This head­line “Six years of the US dwelling in Iraq” pub­lished on Russ­ian Novosti Arabic-edition, it says the following:

The U.S. still con­sid­ers the pos­si­bil­ity of divid­ing Iraq into three regions, the Kurds in north­ern Iraq, the Sun­nis in the cen­ter and the Shi­ite in the South.

Which means that the U.S. author­i­ties unaware of the con­se­quences, because such a divi­sion could cause polit­i­cal prob­lems with neigh­bor­ing countries.

Since Maliki change his mind about his own rec­on­cil­i­a­tion ini­tia­tive (read Badger’s entry “News, and a ques­tion about Journo­List”, and see below also), I won­der if this “divid­ing Iraq” still an option!

Al-Qabas cov­er­age of the impact of Obama’s mes­sage to Iran on Iraq says the following:

Pres­i­dent Obama’s mes­sage to Iran showed that Iraqi politi­cians have not fully recov­ered from the sec­tar­ian deal which estab­lished the polit­i­cal process.

The Shi­ite polit­i­cal forces look at Obama’s move with high hopes, to bridge the US-Iranian rela­tion­ship, and remove the con­cerns of the US bias to other forces, which ben­e­fit from the US – Iran con­fronta­tion relation.

The Sun­nis rushed to express their con­cerns on the con­se­quences this [US – Iran] rela­tion improve­ment, and some offi­cials described Obama’s mes­sage as an effort to revive the “new Mid­dle East”, which includes the new Iran, Israel and other coun­tries in the region.

Khair Al-Din Haseeb is not only a writer, but he is the head of Al-Wahda study Cen­ter in Beirut. In his arti­cle “Iraq … to where?” (orig­i­nally pub­lished on Al-Quds Al-Arabi):

The Amer­i­can prob­lem in Iraq is the following:

1– A) They want to with­draw from Iraq sav­ing face. B) They don’t want to leave chaos behind in Iraq.

2– The biggest US dilemma in Iraq is that there is no guar­an­tee to achieve the “non-chaos” sta­tus in Iraq after the withdrawal.

The rec­on­cil­i­a­tion

the con­clu­sion of Iraqi writer Al-Alwaji pub­lished on Egypt­ian news­pa­per Al-Araby is: Maliki is not really seri­ous in his rec­on­cil­i­a­tion ini­tia­tive. the writer listed the points say­ing that the Army is still based on sec­tar­ian motives, the “Jus­tice and Account­abil­ity Com­mit­tee” still exists, pres­sure from his Shi­ite allies …and many other rea­sons make Maliki’s call unre­al­is­tic.

3 Comments

  1. This is a com­ment I left on Uruknet regard­ing what you posted –
    and am reprint­ing it here.

    okay, noth­ing new under the sun…Shiite iraq is sec­tar­ian in essence and it wil l con­tinue to be used by the Amer­i­cans and the Zion­ists until the par­ti­tion is i n place…the only rea­son it did not take place geographically…as in delim­ited geo­graph­i­cal statelets is because there has been a fierce RESISTANCE which the pup­pet maliki, the shi­ites in power, the kurds and the rest of the sell out junk from the iraqi scum like to call Insur­gents. Bor­row­ing names from their Amer­i­can masters.

    It is so bloody obvi­ous. Why can’t any­one see it ??

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] click here if the arti­cle does not […]

  2. […] = “Awak­en­ing Move­ment in Iraq”; Head­lines Around the WebWhat’s This?Baghdad Dweller­March 23, 2009Back to the old-new “three-regions” argu­mentSpero News — Reli­gious News­March 23, 2009Iraq: 62k pub­lic employ­ees fired for corruptionThe […]

Back to the old-new “three-regions” argument

This article was written March 23rd, 2009, with the mathematical number of 3 contributions.