three iraqs.

[Marla_Singer]

Turkey would go nuts if we even talked about creating an independent Kurdistan.

Indeed it would. If an independant Kurdistan is created, I hardly see how Turkey could avoid disruption. 25% of the Turkish population is Kurdish after all.

But anyway, in my perfect world, I would give its autonomy to the whole Kurdistan (Iraqi, Syrian, Turkish, Iranian), and only then, I would welcome Turkey inside the EU.

 

[Immortal]

Its a shame that wont happen marla

 

[Hakim]

How I feel about it:
-A division of Iraq into three states would become an argument for oppressor regimes to resist intervention in the future.
-It would be a piece of cake for Iran to do whatever it want with that little shia state.
-There are other minorities in the areas that could get in troubles, eg the Turkomans and the christians.
-Federalisation(?) can give a lot of independence to kurds etc. Belgium and other multinational countries works.
-The kurdish are not that democratic, their part of northern iraq have until the war been divided between two clans and a kurdish state might not become a democracy.

That said, I like the good ol' nationstate with one major ethnicity and language and think those works better than countries with two or three major ethnicities. Still, Iraq would just be messed up if anything like this was attempted.

 

[Marla_Singer]

How I feel about it:
-It would be a piece of cake for Iran to do whatever it want with that little shia state.

Actually, it could be easy for Iran to simply make of that new shiite state a full part of Iran. Iran is a big melting pot after all, only 45% of Iranians are actually Persians. The only link between all Iranians is that they are Shia muslims.

-Federalisation(?) can give a lot of independence to kurds etc. Belgium and other multinational countries works.

Federalisation might be a good idea but certainly not if we talk about 3 huge states... At the beginning of Belgium, the country was not divided in 2 Flanders and Wallonia. If that would have been the case, both sides would have made everything to become independant.

I consider personally that a federalisation can be smart. However, the federal states should respect the tribes and not the ethnicities of Iraqis. Well, ok, it's quite stupid but at least, those little provinces would be way too small to pretend to be able to fight for their independance.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Still, Iraq would just be messed up if anything like this was attempted.

Seems pretty messed up right now. 'Iraq' only exists now in a few heavily fortified compounds in Bagdhad.

 

[Hakim]

Actually, it could be easy for Iran to simply make of that new shiite state a full part of Iran. Iran is a big melting pot after all, only 45% of Iranians are actually Persians. The only link between all Iranians is that they are Shia muslims.

I think that's possible, Iran seems to be eager to move its positions forward. OTOH, if Iran with its different nationalities and languages is viable, why is it so impossible for Iraq to become the same kind of melting pot? Seems to me that the differences between variuos groups in Iran is not much smaller than those in Iraq.

Federalisation might be a good idea but certainly not if we talk about 3 huge states... At the beginning of Belgium, the country was not divided in 2 Flanders and Wallonia. If that would have been the case, both sides would have made everything to become independant.

I consider personally that a federalisation can be smart. However, the federal states should respect the tribes and not the ethnicities of Iraqis. Well, ok, it's quite stupid but at least, those little provinces would be way too small to pretend to be able to fight for their independance.

I think there will be 18 provinces, not sure how they will be drawn. Although I suspect that a tribe centric political system would undermine the democracy, perhaps paying respect for their role in the society when creating it could make it more viable.

 

[Tassadar]

It is a very good idea and i already said that, just before coalition invasion ( if the search function was working, i could have find my thread, in brief , i exactly predict the mess that is going on in Iraq and the real solution was to give independency to those 3 different cultur). But guess what ? i was laugh about, as usual, ridiculise and even ban.

The biggest problem for this separation to occur peacfully, is; Sunni area do not have oil, the oil ressource are in the south ( Shia) and in the north ( Kurd ). So the sunni are left without oil income.

And also, some people just dont like other to become free, look here, in province of quebec ( Canada), talk about it to the english canadian, they immediatly become upset and start crying and yelling. We dont want to stole them, neither control their area, we just want to be free, and they dont agree, see....

 

[Hakim]

DP: you're right, it is messed up, but at least there are no border issues to make it worse.

 

[Marla_Singer]

I think that's possible, Iran seems to be eager to move its positions forward. OTOH, if Iran with its different nationalities and languages is viable, why is it so impossible for Iraq to become the same kind of melting pot?

That's an interesting question. I guess the answer is simply that Iran is a historical country which has prevailed during centuries under the domination of the Persians. I guess people are simply used to it.

Modern Iran has decided to become a Theocracy and now Shia Islam is considered as much important than Persian culture as the cement of the country. In India, which is a democracy, the Hindi religion remains the first cement of the country. Anyway, India is far away from the topic !

Seems to me that the differences between variuos groups in Iran is not much smaller than those in Iraq. I think there will be 18 provinces, not sure how they will be drawn. Although I suspect that a tribe centric political system would undermine the democracy, perhaps paying respect for their role in the society when creating it could make it more viable.

