I finally finished reading Tell Me How This Ends. I'm surprised that it took me so long to do, even given that I was making notes along the way -- mostly, who the players were, and occasionally concepts, such as 'battlefield geometry' and the like. I want to read it again, but I think I'll get a different one. Peter Mansoor, Petraeus' executive officer, has written Baghdad at Sunrise: A Brigade Commander's War in Iraq; I've requested a copy from the library.
Reading just the one book hardly gives me insight, let alone unique insights, but I did draw a faint connection between the political environment of Iraq, and the strategies that were effective there, with a couple of articles that I came across this morning from the International Herald Tribune web site. (I heard that Hearst is considering charging for premium newspaper content; that paper, along with the Christian Science Monitor, are both ones that I'd pay for.) The first article, here, has this title, which pretty much says it all - Chechen leader imposes strict Islamic code- while a second one, here, carries almost the flip-side message --Muslims seek to build future in Italy.
Upon seeing the first, my reaction was to think Oh, no, not again. More rabid Muslims! After a second, I thought, no, not rabid Muslims, but rather a rabid person wearing that identity for his own purposes. I still had a trace of why can't the Muslims do something about this?, though, even though I knew that was unrealistic. Then I read the second article, and thought These are the real Muslims; they honestly want what that guy says he's for.
Thinking about the question of Muslims and forcing others to conform to your personal view of what's permissible brought the idea of Iraq to mind; specifically, the idea that people of the same religion don't view it the same way. Some really are Muslims in fact, others, just in name; some really want peace, some really do think that being a Muslim means 'everyone conforms to my view', while still others are just using it as a power base.
I think about how difficult it is to attack the extremists who want to harm others while not attacking the extremists who don't, let alone the moderates, and I think we'll never get it right. Then I think about Iraq, and I think "well, it's not flat-out impossible -- just damned difficult." What, I wonder, will it take to have an Iraqi-style 'awakening' here?
Guess I need to go read more books.
2 comments:
I'm leaning to the "impossible" column on Iraq. It's actually 3 nations, just sort of lumped together when the British departed the land. They did the same with Afghanistan and India, which led to the creation of Pakistan. All had borders defined as "over there, somewhere!"
Saddam could only keep Iraq as one nation by basically ignoring the Kurds, (which he wasnt bombing or gassing them), and using terror on everyone else.
There is precedent for letting the place devolve into different nations: the old European state of Yugoslavia! Unfortunately, there's only one fly in the anointment for Iraq: Iran. And Oil. (It's actually just one problem... Or a zillion. Depending on how you/they/whomever defines "a fly in the anointment").
Ah well. One thing I do know: we'll be there for many years to come!
Carolyn Ann
I don't want to believe that its impossible, but I am astonished at how difficult it is to get things to work in that country. I think your comments about division are exactly right. I hate to admit it, but before reading the book, I wasn't even aware that there IS a Kurdistan, or how fragmented and multi-loyalty-driven the Iraqi government is. It was at times painful to read. If this is the real world, I think I'm going back to comic books -- though even they are a lot bleaker, these days.
Post a Comment