The Bush Administration’s foreign
policy performance, and arguably its performance as a whole, has been largely
judged by one undertaking: nation-building in the Middle East. Vice President
Dick Cheney, on Meet the Press in 2003, famously said, “My belief is we will,
in fact, be greeted as liberators,” in reference to the invasion of Iraq.
Fast-forward six years to 2009, and a new administration had just been ushered
in under the slogan, “Hope and Change,” and with a promise to remove our
soldiers from the failed operations in Iraq. The message was clear: democracy
cannot be thrust upon a state; it emerges from within. Thus, it is not
surprising that the Arab Spring, which began in late 2010, was met with a great
degree of optimism. President Obama even compared the uprisings to the actions
of the Boston Tea Party and Rosa Parks. But this, too, failed to result in the
desired outcome of stable democracies and, instead, resulted in a drastically
more violent and destabilized Arab world. Military rule has shown resilience in
Egypt and Algeria, but where the authoritarian rulers have been swept away –
Iraq and Libya – the politics of identity are leading to fragmentation. Old
borders are resurfacing and calling into question the legitimacy of the
arbitrary borders we recognize today.
The most obvious example of this
unfortunate situation is Iraq, which has been in disarray since the U.S.-led toppling
of Saddam Hussein’s government. Following the invasion, resistance stemmed from
Saddam/Ba’ath Party loyalists. By 2006, however, sectarian violence between
Iraqi Sunni and Shi’a factions became prevalent and continued to escalate to
the level of a civil war. The U.S. troop “surge” is credited with the reduction
of violence in 2007 and 2008, but Iraqi insurgency again swelled in the
aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal. Sunni militant groups increased attacks
targeting the country’s majority Shi’a population, eventually culminating in
the conquest of Mosul and major swaths of northern Iraq by the Sunni rebel
group ISIS. This merged the new conflict in Iraq with the Syrian Civil War,
effectively erasing the border between the two states. Add Iraqi Kurdistan to
the mix and Iraq is effectively three nations within one recognized state: The
Republic of Iraq, The Islamic State, and Iraqi Kurdistan.
Iraq is not unique though, as Libya
experienced fragmentation during and following the Libyan Civil War. Libya has
three major geographical regions with ancient significance: the fertile
agricultural land of Cyrenaica in the east, the urban coastal strip of
Tripolitania in the west, and the Saharan Fezzan in the south. Cyrenaica is
under the control of the internationally recognized Tobruk government, while a
rival Islamist government, the New General National Congress, controls the
capital Tripoli and most of Tripolitania. Both are in conflict and operate
mostly independent of one another.
A commonality between Iraq and
Libya is that their borders were contrived by European colonial powers a century
ago. Italy simultaneously established Italian Cyrenaica and Italian
Tripolitania in 1912, eventually combining the two into Libya in 1934. The
British established control over Iraq in 1920. In both cases, and in the larger
Arab world, foreign occupation in the early 20th century led to Arab
nationalism, with the main objective being to get rid of the colonialists, by
the middle of the century. In the latter half of the century, many of the new
authoritarian rulers in the Arab world – Hussein and Gaddafi – suppressed
ethnic differences by using immense brutality. However, the underlying tensions
never disappeared. When the cracks in these state governments began to show,
first with the disappearance of several dictators and most recently with the
Arab uprisings, the old dividing lines resurfaced. This dichotomy between old
borders and new is a central challenge to stability in the Arab world.
No comments:
Post a Comment