There is a civil war in Iraq. Charles Krauthammer suggests:
What is the insurgency if not a war supported by one (minority) part of Iraqi society fighting to prevent the birth of the new Iraqi state supported by another (majority) part of Iraqi society?
By definition that is civil war, and there's nothing new about it. As I noted here in November 2004: "People keep warning about the danger of civil war. This is absurd. There already is a civil war. It is raging before our eyes. Problem is, only one side" -- the Sunni insurgency -- "is fighting it."
Juan Cole wonders whose criteria defines a civil war. Here is what Cole considers to be the most 'widely accepted social science measure':
"Sustained military combat, primarily internal, resulting in at least 1,000 battle-deaths per year, pitting central government forces against an insurgent force capable of effective resistance, determined by the latter's ability to inflict upon the government forces at least 5 percent of the fatalities that the insurgents sustain." (Errol A. Henderson and J. David Singer, "Civil War in the Post-Colonial World, 1946-92," Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 37, No. 3, May 2000.) '
Sounds like Iraq to me. The important thing, as always has been, is whether or not the situation is at all manageable...whether anything is salvageable. Charles Krauthammer went on to illustrate this point:
"Now all of a sudden everyone is shocked to find Iraqis going after Iraqis. But is it not our entire counterinsurgency strategy to get Iraqis who believe in the new Iraq to fight Iraqis who want to restore Baathism or impose Taliban-like rule? Does not everyone who wishes us well support the strategy of standing up the Iraqis so we can stand down? And does that not mean getting the Iraqis to fight the civil war themselves? Hence the gradual transfer of war-making responsibility. Hence the decline of American casualties. Hence the rise of Iraqi casualties."
My own definition of a civil war varies slightly from these others'. I personally believe that a civil war might be defined as an attempt to gain control of a nation through the use of force in absence of all other methods. In other words, a civil war is what happens when negotiations fail. We aren't at that point yet.
The important thing is that the Iraqi government is existing and negotiating. As long as political progress is being made, even if slowly, then the situation is still hopeful. Ideally, politics as an alternative to violence will become more appealing with time, and this conflict will die down.
If it ever comes to be that there is no political route to pursue; if the Iraqi government fails or dissolves...then the only thing left is for the Iraqis to fight it out. That is my definition of a civil war.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment