Iraq’s security, now and future, in the balance
Asharq Alawsat reminds us that the important Ashura holy day, which for Shia Muslims commemorates the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali at the battle of Karbala in 680, occurs this week (starting Wednesday evening through Thursday afternoon). The holiday is often marked by security problems in Iraq as pilgrims converge on Karbala (in the millions) and on Shia sites throughout the country. Jerry Bremer interrupted a meeting with my colleagues and me during Ashura in March 2004 when one of the first suicide bombings in Baghdad produced a loud detonation audible in his office.
This year for the first time Iraqis will be unequivocally in charge of security arrangements throughout the country during Ashura. If the Iraqis are able to control the situation effectively, it will mark an important step forward. If they fail, it will irritate inter-sectarian relations and complicate the government formation process, which is struggling to make its Christmas eve deadline.
In the meanwhile, the Americans seem to be dropping their studied indifference and have begun, according to David Ignatius, pressing the Iraqis (Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen was in Baghdad yesterday) to sign up to a longer-term strategic relationship with the United States, one that would presumably allow U.S. troops in some number to remain past the current end 2011 deadline to help train and support the Iraqi security forces. This, too, could complicate the government formation process, since the Sadrists–a vital part of Maliki’s proposed coalition–have vigorously opposed the U.S. military presence and will have a hard time approving an agreement to have it remain.
The Sadrists changed their minds on supporting Maliki, but that decision was precipitated by a change of heart in Tehran. It is hard to see how Tehran is going to want the Americans to remain in Iraq, but it is possible that the Sadrists will bend for the sake of gaining a strong position in the new government. And the Sadrists I’ve talked with want the Americans to fix Iraq, by adequately arming security forces not unfriendly to them, before they head for the exits.
Ironically, if Ashura passes relatively peacefully, the Iraqis may see less need for a continued American presence. If however pilgrims are attacked as in the past, they may see more need for the foreigners.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Richard Holbrooke: an appreciation in spite of myself
Dick Holbrooke and I had a contentious relationship. He didn’t like things I said about policy issues in private and wrote in public, and (incorrectly) thought I was disloyal and out to get him. I thought he was too often unappreciative, egotistical and unnecessarily hard on people who had served him well, including me.
But you have to admire his gumption and achievements. He dared to imagine bringing an end to the war in Bosnia, and he did it. He turned around a flagging civilian effort in Afghanistan, even if it still cannot claim success. As UN ambassador, he solved the delicate and vexing problem of US arrears. In each of his many jobs, he got difficult things done, sometimes breaking crockery along the way.
He could also be extraordinarily charming. I first met him in Rome, where I was deputy chief of mission. Before a meeting with Italian bankers, he took me aside and asked me what was on their minds. He then spun a standard briefing into an appeal to their needs–I don’t know if it won the bank he was with any business, but it was a great pitch. And you should have heard him admire Pamela Harriman’s painting collection!
Dick was concerned–many would say obsessed–with correcting what had gone wrong in Vietnam. He thought American power should be a force for good, and he set out to make it so. Our odds of achieving that are lower now that he is gone.
Listen to Jackie Northam’s appreciation on NPR.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kosovo elections mostly fair and peaceful, but…
As in life, things don’t always look good the morning after. While results have not yet been announced, European Parliament and other observers believe yesterday’s mostly fair and peaceful elections may have been marred by ballot stuffing in the Drenica stronghold of Prime Minister Hashim Thaci. The key issue now will be how well these allegations are investigated and dealt with by the elections complaint commission.
The apparent election results so far put Thaci in the lead, but he will need coalition partners (in addition to the constitutionally required Serb and minority parties) to govern. While the press in Pristina is bemoaning “deadlock,” there are lots of arithmetic possibilities for forming a governing coalition and a strong opposition, both of which Kosovo needs.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Why won’t China rein in North Korea?
That’s the question on my mind, even if much of what I read addresses the less interesting question of why we know better and the Chinese are making a mistake. The explanations for Beijing’s behavior are many and varied. From people who live closer than we do:
1. The South Asia Analysis Group (Subhash Kapila) suggests Pyonyang’s behavior “arises from a calibrated strategy operated in tandem with China’s increasing aggressiveness in East Asia”:
- China exploits North Korea as a strategic proxy against the U.S.;
- Washington responds timidly for fear of alienating China, hoping it may still emerge as a partner, even an ally;
- China is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
2. An Australian offers less dramatic explanations:
- Pyonyang has Beijing in a bind: “North Korea may be a bad friend, but it would be a worse enemy”;
- Beijing doesn’t want the international community to get into the habit of asking it to rein in pariahs;
- China thinks its coaxing will work better in the long term than a more rigorous approach.
