Now, though, the fighting in Baquba may have changed things. The
forces which seem to have pushed the ISIS fighters out of the town
centre are partly composed of enthusiastic Shia volunteers who have been
rushing to attack their Sunni enemies.
In Baghdad, bullets and pistols have tripled in price, and you
can scarcely buy a Kalashnikov at all. But this is not because nervous
citizens are arming themselves against the ISIS onslaught; it is due to
the huge demand from the Shia volunteers.
More importantly, in Baquba ISIS is getting close to the edge
of Sunni Iraq. There are two big Sunni suburbs on the edge of Baghdad,
Amiriya and Khadra, which may soon pose a problem to the Iraqi
government, but the city itself is predominantly Shia.
For an organisation of fewer than 10,000 fighters to be able
to capture Baghdad and hold it would require a wholesale collapse of
morale among Shia Iraqis: something that is hard to imagine, especially
after the savage photographs and videos that ISIS fighters have been
putting on Twitter and the web.
Iranian influence
Shias know very well that ISIS regards them as heretics to be
wiped out. No mercy can be expected from an organisation which boasts of
crucifying its victims or using their heads as a football.
Now, though, there is another factor in the equation:
international help. The 275 US military personnel who, the US
government says, are coming to Baghdad are nowhere near as important as
one single Iranian soldier who is here already.
As the world's predominant Shia nation, Iran has sent a
general from the elite al-Quds force of its Revolutionary Guards to
advise on the defence of Baghdad.
Brig Gen Qasem Soleimani is a symbol of Iran's determination
to preserve the huge influence it has built up over the government of
Iraq.
Indeed, Western diplomats blame many of the current problems
which have grown up between Sunnis and Shias on the willingness of Iraqi
Prime Minister Nouri Maliki to follow Iran's demands.
If you listen to statements from the White House or the
British Foreign Office, you would think they were judiciously allowing
Iran in from the cold, so it can play a minor role in this crisis.
In fact they are simply acknowledging that Iran is the sole
external power which, if things go badly wrong, can save Iraq. Neither
Britain nor the US will intervene here seriously, and everyone knows it.
ISIS eruption
Only a year ago, most thoughtful people here believed that
Iraq would probably hold together as a unified country. Clearly, the
Kurdish north-east was to all intents and purposes independent, but it
still accepted that it should notionally remain a part of Iraq.
Sunnis in the rest of Iraq increasingly disliked what seemed
to them to be rule by Shia politicians, but even so the balance of
advantage still seemed to lie with staying inside Iraq.
Now the eruption of ISIS, straddling the border with Syria, has changed all that.
Many Sunnis, particularly the conservative ones who started
turning against al-Qaeda eight years ago, and enabled the US forces to
leave Iraq with what seemed at the time to be dignity, are not at all
happy that ISIS should control their towns and villages.
But the danger of the present fight-back by Shia volunteers
is that they will victimise ordinary Sunnis, and make them feel that
ISIS is the only group that can protect them.
In other words, this has the potential to turn into a
clear-cut religious war, with the possibility of mass "cleansing" of
civilians and brutality on a large scale.
So things at present may not be quite as bad here as people
abroad think; but they could turn out that way if the fighting is not
ended quickly and clearly.
No comments:
Post a Comment