.
Killing of Ayatollah Is Start of Iraqi Civil War
Commentary, William O. Beeman
Pacific News Service, Aug 29,
2003: The bombing of one of Islam's
holiest shrines not only killed an important Shi'a leader, it also
signals the first shot in an Iraqi civil war that Middle East experts
warned would ensue if Saddam were removed without careful planning.
The assassination of Ayatollah Mohammad Baqir al-Hakim in Najaf on
August 28 is the opening volley in the coming Iraqi Civil War. The
United States will reap the whirlwind.
One of the most consistent and ominous prewar warnings to the Bush
administration by Middle East experts was that removal of Saddam Hussein
without the most careful political and social engineering would result
in the breaking apart of Iraq into warring factions that would battle
each other for decades.
The hawks in the White House would not listen. They were so wedded to
the fantasy scenario that the removal of Saddam in an act of
"creative destruction" would result in the automatic emergence
of democracy. They brushed aside all warnings.
Present-day Iraq was three provinces of the Ottoman Empire before World
War I. It was cobbled together by the British for their own convenience
after that conflict. The British installed a king, the Saudi Arabian son
of the chief religious official of Mecca (Faisal, of Lawrence of Arabia
Fame) and glued the whole mess together with the resident British Army.
The three regions were incompatible in ethnicity, religious confession
and interests. The Sunni Muslim Kurds occupied the north. The Sunni Arab
Bedouins occupied the center and Southwest. The Shi'a Arab and Persian
population occupied the South and Southeast. Of the three groups, the
Shi'a were largest, with 60 percent of the population. With oil, an
outlet to the Persian Gulf and good agricultural land, they would be the
natural dominant force in the state the British created. The Kurds would
be important, too, because they lived in the region of the country with
the largest oil reserves.
However, the British wanted the Sunni Arabs, the smallest faction of the
population, to be dominant. They wanted this both to reward Saudi
Arabians for helping them fight the Ottomans, and because they had
existing clients in the sheikhs who ruled the Arab states of the Gulf.
When the British were finally expelled, and their Saudi ruling family
deposed in Iraq in a 1958 nationalist coup, the new Ba'athist Iraqi
nationalist rulers had a supremely unruly nation on their hand. The only
way to keep power in Sunni Arab hands, and away from the Shi'ites was
through ruthless dictatorship and oppression. Saddam Hussein was the
supreme master of this political strategy.
Ayatollah al-Hakim's family was victimized by this oppression. Virtually
every one of the Ayatollah's male relatives was executed by Saddam's
regime. He fled to Iran for years of exile, returning only after Saddam
was deposed by the United States. He became one of the principal leaders
of the Shi'a community, and a symbol of rising Shi'a power in post-War
Iraq. His triumphant return to Iraq and the holy city of Najaf was one
of the most celebrated events in recent Iraqi history.
It is still not known who set off the explosion that killed him at the
shrine of Ali, grandson of the Prophet Mohammad. It could have been
Sunni Arab factions who fear the rise of Shi'a dominance in Iraq, or it
could have been his own Shi'a supporters, disappointed with him for
cooperating with American policies in Iraq. Or it could have been
someone else. What is clear is that his death will now forever be a
rallying cry for the Shi'ite community against its enemies.
It is notable that in Shi'ism virtually all significant leaders have
been "martyred." Of the 12 historical Imams of the Ithna 'ashara
branch of Shi'ism dominant in Iraq and Iran (Ithna 'ashara means
"twelve" in Arabic), ten are buried in shrines in Iraq. Their
tombs are ever-present reminders of the oppression and struggle of the
Shi'a. Now Ayatollah al-Hakim will join them, and with the power of a
saint, will inspire generations of grimly dedicated young warriors,
determined to wreak vengeance and assert the power of their community.
They will be led by his own paramilitary group, the Badr brigade.
Shi'a fury will be directed at the Sunnis to the north. It will also be
directed toward United States as the occupying force who both did
nothing to prevent this tragedy, and further continued the British
doctrine of Sunni favoritism by insisting that the Shi'a religious
leaders would never be allowed to come to power. In any case, the forces
of retribution are about to be unleashed in a manner hitherto unseen in
the region.
Could the United States have done anything to have prevented this
tragedy? Of course it could have. As the occupying power U.S. officials
knew acutely about the danger to Ayatollah al-Hakim. Since Washington
opposed the rise of Shi'a power in Iraq, charges of American
indifference or even complicity in his death will soon be flying.
The final question Washington must now face is how to stop this
inevitable civil war? When the factional shooting starts, where does the
U.S. army, caught in the crossfire, aim its own guns?
William O. Beeman, Director of Middle East Studies at Brown
University. He is author of the forthcoming book, Iraq: State in Search
of a Nation.
Join our Daily News Headlines
Email Digest
|
|
Information
Clearing House
Daily News Headlines
Digest
|
HOME
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
|