Beijing’s main concern is generally thought to be stability. But why don’t they see North Korean behavior as threatening to stability? Are they happy to see the Americans, Japanese and South Koreans discomforted? Are they thinking that recent events will serve them well by hindering any moves towards reunification?
PS: As luck would have it, Victor Cha Sunday morning (I posted on Saturday) has
But because they are the only ones helping the North, China’s leaders are afraid that such a move [cutting off oil supplies to North Korea] would collapse the regime and send millions of starving refugees flooding over its border. The Chinese have no easy way of determining how much pressure they should use, so they remain paralyzed, making ineffectual gestures
Paralysis may not last forever.
PPS: Ed Joseph points out that this question was discussed Sunday on Fareed Zakharia’s GPS: “China experts provided insights on just that question. Most intriguing theory: China fears a precedent and a non-Communist, unified Korea on its border, according to the expert.” You can watch the discussion, which starts just before minute 33, here.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Too early to declare a South Sudan success
Rift Valley Institute (Aly Verjee) updates a previous paper on just-in-time preparations for referenda in Southern Sudan (January 9) and in the border area Abyei, where no progress has been made and the referendum there will clearly be postponed.
While I share Michael Gerson’s enthusiasm for the American officials working on getting Sudan right, it is clearly too early to declare an Obama foreign policy win in South Sudan, as his headline writer did (reflecting accurately the contents of the op/ed). There is a long and difficult road ahead that could be upset by violence, political games, logistical difficulties, technical incompetence, interference from neighbors and miscalculation by Khartoum or Juba. The American officials of course know that better than I do.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Kosovo elections preview: opportunity knocks
Kosovo national elections will take place tomorrow, the first parliamentary poll since independence. Unlike Egypt, Haiti and Ivory Coast, the Kosovo government seems likely to gain in legitimacy and authority from a relatively well-organized and executed effort, one in which substantial numbers of Albanians, Serbs and other minorities are expected to choose among a wide array of political options.
By all reports, the campaign and the election-day organization have been good, maybe even very good. Planning has included 23,000 certified election observers. Polling places are expected to be available in Serb enclaves; Serbs are guaranteed 10 seats in a 120-seat Parliament but can win more. Other minorities also get 10. The system is “open list” with the opportunity to select five candidates. Women make up one-third of the lists and one-third of the unicameral legislature.
The campaign has been vigorous but peaceful, with eight Serb parties among the 29 contesting the elections. Two new Albanian parties—the more radical Self Determination and the activist but more centrist New Spirit—joined the competition with more established political forces and their offshoots. The press in Kosovo is ranked “partly free” by Freedom House, due in large part to weaknesses in the legal environment. But there do not appear to have been any special restrictions associated with the elections.
The main issues of concern to voters, according to the National Democratic Institute’s pre-election polling, are the economy/jobs and corruption, which are also the two areas in which the most dissatisfaction was expressed. “Political stability,” whatever that means, is a fairly distant third. Health and education are viewed as improving. The only institutions scoring at all well were civil society organizations, though the parliament, government and political parties did better than the new municipalities and the ministry of community and returns.
Participation is expected to be strong in most communities, with the possible and important exception of the Serbs who live in the North, where Belgrade’s influence is most strongly felt. If tomorrow is peaceful and participation is strong, it will be an excellent sign of interest and even confidence in the political process.
These elections are an opportunity. If they come off well, they will be an important step in validating Kosovo’s institutions as representative and democratic in advance of upcoming negotiations with Belgrade and give Pristina an important claim to international recognition, regardless of who wins or loses.
Why should Americans care about elections in such a small and out of the way place? With U.S. leadership, NATO went to war over Kosovo in 1999, and we thereafter spent billions to station forces there and help build the Kosovo state. As we consider what to do in Afghanistan (as well as Iraq), it is at least modestly gratifying to hear that such efforts sometimes succeed, at least in part.
RSS - Posts
