Following the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq, one cannot claim that security and stability within the borders of the country have been established. Since 2003, a great number of resistance groups from within Shiites and Sunnis have appeared.
Besides those newly created resistance groups, Iraqi armed and security forces whose number approaches nearly 650 thousand acting under the control of the Central Authority, and Peshmerga forces under the authority of the Regional Kurdish Administration are active within the borders of Iraq.
Since the general elections in March 2010, following the adoption of the new Constitution by the Iraqi Parliament, no new Government was formed as of today. Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that the witdrawal of the foreign troops caused serious doubts and hesitations among the Iraqi people. In addition to that, the considerable delay in the formation of a new Government added up to anxieties and fears among the population about the continuation of hard living conditions that they have been enduring for decades. It is unfortunately a fact that the cost of armed interventions by third countries are being dearly paid by the people of a country subjected to intervention. The thus created conditions even make the people look back to prevailing situation in the past prior to the arrival of foreign troops. An example to this stuation in relation to Iraq maybe the following: As it will be recalled, Ambassador Paul Bremer had been asigned to Iraq with the capacity of the US plenipotentiary and extraordinary civilian representative to Iraq. During his tenure, Mr Bremer was very intrumental in the formation of a new Iraqi Goverment. Various ministers in that Goverment had been chosen with regard to their ethnic origin. Those ministers insteat of thinking about the general interest of the country as a whole had since been taking decisions and implementing them in keeping with the interest of the political group they belong to. This is, in my view also the main reason why a new Goverment could not be formed seven months after the general elections.
Following the withdrawal of the American combat troops even before the deadline of August 30, 2010 as announced by the American Administration there still remain 50 thousand troops in Iraq under the guise of consultants and trainers. The difference between combat forces and the remaining consulting and/or training soldiers is rather marginal. Those soldiers will certainly fight in case of an attack; they are likely to take part in air operations along with Iraqi pilots and they may have to fight side by side with Iraqi soldiers should any serious confrontation arises. It may prove to be unavoidable for them not to take role actively against terrorist attacks which continues unabated today.
No one can claim that following the withdrawal of foreign forces there exist no threat of civil war in Iraq. When we take a look to similiar cases in history, we learn that while hopefully a resemblance of peace was thought to be established within the country a new cycle of turmoil and clashes unexpectedly happened within the span of four to five years. One has to keep in mind that as much as leaders whose ambitions override their mind and reason, there exist a big number of individuals and institutions running after the creation of an atmosphere befitting their own interests. These categories of people and institutions have the high potential of causing disturbances throughout the country using for their own purposes already existing unsolved problems particularly related to security and stability in the country. Let alone the mistakes committed by intervening forces within the framework of ethnic, religious and social structure in Iraq which appears to be seriously eroded, dismantled and degenerated.
Despite the fact that the Iraqi people are basically very nationalistic and reactionary before any move going against the national interest of the country have always had difficulties in accepting the existence of foreign armed forces in general and the American armed forces in particular on their territories. Nevertheless, they have now encountering a serious dilemma about the timing of the withdrawal taking into account the need to finish with the difficulties they are faced with in their daily lives, in particular there need for a real safety. It is a fact that the majority of Iraqi people believe that the Iraqi security forces are not yet at the level to provide them with their individual safety as much as the security in the country in general. They believe that their training and real effectiveness might take much more longer time to reach than expected.
Consequently, one may claim that the Iraqi security forces as long as they remain faithful to the Central Authority and they do not go along with the interest of certain interest groups are likely to play a key role in the period ahead.
In so far as I can see it, there are three serious challenges in terms of Iraq’s security and stability. The first of those challenges is likely to come from a possible armed conflict between Arabs and Kurds with regard to “disputed territories”. And eventual clashes between the members of the Iraqi security forces and Pesmergas, who are actually deployed along the “green line”, might well be of a nature to turn the ensueing turmoil into a civil war which might spread over the totality of the Iraqi territory . Lets hope that the Iraqi security forces will act responsibly and with discipline and they will remain devoted to the common cause of the Country and act in keeping with the expectations of the Iraqi people.
The second of those challenges is the growing influence and authority of Iran over Iraq in general. A sarcastic comparison might well be between the authority of the present Iranian Ambassador today as opposed to the influence and authority of the British Ambassador during the time Iraq was under the mandate of Her Majesty’s Kingdom. Iranian Ambassador seems to have more power than his Bristish counterpart a Century ago. Iran is also trying to use Iraq as a stepping stone to other countries of he Gulf in the south to expand her regime and authority.
As to the third challenge, we may easily talk about the general problem of unemployment, corruption and illegality which are rampant. One may easily claim that this corruption and illegality is far more serious in the nordern part of Iraq compared with the southern part of the country. This situation is of a nature to affect the neighbouring countries and beyond. I recall the “Development Board” composed of entirely trustworthy wise men with no political affiliation created in the 1950’s with a view to fighting against unemployment and corruption. The money given to their discretion could not be touched by the Goverment even the President. Maybe a smilar kind of a Board is needed in Iraq today.
Finally, what could be Turkey’s role in the near future? Turkey can contribute to Iraqi economic stability to the best of her ability by using her existing considerable potential in the region. Nonetheless, Turkey should not be expected to intervene directly through the use of her armed forces in case of a civil war which may flare up in the period ahead. Turkey’s role in solving any possible internal conflict in Iraq will not and indeed should not be to play alone by herself the role of a subcontractor to withdrawing hthird parties.