I agree with you about a tribe centric political system undermining democracy. Actually, the society is still extremely tribe centric in Iraq today and it promotes more Nepotism than Democracy indeed.

Anyway, my point is that smaller provinces should be drawn. If you tell me there will be 18 provinces, then it's fine. I'm curious to see how they'll look like though.

 

[North King]

The biggest problem for this separation to occur peacfully, is; Sunni area do not have oil, the oil ressource are in the south ( Shia) and in the north ( Kurd ). So the sunni are left without oil income.

However, the Sunni area has most of the main dams and thus the increasingly important water resources, correct? Thus they are not so deprieved.

 

[Tassadar]

However, the Sunni area has most of the main dams and thus the increasingly important water resources, correct? Thus they are not so deprieved.

I dont know how water is distributed among those 3 area, but you are indeed right , water is an increasinly important ressource.

I guess they would have to learn how to share/trade it.

It remember me an article which i read a few month ago, in brief, they said that futur war in the world, will be for soft water. No water, no irrigation, not enough food, see the picture...

 

[h4ppy]

The Shi'a make up the largest percentage block of Iraq of about 65%.
The Kurds make up about 20% of Iraq's population.
The Sunni represent about 35% of Iraqis.

120%? Something isn't right here.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Well... if you look at a map of what would look the region once Iraq divided in 3... I'm not sure it's really that great.

 

[h4ppy]

Green becomes a Sunni state.
Blue becomes a Shi'a state.
Red becomes Kurdistan.
Cyan above Southern No Fly goes to Sunni, below Shi'a.
Tan above Northern No Fly goes to Kurds, below goes to Sunni.

Also this would result in a Sunni controlled Kirkuk, the Kurds won't be happy.

 

[Pirate]

What is with the global tencency to divide? I see all these groups itching to become their own tiny powerless state. I think Europe realized that they might have all been nice little countries on their own, but they couldn't stack up individually against larger nations, hence the EU was formed. So why in Iraq, surrounded by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, etc... would anyone think they would be better off as a tiny little country? I understand that the basic reason is to empower oppressed minorities. But is division the only answer? Would it be worth it to make your own counrty just as powerless in a larger regional and global perspective?

 

[Marla_Singer]

What is with the global tencency to divide? I see all these groups itching to become their own tiny powerless state. I think Europe realized that they might have all been nice little countries on their own, but they couldn't stack up individually against larger nations, hence the EU was formed. So why in Iraq, surrounded by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, etc... would anyone think they would be better off as a tiny little country? I understand that the basic reason is to empower oppressed minorities. But is division the only answer? Would it be worth it to make your own counrty just as powerless in a larger regional and global perspective?

Of course not. And I fully agree with you on this point. Actually, it's easy for us, westerners, to divide other countries since it actually increases our power on them.

If you've looked at the map above I've made, you can see that dividing Iraq is only a good idea on paper. Giving its independance to the Iraqi Kurdistan will only increase tensions in the region... tensions involving Turkey and Iran. And about the southern Shia' country, well, there's no doubt it would become a smaller Iran... if it wouldn't be simply incorporated into Iran.

And finally... the Sunnis would fall under the influence of either Saudi Arabia or Syria. There wouldn't be other choice, especially that they don't have oil as it's been pointed out above. In my opinion, dividing Iraq is not a way to have less problems than before.

 

[Tassadar]

The even more little Koweit survive pretty well, they even had USA to defend them

 

[Bozo Erectus]

If you've looked at the map above I've made, you can see that dividing Iraq is only a good idea on paper. Giving its independance to the Iraqi Kurdistan will only increase tensions in the region... tensions involving Turkey and Iran. And about the southern Shia' country, well, there's no doubt it would become a smaller Iran... if it wouldn't be simply incorporated into Iran.

And finally... the Sunnis would fall under the influence of either Saudi Arabia or Syria. There wouldn't be other choice, especially that they don't have oil as it's been pointed out above. In my opinion, dividing Iraq is not a way to have less problems than before.

Thats all true, but who are we to try to stand in the way of what they want? If all of what you described above is what they want, we destabilise the region ourselves by continuing to force them into arbitrary lines we drew on a map 100 years ago.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Thats all true, but who are we to try to stand in the way of what they want? If all of what you described above is what they want, we destabilise the region ourselves by continuing to force them into arbitrary lines we drew on a map 100 years ago.

Well, not exactly. Both Shia and Sunni arabs want to control the whole country. Kurds are the only one who wants the independance... but they don't want only the independance of the Iraqi Kurdistan. On their side, Turks are not ready to drop their own Kurdistan. Their country is a rectangle and they like it this way. After all, on another thread, I was saying I wanted France to remain an hexagone...

Well, anyway, the idea is simple. We could decide to not interfere and let them go for their own choice... However, that doesn't mean they will live peacefully and happily.

 

[Hakim]

darn, wrong map (deleted).

edit2: @Marla: then maybe I'm wrong about the 18 provinces as well. I hate getting the facts wrong.