PATH TO PEACE IN IRAQ

The whole world is watching; what is going to happen next in Iraq? The answer is that no one knows; however, a moment’s reflection should give you a clue. Who is the most influential person in the Middle East and what is philosophy is he following?

The most obvious answer is that we can never know what is going to happen next but we can get an idea from answering a short series of questions.

Q: Who is the most influential person in the Middle East?

A: Barack Obama is by far the most powerful individual in the world.

Q: Then we have to ask what has history and his political campaigns taught us about his philosophy?

A: He is a man concerned about the welfare of people; thus, a man with a deep commitment to peace as he has demonstrated with his entire life: it is his heritage innately ingrained in his being. He wanted us out of Iraq, which he accomplished. He wants us out of Afghanistan, which he is now accomplishing. He wants peace in the Middle East; he will achieve that too.

Q: Does he understand the situation and the entire range of religious implications of the situation in the Middle East and in the U. S., which includes Israel, the Vatican, and even a small black church in Chicago?

A: Yes, he does, as his actions in Syria fully demonstrated; he did not go for the quick and easy solution of arming one side over the other, which would have made things worse in the end. He understands that Sunnis and Shi′a Islamic sects have been fighting for centuries across the region and that sovereign borders are the same as religious boundaries. He made it clear he understands this by holding Iran, a stronghold of the Shi'a Muslim faith, at arms length in searching for a solution of Iraqi’s problems with a Sunni leader (Maliki). He could have allowed Iran to build an atomic bomb, but he didn’t. He didn’t bomb them either as the neo-cons wanted. He peacefully negotiated that weapon away. He could have allowed Iran to control Iraq by using Iran’s military might against Maliki but he will never do that either. George W. Bush sought the easy solution and the result is a Shi′a dictator; a serious problem we have to live with today. Democracy does not work without separation of “church and state”. Predictability, a Shi′a majority, in a Shi′a country elected a Shi′a religious dictator.  

Q: Has Obama demonstrated that he understands the objective is of the Arab Spring movement.

A: He has repeatedly demonstrated that he knows that “Arab Spring” is about replacing caliphates with democratic governments; especially in handling the riots when President Morsi of Egypt; once elected, turned into a religious dictator just like Maliki did in Iraq. The people in the Middle East are envious of American Democracy and freedom from religion is government; they want to flatter us by coping us, which is the basis terrorists’ wrath. Terrorists want religious domination, and are willing to kill to achieve that. Confusion comes because the Shi′a want to dominate the Sunnis who want to dominate the Shi′as; thus, both groups do not want religions freedom. They do not understand what it is that makes America great.

Q: What will Obama do?

A: He will follow a course in the Middle East that can lead to peace in the entire region.  No one knows what that exact course will be. He will weave it around and integrate it with the rapidly changing situation across the entire region including Russia, which stuck their nose into Syria.

Obama understands that the duly elected president of Iraq, Maliki, clearly is on one side of the religious divide that just happens to be the opposite side from Saddam Husain. Neither of these dictators follows the dictates of the Arab Spring any more than Morsi in Egypt did. The coalition Obama has to form to comply with the Arab Spring mandates has to be made of all of the people in the region; both Sunnis and Shi′a whether or not they are Kurds, Iraqi, Syrian, or Iranians. He can not simply overthrow an elected leaded even if that leader is a dictator. Who ever the voters are, they have to believe that democracy is better than a caliphate; they have to want democracy.

He will not support rules who lead by terror. To allow a man to rule by terror is not compatible with his peaceful philosophy; therefore, rule with the blessings of the Untied States, which means arms and economic support. Obama recognizes that President Maliki is there as the result of a democratic process just as was elected Morsi in Egypt, which was entirely consistent with the wishes of the Untied States. Therefore, Obama has to see that democratic leaders replace them in a manner consistent with the Arab Spring philosophy, not just people elected, peacefully but elected by people who believes in one-man one-vote whether that vote is Sunni or Shi′a. As we learned from Egypt, it is not an easy task and may take two or three tries before the people in that country can accomplish that. A voters’ religion “must not matter”; this is not an easy thing to accomplish, even in the United States. Look at the influence wielded by religious radicals such as Ralph Reid; consider George W. Bush and his officer of faith initiative in the White House, House, consider the chance of the people electing an atheist President in the United States, and consider the hate the Right wing is currently trying to stir up against the Muslims. Muslims could not even build a Mosque in New York City near ground zero; now think of how hard our President’s task is in the Middle East. If there ever will be peace in that region, it will not be because of Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Steve King, Ralph Reid, or Oral Roberts. We may not know the way but we can be sure that it is because of Barrack Obama or Hillary Clinton does, or at least someone of like philosophy. 

URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated