What's new

Saudi Arabia and Qatar Ratcheting Up Sectarian and Ethnic Tensions In Iraq

Alshawi1234

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Nov 28, 2012
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
8
Country
Iraq
Location
Iraq
The most accurate Article i have come accross, thought of sharing it.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar Ratcheting Up Sectarian and Ethnic Tensions In Iraq

Written by Zayd Alisa, Guest Contributor|
Iraq, a decade after the U.S. led invasion and one year after the end of the U.S. occupation, is undeniably grappling with not merely an escalating sectarian crisis between the Shia-led partnership government and an increasingly disaffected Sunni minority, but also with an intensifying ethnic crisis with an increasingly defiant and heavily armed Kurdish Region.

In 1991 Saudi Arabia fiercely resisted the toppling of Saddam’s regime and played a major role in pressurising the U.S. to turn its back on the popular uprising against Saddam’s tyrannical regime. In 2003, however, Saudi Arabia’s immense influence in the U.S. was dramatically weakened due to the decisive role played by Saudi nationals in the 9/11 atrocities in the heart of the U.S.

Ever since the ousting of Saddam’s regime in 2003, the Saudi regime has adamantly refused to recognise the new democratic system in Iraq and has been steadfastly determined not to have any diplomatic representation in Baghdad. Among the real underlying reasons behind the Saudi regime’s conspicuously emphatic hostility towards the fledgling democracy in Iraq, was and still is its deeply entrenched fear that the success of democracy in Iraq is an immensely harmful precedent which would undoubtedly inspire its own people. Another reason is the deeply rooted hatred towards the Shia, which explains its fierce refusal to come to terms with the inescapable reality that the Shia in Iraq constitute the indisputable majority. The Saudi regime also accuses Nouri Al Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, and the Shia-led Central Government (CG) of giving Iran a free hand to dramatically intensify its influence in Iraq.

Since the bitterly contested 2010 national elections, the heavily Sunni-dominated Iraqiya bloc-which enjoys the full blown support of both Saudi Arabia and Qatar-has persistently accused Al Maliki and the Shia-dominated National Alliance of hijacking the elections, despite the patently unambiguous Federal Court’s ruling permitting the formation of the biggest bloc inside parliament. The Saudi King left absolutely no doubt where his sympathies lie, underlining his unequivocal backing to the Iraqiya bloc by personally meeting its head, Ayad Allawi, immediately before and after the elections. It is doubtless that the U.S. final withdrawal from Iraq in December 2011, which coincided with the arrest warrant issued against Tariq Al Hashimi, Iraq’s Sunni Vice President, provided Saudi Arabia and Qatar with a golden opportunity to ramp up the message that Sunni discrimination would dramatically escalate.

Despite the enormous geopolitical concessions made by the Iraqi government on its stance towards Syria and Bahrain–before the Arab League summit held in Baghdad, in April 2012–to specifically appease the Saudi regime, it nonetheless decided to appoint its ambassador in Jordan as a non-resident ambassador to Iraq, reiterating the same old message that Iraq is far too insecure and unstable. But, even more disparaging, was the Saudis' and Qataris' decision to restrict their representation to low level delegations. As part of the Saudi and Qatari relentless efforts to ratchet up sectarian tensions in Iraq, Qatari Prime Minister Hamad Bin Jassim not only asserted that Qatar’s low level participation was aimed at highlighting Qatar’s fierce objection to the marginalisation of Sunnis in Iraq, but, to add insult to injury, the Qatari PM and afterwards Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al Faisal also offered Al Hashimi a formal red-carpet reception in Doha and Riyadh, even while he–found guilty and handed a death sentence–was facing terrorism allegations. Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been working tirelessly to break up the Shia-Kurdish strategic alliance in Iraq, replacing it by a Turkish strategic alliance with the Kurdish Region (KR), headed by Massoud Barzani. This has unquestionably not only dramatically bolstered the position of the KR in its tense confrontation with the CG over land and oil, but also ramped up ethnic tensions.

Against this backdrop of growing sectarian tension, in December 2012 the arrest of nine bodyguards for Iraq’s Sunni Finance Minister, Rafe Al Essawi, and his accusations to the CG of marginalising the Sunni population, sparked protests that swept the Sunni-dominated provinces of Anbar, Nainawa, Salah Al Deen, and Deyala. Although the protests started spontaneously, they were swiftly taken over by a number of the Iraqiya bloc leaders and hard-line Sunni clerics, who are closely connected to Saudi Arabia and Qatar. And amid Iraqiya’s strenuous attempts to win over Muqtada Al Sadr’s unarguably vital endorsement, to ensure that the protests spreads far beyond the Sunni provinces, it scrambled to replace the menacingly sectarian slogans with patriotic ones. Beyond a doubt, former Saddam Vice President Izzat Ibrahim’s ringing endorsement of the protests, followed by Al Qaida’s spokesman’s ominous call on the protesters to take up arms, made it absolutely inconceivable for any Shia leader, let alone Al Sadr, to urge the Shia to join the protests. Indeed, the demonstrations that took place in Shia areas were by contrast highly supportive of Al Maliki’s government and have categorically refused any alterations to either the terrorism or the Justice and accountability laws.

