Deep gaps between U.S. and Arab views over the crisis have grown more obvious in recent days, say American and regional officials, hampering Washington's response to the onslaught by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, which this month seized control of territories straddling Iraq and Syria.The US's "sworn enemy". Really? Very grade school type language.
President Barack Obama raised the stakes on Sunday, telling CBS News that ISIS threatens American interests if it turns to global terrorism, two days after he announced plans to send U.S. military advisers and supplies to Iraq and called for a new, more inclusive government in Baghdad.The crisis in Iraq has exposed contradictions in traditional Mideast alliances, in some ways placing the U.S. alongside its sworn enemy, Shiite-ruled Iran, in a joint effort to halt ISIS, while in other ways putting Washington at odds with longtime Sunni allies in the Persian Gulf, who want to weaken Iran's sway over Iraq.
John Kerry traveled to Cairo and then Amman to seek support for U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq, U.S. officials said the chief American diplomat held a conference call with Sunni Arab leaders. What he heard from them, said a senior Arab diplomat briefed on the call, were expressions of bewilderment.Ya gotta love narrative creation! Seriously. Narrative creation tells you what to think and how to think about a situation. It give you all your talking points.
"We felt the Americans were greatly misinformed," the diplomat said. "The insurgency isn't just about ISIS, but Sunnis fighting back against injustice."
You see this isn't about a destabilization campaign? Or a remake of the Middle East? Washington Relaunches its Iraq Partition Project (hat tip freethinker) No this is a fight against 'injustice'- Which feeds nicely into the propaganda narrative needed for the US to take down the democratically elected government of Iraq- in order to restore 'justice' and democracy. Not to partition a nation.wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
Regime Change- The White House has signaled to Iraqi politicians that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, should go because of his failure to build bridges to his country's major minorities—Sunnis and Kurds—during his eight years in power.The white house has 'signaled' to Iraqi politicians that the PM should go? Was it smoke signals? Who exactly is the white house to tell the Iraq people they cannot have the leader they just elected? Quite overwhelmingly, too!
Regime Change-But to create a new, more inclusive Iraqi government, U.S. officials will need to stitch together the vastly differing interests of the region's powers who view Iraq as the focal point for their struggle for influence.
Exactly as I had contended in this post- Obama delivered an ULTIMATUM to Maliki via ISIS- Comply or...
Talking points- Justice. Building bridges. Inclusive government.
The US and Israel want the same thing as SA, UAE and JordanThe Sunni states, particularly Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan, are seeking a new Iraqi leader bereft of cozy ties to Iran and one more focused on promoting Iraq's Arab identity than its Shiite one.
The Kurds, meanwhile, are demanding Baghdad's next government grant their region greater political, economic and strategic autonomy, or risk Irbil declaring formal independence.
Black is white- It's not the Kurds breaking away from Iraq and selling disputed oil to Israel."This isn't a case of the Kurds breaking free from Iraq, but Iraq breaking free from us," said Karwan Zebari, the Kurdish Regional Government's ambassador to Washington, in an interview.
Ukraine- 10 k or 100 k buffer zone.Israel gets first deliver of Kurdish Oil It's Iraq breaking away from the Kurds???
The deliberations over Iraq that Mr. Kerry is pursuing will have ramifications beyond the country's borders, say U.S. and Arab diplomatsI am quite certain they will. The deliberations will work to further weaken with the goal of destroying Syria and Iran.
The current debate in Washington on whether to strike ISIS militarily is also being heavily influenced by sectarian considerations, according to U.S. officials.
Sunni leaders in Iraq and other Mideast states have questioned why the U.S. would consider bombing militants to support a Shiite government in Iraq when it wouldn't attack the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad —who adheres to a Shiite offshoot—after it allegedly used chemical weapons on largely Sunni rebels last year.
These sentiments led Mr. Obama to make clear last week the U.S. wouldn't pursue military operations "that support one sect of Iraq at the expense of another."The US won't support one sect of Iraq at the expense of another? Aren't they already doing that? Of course they are! They are crushing the Shiite sect, in favour of the Sunnis & Kurds who, as coincidence would have it, are both heavily allied with Israel! Which is exactly what the US/NATO nutters are doing in Syria!
Reminder- I am not a coincidence theorist.
Members of Mr. Maliki's government and Iranian officials in recent days have framed the challenge almost solely through a counterterrorism lens.
They cited ISIS's past links to al Qaeda and other international terrorist organizations, and the alleged influx into Iraq of foreign fighters from other Arab states and Europe.
"It is all coordinated, and it has international dimensions," said Iraq's ambassador to the U.S., Lukman Faily. "These are not Iraqi fighters. These are jihadis."
International dimensions- A real global army effort....
Don't miss.. Turkey's agression against Syria & Iraq: Cut off water supplies