Long time between posts; too busy with Ugandan stuff. Since I’ve made the decision to go to Kampala in September, I’ve been trying to learn what ducks I’ve got to get in a row. Most people travel halfway round the world to see castles and fight off souvenir vendors; I go to see poverty and fight off malaria. So I’m weird.
It looks like the backroom deals have been cut in Iraq necessary for a peaceful division of power; the Kurds got enough to be satisfied, it seems. Actually, it works out best for the internal political issues in the Kurdish region as well; Talabani, leader of the PUK and Barzani of the KDP will both have prominent and influential positions as Iraq’s president and the primary local Kurdish leader, respectively. Not to mention the thought of a Kurd sitting down at the Arab League meetings is especially enjoyable. Thanks are very likely due Sistani, who no doubt is pulling a lot of strings in the background.
Some worry about Sistani driving Iraq to an Iranian type of government. I think his ambition (never doubt that he has a lot) lies in a different direction. I think he’s setting up for Iraq to be such a free, prosperous and desirable example that the Mullahs will lose control next door, Iran will want to follow the Iraqi example, and guess who instantly becomes the benign puppet master of BOTH countries due to the Shia dominance? Expect some assassination attempts coming out of Iran before this thing is done.
Why become the strong-handed, upfront leader of one country, when you can wield behind-the-scenes authority in two (with a lot less headaches, to boot)? And, if they become the beacons leading the way to the future for other Mid-East nations, who starts making the Saudi royal family look inconsequential in terms of real power? An example where one man’s ambitions, with a big helping hand from the U.S., suddenly can accomplish great things.
A new interesting blog is Iraqi Mistress; whether it is for real or not has yet to be determined. The blog author claims to be a mistress unemployed by the Iraqi invasion; obviously, her clientele would have been the Baathists and she’s very unhappy with the ‘Yankees’ (Ya’ll calling us Yankees down he’ar in Texas, them be fightin’ words, Little Lady.). Her third posting makes me (and others) suspicious of the authenticity, but, hey, it’s good for a laugh, anyway.
It looks like the backroom deals have been cut in Iraq necessary for a peaceful division of power; the Kurds got enough to be satisfied, it seems. Actually, it works out best for the internal political issues in the Kurdish region as well; Talabani, leader of the PUK and Barzani of the KDP will both have prominent and influential positions as Iraq’s president and the primary local Kurdish leader, respectively. Not to mention the thought of a Kurd sitting down at the Arab League meetings is especially enjoyable. Thanks are very likely due Sistani, who no doubt is pulling a lot of strings in the background.
Some worry about Sistani driving Iraq to an Iranian type of government. I think his ambition (never doubt that he has a lot) lies in a different direction. I think he’s setting up for Iraq to be such a free, prosperous and desirable example that the Mullahs will lose control next door, Iran will want to follow the Iraqi example, and guess who instantly becomes the benign puppet master of BOTH countries due to the Shia dominance? Expect some assassination attempts coming out of Iran before this thing is done.
Why become the strong-handed, upfront leader of one country, when you can wield behind-the-scenes authority in two (with a lot less headaches, to boot)? And, if they become the beacons leading the way to the future for other Mid-East nations, who starts making the Saudi royal family look inconsequential in terms of real power? An example where one man’s ambitions, with a big helping hand from the U.S., suddenly can accomplish great things.
A new interesting blog is Iraqi Mistress; whether it is for real or not has yet to be determined. The blog author claims to be a mistress unemployed by the Iraqi invasion; obviously, her clientele would have been the Baathists and she’s very unhappy with the ‘Yankees’ (Ya’ll calling us Yankees down he’ar in Texas, them be fightin’ words, Little Lady.). Her third posting makes me (and others) suspicious of the authenticity, but, hey, it’s good for a laugh, anyway.
posted by Mike O | 5:25 PM