The principal accusation of deliberately discriminating against the Sunni minority leveled at the CG holds no water for the following reasons: First, while the Sunni minority has persistently been in power since 1920, during the Baathist era and specifically under Saddam’s rule, Sunnis were almost exclusively calling the shots in Iraq. No wonder, the Sunnis regard the prominent positions–Vice President, Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister, and seven more ministries–given to them as woefully inadequate.

Second, with the exception of the single clash, which occurred on January 35, 2013–five weeks after the protests commenced–between the army and the protesters that caused the death of eight protesters, the army has consistently been extremely patient and extraordinarily lenient. In comparison, the army was by far much harsher in dealing with protests in Shia areas like Basra, Al Nasriya, and Al Diwaniyah.

Third, in stark contrast to Sunni claims that Article 4 of the terrorism law has persistently been exploited to unfairly target them, the fact is that it was the Shia cities of Basra, Amarah, and Sadr City that experienced, in 2008, the harshest crack down and the strictest implementation of anti-terror laws. Finally, in an unprecedented move, the CG swiftly established three committees headed by highly influential officials to meet protesters' demands, including the release of thousands of prisoners and the return of thousands to their jobs or pensions. The protesters, however, have not only insisted that none of their demands have been fulfilled, but dramatically ramped up their demands, calling for scraping the constitution and toppling Al Maliki’s CG. This without doubt underlines that there are internal and external parties spurring these protests not merely to persist but to dramatically escalate.

The internal parties include Iraqiya leaders, namely the speaker of the parliament Usama Al Nujayfi, the Finance Minister, and the head of bloc in Parliament, Salman Al Jumaili, are desperately attempting to revive their popularity by portraying themselves as being targeted for standing up to the CG. They are also using these protests to pile the pressure on Al Maliki to force him to resign, and, above all, hoping to regain lost ground to Al Maliki, whose tough stance against the KR has undoubtedly bolstered his popularity with Sunni Arabs. Second, these protests are certainly music to Brazani’s ears, who has been increasingly alarmed by Al Maliki’s growing popularity among the Sunni-Arabs in the disputed areas.

The external parties include Al Qaida, which views the on-going protests as a golden opportunity for more radicalisation and ultimately an upsurge in recruitment. Just as important to Al Qaida is exploiting the army’s reluctance to tackle terrorist suspects in the Sunni provinces–fearing the ready-made accusation of targeting Sunnis–to re-activate the safe-havens that originally existed in the Sunni provinces.

For Saudi Arabia these protests are a dream come true. The Saudi Kingdom is increasingly using Iraq’s turmoil to convince its people that democracy eventually leads to instability, insecurity, and ultimately civil war. It is also seeking not merely to fend off any potential challenge by a democratic Iraq to its leadership of the Arab World, but also to ostracize Iraq by trumpeting these Sunni protests as irrefutable evidence that Iraq is adopting a sectarian policy against the Sunnis. Moreover, both Saudi Arabia and Qatar are exploiting the protests in Iraq as a highly effective tool to divert the CG's attention away from pursuing a diplomatic solution in Syria, as well as placating Iraq’s strident opposition to the Saudi and Qatari concerted effort to not just finance and arm the Syrian opposition–namely the extremist and hard-line Wahhabi Salafi, Jabhat Al Nusra, which is essentially Al Qaida’s branch in Syria–but also pay salaries to the insurgents. In addition, both the Saudis and Qataris are using the protests to keeps Iraq’s CG far too busy to prop up the Syrian regime. The Saudi regime is taking advantage of these protests and the sectarian strife it is deliberately stoking–in Iraq, Syria, and Bahrain–to stave of dissent in its Sunni heartland by demonstrating that it is not just the guardian of Sunni Islam, but also at the forefront of combating an existential threat from the Shia, namely Iran.

The sectarian ethnic conflicts, protests, Turkey’s open hostility and a revitalised Al Qaida are all an integral part of a modified last ditch attempt spearheaded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar to achieve their overarching goal of destabilising and ultimately dismantling the fledgling democracy in Iraq. Yet, alarmingly, even if this ferocious all-out assault fails to restore minority rule, which is almost certainly the case, then Saudi Arabia and Qatar are implacably determined to throw their support behind the Sunnis drive to establish a Sunni Regional Government, which is similar to the KR but under Saudi and Qatari complete control. If Saudi Arabia and Qatar cannot have all of Iraq back, they are hell-bent on taking part of it for now.
 
