The Fall of Ramadi and the Threat of Iraq’s Disintegration

Some believe that Heidar al-Ebadi may be a good person but he is not a politician who would be able to handle the internal and external complexities in Iraq’s political scene. If the fall of Mosul is considered as the result of a surprise attack, the occupation of Ramadi must be analyzed as the result of ISIS’ initiative and its power and the incapability of the al-Ebadi government.

Reports received from Syria and Iraq indicate the advances made by ISIS and the bitterness of the fall of Ramadi. Although internal and external elements including the US, Turkey,… which considered the dismissal of Noori al-Maleki as the solution to the Iraq problem, prepared the ground for the fall of Ramadi, it must be mentioned that the problem in Iraq is mainly structural and, more than to different personalities, related to its sensitive geopolitics and the rivalry between inside and outside players. In the minds of the Iraqis, Iraq is disintegrated. Although the mindset of disintegration is not a new issue and the history of Iraq is based on this foundation, the conditions of this country have changed since more than a decade ago and with the empowerment of ISIS, the idea of disintegration among the tribal and religious groups has been strengthened more than ever before.

The Kurds, who have always pursued independence and taken any opportunity to achieve this goal, take more serious measures in this regard. In the recent visit made by Barzani to the US, the main topic of negotiations was the independence of Kurdistan. A major part of the Sunnis who have not yet accepted the post-Saddam conditions seek to gain control of all of Iraq or separate their destiny from this country. This group has linked its demand with the emergence of ISIS and is the main cause of today’s crisis. Despite their majority and due to their disunity and lack of political experience, the Shiites have not been able to completely implement their responsibilities.

The key point about the developments in Iraq is that, without experiencing the process of democracy, this country went through sudden structural developments of imported democracy and the social ground was not prepared for this. The numerical democracy of the Shiites was not accepted, neither by domestic players nor by regional powers, and the plan of an inclusive government proposed by countries like Turkey was, in fact, aimed at negating tools of democracy wherein the Shiites were the premier power. In the minds of the Arab and Turk media and officials, the Shiites are responsible for the emergence of ISIS and the crisis in Iraq. This is a tactic to create a defensive position among the Shiites and, more importantly, hide the overt and covert support of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, … for ISIS. A look at the statements made by the Turkish and Arab officials indicates that they directly and indirectly relate the fall of Mosul and the situation in al-Anbar to the Shiites’ performance in order to reduce the shame of their covert and overt support for ISIS.

Although the Kurds are apparently the main winners in Iraqi equations and imagine a separate destiny for themselves, even if this is not the case and regional policies in destroying the unity between the Kurds and the Shiites have succeeded, this point must be noted that even the unity between the Kurds and the Sunnis would be a minority against the Shiites and they must accept the rules of democracy. The Kurds must not enter a risk which could not be compensated. When ISIS threatened the borders of Erbil, it was Iran which gave its helping hand. Erbil should not be deceived by Turkey’s neo-Ottomanism of Erdogan who calls the Kurds in Turkey Zoroastrians and non-Muslims. If intelligence does not rule the sectarian and religious mindset of the people and rulers of Iraq, a crisis far worse than disintegration will threaten the people of this country and the region. The possible disintegration of Iraq could be a beginning for the disintegration of other countries in the region and a hopeful development for ISIS in the management of inclusive crises and interference in the geography of the Iraqi Kurds and the Shiites and the countries of the region.

In fact, the crisis in Iraq which is linked to the crisis in Syria and has spread to Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc. could be the beginning of a regional war which would be to the benefit of the extra-regional powers. Today, ISIS and its supporting countries including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are at the service of western strategy to create war among Muslims. Although the conditions are not suitable for making such statements, it seems that for the resolution of the crisis caused by the emergence of ISIS, the leaders of the region need, more than ever before, consultation, refrain, prudence and collective wisdom and an outlook going beyond religion. Through creating fear caused by blind and brutal killings, ISIS intends to eliminate wisdom and substitute revenge among the people and leaders of the region. The countries of the region must move towards the resolution of the crisis and retaliatory measures will help the continuation and expansion of the crisis which is desirable for ISIS and its international supporters. They should not enter this game. Exercising radicalism will have nothing for the region except the spread of war and its resulting suffering. ISIS terrorists, who call themselves Jihadis, and their supporters are aware of Ashura idealism in Shiite culture and have witnessed its manifestations in the war between Iran and Saddam and the 22- and 33-day wars in Lebanon. The people and leaders of Iran, through wisdom, attempt to align the people and leaders of the Islamic countries and prevent another Saffein in the history of Muslims by using collective wisdom.

The important point is that the Iranians have shown, through their revolution and support of the unity and rights of all Muslims for which they have paid a price for the oppressed people of Palestine, that they bypass the bitterness of history and seek peace, unity and justice among Muslims with the strategy of wisdom, prudence and pride. The last point is that in the opinion of the Iranians and in the culture of martyrdom risen from the event of Karbala, the leaders and the people of Iran believe that if they are faced with an incident similar to Karbala, they must show the culture of Ashura not in confrontation with the religious ignorants of the Islamic states but rather against the world arrogance.