Why the Iraq War was Deviously Clever

The Iraq War is, without exaggeration, the single worst foreign policy blunder in American history. But looked from another perspective, the Iraq War was deviously clever.

How, you might ask? Consider the following points:


1) America now has Shi'ite allies.

The loudest Iraqi Shi'ite voices, like Muqtada Al-Sadr, would never admit it or even dare to say it, but the truth of the Iraq War is that it provides America with Shi'ite allies for the first time since the Iranian Revolution of 1979. This occurred because the majority of Iraqis are Shi'ite, and by America allowing Iraq to become more democratic - though horrendously corrupt - the Shi'ites have ended up with all the power in government.

2) Iran and America have a mutual ally

Because of the Iraq War, Iran and America share an ally. This has meant that previously unattainable goals, such as removing Iran's nuclear stockpile, have been more readily achieved, especially under the Obama Administration. It also means that counter-Sunni-terrorism objectives against ISIS and Al-Qaeda are also easier to achieve, as information can be shared through their mutual ally. It gives Iran and America more room for dialogue, rather than just endlessly threatening each other.

3) The Iraqi Kurds have more freedom

Coupled with Shi'ites controlling Iraq is an enjoyed greater autonomy for the pro-Israeli Kurdish population of Iraq. It gives Israel more of a chance for an ally in the Middle-East. Even if the Kurds don't become an autonomous region, Iraq is forced to concede more often and not pursue as many anti-Israel policies as under Saddam Hussein.

4) Mostly Shi'ites are anti-Israel, most Sunnis are anti-Shi'ite

Saddam Hussein was a Sunni Muslim who championed being anti-Israel and pro-Palestine. Iran since 1979 has also been very anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, together with Hezbollah in Lebanon (from 1985), Hafez al-Assad (from 1971) and his son and successor Bashar Al-Assad, both of whom ruled in Syria and protected Hezbollah after it was formed.

By removing Saddam Hussein from power, the last major Sunni power that unequivocally refused cooperation with Israel was destroyed, meaning that the only really anti-Israel powers in the Middle-East are Iran or Iranian allies: Iran, Hezbollah and Assads' Syria. This has caused the anti-Israeli enthusiasm of many Sunnis to be replaced by an anti-Shi'ite enthusiasm - this change of focus means Sunnis would sooner fight Shi'ites than Israelis, and Shi'ites would be unable to fight Israel as they would be preoccupied by fighting with Sunnis.

This has left Palestine in an awkward position: Palestine is now the only Sunni power that wishes to fight Israel; the rest are Shi'ite, and Palestine is thus mainly supported by Shi'ites.

5) ISIS targets Shi'ites first, West second and rarely targets Israel

ISIS perhaps benefits Israel most of all, as ISIS is the main reason Sunnis are fighting Shi'ites and not Israel. Osama Bin Laden, founder of Al-Qaeda, said, "America will never dream of security unless we will have it in reality in Palestine. God willing, our raids on you will continue as long as your support to the Israelis will continue," This rhetoric has all but evaporated in ISIS, as they speak threats against Assad's Syria, Shi'ite Iraq, Iran and Shi'ites in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - much more than they threaten Israel. When ISIS fail to target the Shi'ites, such as when they are pushed back from key cities in Iraq and Syria, they deliberately target America, France, Belgium and other countries to put pressure on the West to leave them alone.

This is worse for the West - we should expect not only 9-11's but worse ones, as ISIS is more cruel than Al-Qaeda - but to Israel, it is a glorious breather. No longer is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the uttermost in people's minds, but Arabs killing each other from 2 different sects of Islam in Iraq and Syria is.

6) Israel has allies for the foreseeable future

Since Iraq has turned Shi'ite, Saudi Arabia has become more paranoid by the threat of Iran's influence in the region. It has meant Saudi has wanted to quell Iranian influence in Syria (in which they have not succeeded, largely due to American distaste for a Syrian war so soon after the Iraq War). Not only in Syria, but in Lebanon, in Yemen and Iraq. Because Saudi Arabia have been largely unsuccessful in their war on Iranian influence, Saudi-Israeli relations are closer than ever.

But this is unlikely to last, as Saudi Arabia is about to explode from within as a response to losing Syria and Iraq to Iranian influence. If ISIS successfully detonate in Saudi Arabia - as Alistair Crooke predicts - then Israel will lose their ally.

However this would cause countries such as Egypt, Jordan and Iraq to get closer to Israel. Both Jordan and Iraq have borders with Saudi Arabia - should ISIS control those borders, both will need Israeli help to counter the threat. (Jordan already has strong relations with Israel, so that wouldn't change. However Iraq would have America and Iran as close allies as well as, paradoxically, Israel.)

7) The Gulf would completely destabilize

Sometimes I ponder that the real reason the neocons destabilized Iraq was due to 9-11 and an inability to attack Saudi Arabia directly. Saudi Arabia is holy land for Muslims, and 9-11 occurred in the first place because Americans have been sent there since the Gulf War to protect the Saudi Government. To escalate attacks on the Arabian Peninsula after 9-11 would have been most unwise.

By handing Iraq's government over to Shi'ite Arabs, it was perhaps sending a clear message to Saudi that America is prepared to change their allies if 9-11's continue. Not only so, but in knowing Saudi Arabia would, in Iraq, fund a terrorist group more extreme than Al-Qaeda, it would cause Saudi Arabia to destabilize and/or be overtaken by terrorists, punishing the Saudis for their role in 9-11.

If Saudi Arabia deconstructs at the hands of ISIS, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and U.A.E. would follow suit. It would cause genocide of Shi'ites in the Gulf, forcing them to flee to Iran, Iraq or another Iranian-dominated country for safety.

Perhaps Yemen would also fall under ISIS influence, but that is harder to know for sure. Perhaps South Yemen would pledge allegiance to ISIS, or perhaps not, because South Yemen is closely affiliated with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, not with ISIS. It is hard to know, as Al-Qaeda does not share ISIS' radical ideology to the same extent.
 
Trading instability and oil productions between Iraq and the Gulf might just mean America could exact revenge for 9-11.