.
Saudi "Arabia" and Qatar can get involved in/with Iraq easily... if they only did it peacefully.. instead they are spreading hatred, racism, and even supporting terrorism. It is a shame that Saudi "Arabia" and Qatar are destroying Syria and Iraq just for stupid reasons... and what's worse is that the people of GCC fell into the GCC regimes propaganda traps, and now they can only picture Iraq and Syria as the bad guys... :disagree:
 
. .
They have tried their best and have spent billions to put their puppets in power in Iraq, but they have failed and this is what is pissing them off. The good thing is the Iraqi security forces have went through many filtering stages, no free Iraqi army for them, lol., right now the best they could do is support terrorist organizations to increase secterian tension. The only thing they are doing is delaying progress in Sunni Areas. Ironically, even Sunni engineers/ craftsmen prefer to work in the Shia areas because it is much safer for them than to work on their own areas.

But iraq is moviing ahead regardless. The protests can't really do much since they are quite small and isolated, it's just that Arab media try to make them larger than they are. Many Sunnis are against the secterian slogans that some of protests have adopted. Their are also many terrorists within the protesters, but the iraqis forces have been patient because they don't want to clash and end up killing protesters.

The protests have tried hard to get international support but they failed. The areas of protest have no strategic worth to them in terms of location and resources. So the Saudi-Qatraeli plan will continue to fail, like it has for the past years. And once Iraq regains its strength on the regional field, these countries must prepare for a payback.

Who knows, the Houthis may become Iraqs new best friend if Saudi Arabia doesn't change it's attitude soon.
 
. .
good thing that Qatraeli puppets are only minority in Iraq.. The people of Iraq are wise and understand the game very well... terrorism might slow Iraq down, but it won't stop it from advancing...

and about the terrorist Al Hashimi, where is the Interpol ? oh wait he is a terrorists supporters safe haven.
 
. .
It is up to the Iraqis. They must reconcile their differences and deal with the exploiters.

it sounds easy... but when there is an outside force creating trouble and chaos, it won't be easy.. but Iraqis will overcome it
 
.
LOL, at that article.

KSA simply does not care enough about Iraq to be that interested. Iraq on itself is a failed state. All the North, the most stable and developed region, is already ruled by Kurds on all areas, be it the local parliament or their own force, the Peshmerga. The Sunni areas are ruled more or less by themselves and very few have a favorable stance towards Al-Maliki and his policies as the last 10 years clearly show by themselves.

KSA is by far the biggest economy in the entire Middle East and Muslim world. Not to say the most stable and rapidly growing. KSA's population is already the fastest growing together with that of Yemen.

Iraq is far from being a democracy, LOL. Anybody that is not a Shia or not biased would admit that. If not they just need to see the comments by international agencies or human rights organizations. There was no "Western styled democracy" in the Middle East before 2003 nor today. There is little possibility of that happening in the near future as well.

The Shias in the Middle East are a tiny minority and pose no threat. The undeniable fact is though that Al-Maliki is a well-known Iranian puppet and great ally of the Mullahs in Tehran with his actions and history proves clearly. Since the relations between the real powers in the Middle East (GCC and Turkey on one side and Iran on the other) are not the best there is little trust. This goes for both sides.

The key is the relation between GCC and Turkey and Iran on the other side in terms of the regions stability. It is crystal clear that Iran can only influence Shia areas in the Middle East which are essentially limited to the tiny Alawi areas in Syria (where there is already conflict and they are going to lose the power sooner rather than later best represented by the Child-Murderer), tiny Southern Lebanon and Southern Iraq. They don't even make a secret of them aiming to influence their power in the Shia areas.

That's nothing and not a threat to the Sunni hegemony in the region. Moreover Iran is in great economical and political trouble and I would not provoke any if I said that it is a very isolated state and that the regime is in danger of collapsing from within or from the outside if some approaches are not going to change.

Lastly, people in KSA, being the richest, most stable and growing economy have no reason to suddenly rebel for Western styled democracy. This is some illusion that ignorant outsiders want to portray. Reforms have already happened continuously in the last 10 years and more are to come. But it will be over my dead body to see Western styled democracy in full flow among the ancestors of Prophet Muhammad (saws), all the Prophets before him and the Sahabah. That will never happen in the land of the Two holy Mosques. The day I see pubs, sex shops and other ***** in the streets of my dear Makkah or Madinah we will know that the end of times is near.

Same with all of the GCC. The vast majority are extremely happy with their life since they have it better than any other region in the Middle East by far on all levels. There might be some dissident at some point but the rulers will have learnt how not to deal with such protests/dissident by just looking at Syria.

In short people in GCC have nothing to rebel for as long as they live in one of the most stable, rich and prospering regions under laws that the vast majority see as completely natural (Islamic laws).

