to spend on weapons and training. If we leave Iraq you might as well just drop the Q and replace it with a N.


4 posted on 01/23/2020 9:16:45 AM PST by blackdog (Making wine cave appearances upon request.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
America and European powers funded Saddam’s effort

False. Gulf Arabs funded Saddam. If the author is this clueless of basic facts on the ground in the ME, one has to wonder why we should take any other assumptions he makes seriously.

5 posted on 01/23/2020 9:19:08 AM PST by MNJohnnie (They would have abandon leftism to achieve sanity. Freeper Olog-hai)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

I would have replaced quit with surrender in your statement, but I agree with the sentiment.


6 posted on 01/23/2020 9:20:21 AM PST by Ingtar (Bedbugs, thy name is Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes, they was nothing but peace in that region for thousands of years before we showed up.


7 posted on 01/23/2020 9:20:52 AM PST by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

RE: False. Gulf Arabs funded Saddam

You mean we never helped Saddam in his war against the Iranian Mullah’s?

There have been persistent talk that the USA, through Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam with his Chemical Weapons development...


8 posted on 01/23/2020 9:21:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind (look at Michigan, it will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Journalists can’t even be writing this kinda crap anymore. More like talking points in outline form off Brennan’s personal email and fax lines. All produced from the Obama Georgetown basement war room run by none other than Vallerie Jarrett and Ben Rhodes. The commission on the 80 billion keeps things running smoothly. For now at least.


9 posted on 01/23/2020 9:21:51 AM PST by blackdog (Making wine cave appearances upon request.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Why Conflict With Iran Over Iraq Can’t End Until America Withdraws Converts
10 posted on 01/23/2020 9:42:05 AM PST by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Persistent talk from the American Left, maybe.

I hear this often from Leftists, that the USA supplied Saddam.

Yet he had only had French Mirages and Soviet MiGs, Scuds and T-72s.

Every Iraqi weapons system was European or Soviet. None were from the USA.

Every time I point this out they go away mad and confused, yet it is true. We never sold as much as a bullet to him.

Perhaps there was some Kissingeresque Realpolitik going on between the powers but the United States did not in any substantial way help Saddam Hussein.


11 posted on 01/23/2020 9:47:38 AM PST by Alas Babylon! (The prisons do not fill themselves. Get moving, Barr!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I wouldn't suspect this guy of any latent manhood - another draft-dodging, neoisolationist a-hole masquerading as "conservative".

We're there because we have to be.

12 posted on 01/23/2020 9:54:51 AM PST by Chainmail (Remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yawn. Here come the FR Warriors (Armchair Division).

Nothing we do will solve it. Bring them home. Or automatically enlist everyone who supports our presence there. Thatvwould be cool.


13 posted on 01/23/2020 10:06:18 AM PST by Seruzawa (TANSTAAFL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson