I received this article so many times in the past few days that I
decided to write this comment, knowing of course that material is often
circulated for information rather than approval.
Why we stuck with Maliki — and lost
Iraq
My comments are
as follows:
First, the
article is written by a mercenary who has served the occupation for about 10
years and he claims a major role in arranging the Exxon-KRG oil deal. There is
every expectation that he is writing this not as a contribution to our
understanding but in order to pursue the interest of the oil company or whoever
else he is working for now. Furthermore, he is clearly exaggerating his own
role, which for all we know may not be more than one of a go-between and an
interpreter.
Second, this long
article says virtually nothing we do not know and conceals and muddies much
that is known. The writer claims to tell us why the US stuck with Maliki, but this is not what we find at all. Instead, he
tells us who said what among US officials, not their assessments, their
rationale and the rationale behind the ultimate decisions. He tries to give the
impression that the US had no strategic planning and just wanted to be out, and
that everything was the result of short-term policy considerations and
conjecture. This view is not tenable, and it is part of the public political
discourse in the US and the media fight between democrats and republicans.
Anyway, he clearly belongs to the neocons and should
be read as that.
Third, his
premise is that the US has lost Iraq, and he makes no mention of the Biden plan
which we see unfolding before us, nor does he mention any considerations of oil
issues, of which he is aware. You have to believe that the US invaded Iraq in
order to create a free, democratic, progressive and united country so as to
accept that the US project has failed. I don't see failure when Iraqis fight
each other and all separately ask for US support.
Fourth, according
to this article, everything that went wrong in Iraq is the fault of Maliki. There is no mention of all the major US decisions
undermining the state and paralysing it. There is
also no mention of Negroponte and the Salvador Option, and no mention of a
flawed constitution and policies driving a wedge between Iraqis. The picture is
of US innocence and confusion and Iraqi violence, mistrust and culpability.
This is symbolised by Maliki
who basically takes all the blame. He even says Maliki
destroyed the Iraqi state. In other words, that the US built and sustained the
state and Maliki destroyed it is his message.
Fifth, the
article does offer a picture of regular and close US oversight of Maliki personally in the early years, such as weekly
conversations with Bush and almost daily hours-long US meetings with Maliki. This is interesting to remind us, but hardly a
revelation. We already know that the US Ambassador was a frequent and
major presence in Parliament and government, so this is not
surprising. There is little mention of what the US has left behind after withdrawal in terms of links,
relations of dependence and general subservience among the political clique.
The idea as presented here is that the US was trying to keep civic peace and
that it has little influence in Iraq. This is nonsense.
Finally, Khedery is clearly associated with Kurdish
political/business interests, as his claim to be a fixer of the Exxon-KRG deal
signifies. In a separate intervention, he told a journalist that foreign oil
companies might pull out of southern Iraq if employees of these companies were
killed. He said: “I would not be a surprised to see some of the western IOCs
suspending operations in Iraq all together (sic.) for
the foreseeable future. ... The current fiscal terms just wouldn’t be good
enough in southern Iraq relative to the rest of the world to justify their
continued presence.” This
same message of a grave and imminent threat to oil in the south has been spread
by other advisors to the occupation who have close personal connections with
Kurdish parties, one even told the BBC that ISIS was
likely to carry out a raid across the western desert into the Basra
installations.
The above is not in defence of Maliki who has led the country into this mess through eight
years of corruption, incompetence, sectarian prejudice and repression,
ultimately threatening the integrity and future of the country. It is
disgraceful that Maliki and his supporters are now
pleading with the US to bomb Iraq.
Kamil