Regarding the Houthis then they have been completely crushed and defeated long ago (4500 of them died while the KSA and Yemeni government only lost 5 percent of that number) and KSA even controls large parts of their territory on the Yemeni side of the border with the blessing of the Yemeni government. Moreover Yemenis and Saudis are brothers and sisters and extremely close on all levels. Yemen is soon to join the GCC anyway and stability is just a question of time when the political differences between the North and South regions are solved and the few remaining militias and Al-Qaeda are defeated entirely. Which is a work in process.
 
.
I’d like to answer but looking at all that text, I think I will save it to type my essay:D
 
.
If KSA was that "afraid" of Shias why not finish of the 3 million Shias who actually live inside KSA? Or carpet bomb whole villages and cities in the Shia areas of the Eastern Province where violent protests have taken place by mobs fueled by the preaching of Iranian Mullahs and Iranian agents inside KSA, such as the leading cleric who was arrested and faces death penalty for being behind killings of innocents and 1 police officer?

Why not engage in a conflict with our dear Omani neighbors because a significant portion of them are Ibadi Muslims? Why not attack Yemen which has a sizable population of Zaydi Muslims? Iraqi Shias pose no threat to KSA. They don't even border KSA! They are no threat whatsoever nor Iraq in any way. The days of a neighboring country that is ruled by a unstable dictator that used 99 percent of his countries budget on the military (like Saddam did in Iraq) have ended long ago.

KSA have no interest in creating instability in their backyard.

At the end it is all a political game of influence between the powers in the region GCC jointly with Turkey and Iran on the other hand. Ironically one block is Sunni and the other Shia.

As I see it it will continue until the parts reach some kind of agreement which is hard to think right now when Iran is actively seeking nuclear weapons - whether or not they will get them we will see, but it will force KSA to get the bomb as well and none of those moves are good for the stability of the region. Or one of the regimes fall apart and that of the Iranian regime is far more likely.

Let's not forget Syria which is a sectarian conflict more than anything else where both parts are doing their bit.

At the end it is the GCC/Turkey and Iran that pulls the strings in the region whether one likes it or not and everything starts and ends with them.

I can't talk about Qatar thought but I assume that they are in line with the GCC and Turkey when it comes to the main regional issues.

Also, as far as I am aware of the KSA/Iraqi relations are going to improve in the future regardless of Maliki or not. Iraq needs KSA more than KSA needs Iraq in the sense that Iraq would benefit greatly from having friendly relations with their Sunni Arab neighbors (KSA, Kuwait (GCC) and Syria which is also Sunni majority and soon will join the GCC block once the Child-Murderer has been removed.

KSA being the biggest economy in the Middle East, Muslim world, a giant country with a very strategic location etc. could be to great benefit for both Iraq and Iran in terms of trade and other issues.

That makes me thing how strong the region could become if there was no rivalry or different interests. A scary thought actually!
 
.
So what's new? :undecided: This has been going on since time immemorial!

Next....
 
. .
I’d like to answer but looking at all that text, I think I will save it to type my essay:D
As an Iraqi your comment will be the most appreciated. I wish you have some time for it.

@al-Hasani > there is a time for propaganda and there is a time for honesty.
You'd like Iraq sponsoring terroris in KSA ? No? So do the same . Thx
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
As an Iraqi your comment will be the most appreciated. I wish you have some time for it.

@al-Hasani > there is a time for propaganda and there is a time for honesty.
You'd like Iraq sponsoring terroris in KSA ? No? So do the same . Thx

LOL, says the Iranian. Your regime "sponsored" the opposite terrorists (Shias) and that is widely documented. On the other hand nobody can prove any direct Saudi government involvement in Iraq. At most single individuals who went to Iraq like hundreds of others from around the world. Iranians included.

Which makes no sense since Al-Qaeda's main goal is to topple the regime in KSA. They have made that clear time and time again and their actions in that connection speak for themselves. Moreover KSA have been hit by several terrorist attacks by Al-Qaeda inside KSA. Moreover Al-Qaeda also operates in Yemen, another neighbor and KSA is not supporting them but fighting closely with the Yemeni government to combat them.

On the other hand Iran has been known to host Al-Qaeda members in Iran and even family members of Osama bin Laden. Nor have Iran ironically been targeted by Al-Qaeda while a much less sophisticated and weaker organization such as Jundallah (Balochi group) could. Something to think about.

The KSA government is not supporting any foreign militant groups aside from FSA in the Arab world, which is something the international society does as well and which is completely understandable given the actions of the Child-Murderer. At most private financiers inside Saudi can do that as some of them once did in regard to Al-Qaeda inside KSA before they were defeated and expelled to Yemen. Secondly the 10 most wanted fugitive list in KSA all have connections to Al-Qaeda.

Also nobody can counter what I wrote in my two previous posts here because it is simply correct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom