February 25, 2006
"We
have widespread evidence that the outside forces are attempting to
instigate a civil war here and Iraqis are conscious of that and have
made determined effort not to respond to it" (Dr. Saad Jawad, a political scientist at Baghdad University.)
When a crime is committed, the obvious question to ask is: what was the primary motive and who stands to benefit. The
answers would lead to building up a list of suspects. Therefore, at the
very least, let us ask the obvious questions before apportioning blame
to a particular community or group. Almost everyone concurs that, the
primary motive behind the bombings of the Askariyah shrine was to
ignite civil war along sectarian lines. The main beneficiary would be
the US led coalition forces, as they would face less resistance due to
the Sunni-Shia infighting. A deeply divided Iraqi population is less
able to channel and focus their collective opposition against the
US-led invaders.
It is an axiom that power in the international arena is always
determined by the power of rival nations. Naturally, if civil war in
Iraq ignites, that would further weaken its position in relation to
Israel; another significant beneficiary of a civil war. Logic dictates
that the primary suspects behind the bombings of the Askariyah shrines
are the US, UK and Israel, most likely a joint CIA, MI5 and Mossad
operation. Many would simply dismiss it as a conspiracy theory, but
remember to suit the interests of the state, political analysis are
often dismissed as conspiracy theory or disseminated by the state as a
legitimate point of view.
As expected, the western dominated media wasted no time in blaming the
ubiquitous Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Musab Al-Zarqawi and the likes. Blaming
the Sunni-led Iraqi resistance for the recent bombings is bizarre, as
they have the most to lose from a civil war, as explained above. The
city of Samara where the Askariyah shrine is located was under the
control of Sunni-Arab resistance, but the Shi’ites places were never
attacked, the same can be said for other places that the Sunni-Arab
resistance was in control of. Moreover Islamic laws clearly prohibit
attacking any place of worship, e.g. Mosques (Sunni or Shi’ites),
Churches and Synagogues.
If you examine the mass media, the statements from political
commentators to senior politicians, they are the ones who have been
promoting the idea of a civil war; it has been constantly on their
lips, and constantly amplified by the media. From
the onset of the invasion the occupational forces have tried to inflame
the sectarian violence to ignite a civil war. It was they who
constantly talked about dividing Iraq into the three regions, by
constantly alluding to Sunni-Arabs and Shi’ites-Arabs and Kurds (note
majority Kurds are also Sunnis). To incite the Shi’ites, they kept
reminding them of how the minority Sunni-Arabs have dominated the
country for centuries. Likewise, to incite the Kurds, they kept
reminding them of their rights over the Kirkuk oil fields and the
domination by the Arabs for centuries. Indeed, divide and rule has
always been a very effective colonial tool.
Accordingly, the US began to appoint people on the basis of promoting a
sectarian conflict. They filled the military, police and other
influential positions largely with the Shi’ites and the Kurds. The US
forces used these sectarian based militias to attack the Sunni
dominated town of Fallujah and other similar towns; this naturally
incited the Sunni-Arabs. Then, elections were held under US occupation,
which clearly favoured the groups that provided the least resistance to
the US occupational forces. Only recently dead bodies of Sunnis were
discovered, tortured to death by the Shi’ite dominated regime.
The US hoped that Shia-Sunni schisms would eventually surface - when
this did not occur they tried to ignite it themselves. The bombings of
Shi’ite Mosques and other similar places were never carried out by the
Sunni-led resistance, and no genuine group came forward to admit this.
In fact, most of the killings and kidnappings have been blamed on a
particular community with little or no evidence in order to incite
sectarian feuds, hoping that it would culminate into a full scale civil
war. This was largely part of the counter-insurgency activity; and
clearest evidence for it was shown by the capture of the two British
soldiers last September, who were dressed as Arabs armed with
explosives and remote detonations.
Can anyone explain how it would server the interest of any Iraqi group
by killing so many Iraqi academics, which the main stream press have
kept quiet about? Not surprisingly, many of Iraq’s senior nuclear
scientists have been eliminated. Is this the work of the Sunni-led
resistance? Nuclear scientists are an asset to any nation. Another
clear proof of the coalition forces engaged in terrorism and
counter-insurgency activities.
Fortunately, many of the Iraqis have realised the conspiracy to ignite
civil war and have resisted all the provocations to their full credit.
It is commendable that both Sunni and Shi’ite leaders have called for
restraint, and have denied that Sunnis were behind the bombings as no
clear evidence has been provided. Another pertinent point is that, in
its entire history, Iraq’s sectarian-based conflict never took place,
so why should it erupt now? If it does, it cannot be down to
coincidence but directly related to the designs of the foreign
occupational forces as they have the most to benefit from a civil war.
Some of the Shi’ites are angry towards Sunnis as they are the prime
suspect in their eyes, but most have started to blame the US and
Israel. Even it is found that some extreme Sunnis were behind the
bombings, primary blame still lies with the US, because there were no
such attacks prior to the war. The war and the subsequent occupation
created the climate for such types of attack.
Moqtada as-Sadr has called on the Sunnis to join the Shi’ites in
condemning those Sunnis who have attacked Shi’ite places, but how many
have called on the Shi’ite to join the Sunni-led resistance. On the
contrary, seeking sectarian interests, Shi’ites and Kurds have provided
the greatest level of cooperation to the US forces. For example,
Ayatollah Sistani, the most influential Shi’ite scholar in Iraq ordered
his followers not to resist the US forces, therefore implicitly aiding
the US forces against the Iraqi resistance. He was treacherously silent
over Abu-Ghraib and the Fallujah massacre. Therefore, by his conduct,
he participated in killing the men, women and children in Fallujah
alongside the Americans.
Shi’ites ought to consider the point that anyone cooperating with the
US is a legitimate target for the Iraqi resistance. Hence, the
Sunni-led resistance targeted all collaborators, Shi’ites, Sunnis and
Kurds. Attacks were never driven by ones sectarian identity but the
degree of cooperation with the US-led forces.
Many of the commentators view the recent events in the context of the US preparing for an attack on Iran.
• Recent bombings of the holy shrines were designed to ignite a civil
war and give the US an excuse to drag Iran into the conflict or
initiate an attack on her.
• The Danish cartoon incident was engineered by the neo-cons behind the
scene to magnify the anti-Islamic climate in Europe, which would reduce
the level of opposition in Europe, if Iran is attacked jointly by the
US and Israel.
• The nuclear crisis with Iran is always looming to escalate even
though Iran has not violated the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
treaty. Clearly the crisis has been manufactured by the West as pretext
to attack Iran and like Iraq’s WMD it is a lie.
• Finally, Iran’s oil is now being traded in euros instead of the US
dollar and they are preparing to establish an oil bourse to trade oil
using the euro – this will threaten to eradicate the petro-dollar, and
weaken the US dollar significantly, posing a serious threat to the US
economy and its super power status. No wonder Iran is part of the axis
of evil. This may be the most significant reason behind the conflict
with Iran.
Yamin Zakaria (www.iiop.org)
London, UK
Copyright © 2006 by Yamin Zakaria
|