It is the beginning of the end of what started on March 20, 2003. If one goes by duration alone, the Iraq War is well comparable to Second World War (WW II). But the similarity perhaps ends there itself. For, the two contesting sides here were hugely unequal. It was more of an occupation of Iraq by multinational forces, chiefly the American and the British. Besides, Germany and Japan were nations strong enough to rebuild themselves from scratch. A shattered and divided Iraq can hardly be seen possessing the same capabilities.
The occupation of Iraq has been controversial right from the beginning. George W Bush attacked Iraq on the pretext that it possessed weapons of mass destruction. But the inspections made by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) later revealed that this was a hoax call made by the Americans. Bush later changed tack and accused the then Iraqi president Saddam Hussein of harbouring and supporting Al-Qaeda terrorists. But this charge too was based more on apprehension than on any solid evidence.
Several analysts felt that the US had uppermost on its mind Iraq’s massive oil reserves, estimated to be the third largest in the world. The issue has been contentious ever since the oil industry was nationalized in Iraq in 1972. But the US really got angry when Saddam switched the oil sales from dollar to euro in 2000. However, the US was discreet enough to avoid any such allegations or even connotations. It is said that even the change of the name of the operation was a sort of hand-washing. Operation Iraqi Liberation had OIL as its acronym, and was therefore renamed Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Perhaps the only ground on which the US invasion could be sympathized with, though not necessarily justified, was the outrageous abuses perpetrated by the dictator Saddam. During his rule of more than two decades he had killed and tortured thousands of Iraqi citizens. He had gassed and killed thousands of Kurds in the mid-eighties. He had brutally repressed Shia and Kurdish uprisings following the 1991 Gulf war. Besides, a campaign of repressing and displacing the Marsh Arabs had been going on for 15 years in Southern Iraq.
One wonders if the US has achieved its purpose of liberating or freeing Iraq. It seems to be more out of political and economic compulsion that the US has signed the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). US ambassador Ryan Crocker and Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari have agreed that the US combat forces will withdraw from “Iraqi cities, villages and localities” no later than June 30, 2009. Further, the American forces will withdraw from all Iraqi territory by the end of 2011.
What has prompted this withdrawal? The war was leading nowhere and has discredited the Bush regime to a large extent. Things are getting out of control in Afghanistan and deserve much more attention. Besides, Barack Obama has never been a votary of this war and in any case would have ended it, or at least begun its end, once he came to power.
Economically, the war is proving to be a millstone around the American neck. The US has spent nearly one trillion dollars on this war. At a time when stimulus and bailout packages are the need of the hour, even the largest economy can hardly afford spending a billion dollars a day merely trying to improve the lot of a country thousands of miles away geographically and still farther culturally.
So the US is ready to move out. Nearly six years of occupation has led to hardly any positives except for removing tyrant Saddam from the scene. In Saddam, however, Iraq has also lost its most potent unifying force. What the Americans are leaving is a weakened federation of 18 provinces, elections for 14 of which are scheduled to be held on Jan 31. Iraq is a house divided. The Sunni minority does not see eye to eye with the 60-odd per cent Shia majority. Moqtada Sadr sings his own tune through his Mahdi Army.
Ethnically, the Kurds still remain a disgruntled lot. The future of the Kirkuk province remains precarious. The daily newspaper of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) has accused the Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of creating Isnad or “Support Councils”, which are tribally-based private militias. They are supposed to be a personal instrument of his power engaged in curbing the Kurds. Asked the newspaper, “Who can tell the difference between Saddam’s al-Quds army and Nouri al-Maliki’s Support Councils?”
There seems to be no proper consensus on a law for oil, the crucial commodity on which Iraq has traditionally relied for 95 per cent of its exports. Moreover, a collapse in global oil prices will only deter the country further from leveraging on this mineral.
Lack of friendly neighbours does not help Iraq’s case either. Iran, which may be a nuclear power by 2012, should be in favour of a weak federal Iraq under Shiite leadership. Syria on the other hand favours a unitary state. So should Turkey, so that Kurdistan does not rear its head.
Nearly six years into the war, Iraq seems to be groping in the dark. Lakhs of its citizens have been killed and nearly 5 million, or 16 per cent of its population, displaced. The Americans, who promised to hold the torch, are gradually dimming it.
