Should we be careful of what we wish for in Iraq?
In the post below, I consider Reuel Marc Gerecht's case for "one war at a time in Iraq." Gerecht recommends that we focus for now on defeating the Sunni insurgency and its al-Qaeda backers, and that we turn our attention to Shia miiltias later, if at all.
However, Diana West asks a more basic question: if this strategy succeeds, what will we be left with. The answer, she fears, is "a natural ally of Iran and perhaps Syria" and "another Shi'ite-dominated, pro-Hezbollah, anti-American, anti-Israel Shariah state with lots of oil."
Diana's concerns are hardly insubstantial, especially when one reads (as in Gerecht's piece) about how we may be tilting towards Adil Abdul Mahdi and his "Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq," whose forces were trained by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps. However, I don't believe we will have failed in Iraq if the government ultimately is anti-Israel or has decent relations with Iran. "Success" (in the sense that it still seems possible to achieve) would mean having replaced Saddam Hussein's regime with a duly elected government that poses no threat of engaging in or sponsoring terrorism against U.S. interests or friends, and which is strong enough to prevent the establishment of zones from such terrorism can be launched.
Even under my limited concept of "success," we will not have succeeded if the Iraqi government in effect is a subsidiary of Iran. However, it seems quite possible to avoid that outcome. I see no evidence that a critical mass of Iraq's Shiite population desires their country to become a proxy for Iran, with whom Iraq fought a bloody war 20 years ago. The only motive for becoming one would be to protect Shia interests against Sunni extremists and/or a Baathist restoration. But the American presence, if we are able to sustain it, should simultaneously provide that protection and constitute a deterrent against a power grab by Shia elements loyal to Iranian interests.
JOHN agrees: As Paul says, I see no sign that Iraq's Shia population has any desire to live under the Mullahs. The main purpose of the Iraq war was to begin bringing freedom and democracy to the Arab world. If Iraq does become a relatively progressive democracy, any affinity between its citizens and those of Iran will add to the reformist pressure in Iran. At the end of the day, if Iran and Iraq wind up as friendly as the U.S and Canada, that's a good thing, compared to the bloody rivalry they experienced under Saddam.
