The Future of Iraq: Mitigating Threats and Ensuring Security

Iraq is considered as a war ravaged country in the Middle East and it has become an influential country after Saddam Hussein took over as its totalitarian leader. However, the United States of America was eager to end Hussein’s regime. The efforts to rule Iraq temporarily halted when Clinton became U.S. president. Another Bush came into the picture and the attack on U.S. soil on September 11 became the turning point of an unpleasant world event that is happening right now. After dispatching Afghanistan, U.S. and its allies turned their attention to Iraq (Cogan 124). Iraq was accused of housing terrorists and producing weapons of massive destruction. Iraqi soldiers defended their turf but Iraq succumbed to the fate suffered by other countries. Some welcomed the changes in Iraq, other fear that the worst has yet to come.

            Deteriorating security in and around the Iraqi capital has been a fact of life since the heady early days following the U.S. invasion (Zelnick 4). Vali Nasr (2006) argues “that the future of the Middle East will be shaped by the conflicts between Shias and Sunnis and not by debates over democracy or globalization” (Sariolghalam 201). The Iraqi political culture finds it difficult to attain democracy because of the conflict between ethnic groups that causes instability. For instance, the Sunni Arabs are deeply resentful about the loss of power and their force would be impossible to overcome Iraq would not be able to succeed in providing security and economic well-being. Such resentment would lead to guerilla warfare, violence, terrorist attraction, and shaky economy. Therefore, a Marshall Plan and a policy implication are needed to empower Iraq in avoiding war (Pillar 18). The conflict between the US and the Shias was intensified since the September 2006 revealed that 62% of the Iraqi Shias believed that attacks on US forces were justified (Kaufmann 48). Although it is untrue that the Iraqi lack national identity, it is believed that sectarian fighting will continue in the future.

In fact, Shia disloyalty could lead to division of Iraq. However, the international community needs to come up with a long-term solution like recognizing and developing Iraq’s historic presence as a unified nation and pursuing towards democratic system and pluralistic federation. Iraq needs to devise a strategy to overcome the negative aspects and events that hinders it from attaining stability.  Uniting its various parties and creating strong internal and regional system and political processes are likely to create solution for long term benefits. In addition, the Iraqi government should ask its neighbors for support and assistance since international community can help the country in reaching its goals like political reconciliation and unity, as well as make complex compromises and strategic decisions in order to stabilize the nation (Al-Istrabadi 16). Moreover, the government must ensure a positive result in its proposal in altering the UN Security Council authorization for coalition troops in the nation in order to protect against future attacks. Iraq should turn down the proposed managed partition because it will result to the creation of more refugees instead of bring the war to an end.

Partition would only serve as the basis for fighting over By the neighboring countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey due to the advantages they could get from oil or other natural resources. If these powers would continue to intervene until they have realized their motives Iraq is more likely to suffer instability and war for decades throughout the Middle East (Kaufmann 49). In Iraq’s initiative to fight terrorism, it faces a problem concerning witnesses who were so afraid of suffering reprisals from the hands of terrorists when they are needed to testify in open courts.  According to (Frank 650), because the court security personnel or judges have ties to the insurgency, a question is raised whether anonymity in testifying to courts is sufficient to protect witnesses from reprisal. The Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) of the United States should affirm that anonymous testimony is a temporary and it is just an extraordinary measure necessary for the future of Iraq to overcome terrorist insurgency and the danger it poses like political instability and war. There is a need for the new Iraqi justice system to commit to the transparency of legal processes.

Therefore the utilization of photographs would be helpful but these are not always essential in proving that a defendant committed a certain crime beyond a reasonable doubt. However, officers do not always have access to digital cameras or other means to avail photographs. Therefore, we cannot expect them to provide photographs of the defendants as evidence. Soldiers would also find it impossible to snap shot of the criminals or terrorists during battles or insurgencies. It is also risky to investigate a crime scene in the aftermath of a battle due to possible presence of snipers and explosive devices. It is a fact that Iraqi forces lack the resources in constructing cases for Iraqi courts, fighting insurgencies, protecting the public, and enhancing the Iraqi security forces.

In order to prevent Iraqi forces from falling from the hands of the enemies, the Iraqi government should follow the international law in creating military tribunals and providing a safe environment for security forces and the public. Military commissions could also help the executive, legislative, and judicial branches in improving the conditions of the Iraqi security forces (Frank 695). Moreover, Jean Bethke Elshtain, one of the proponents of just war theory, emphasizes ethics of a just occupation in which Iraqi should accept some post-war responsibilities such as repairing infrastructural, environmental, and political infrastructures; providing defense and security; and the responsibility for future deterrence. Iraq should adopt ethics of withdrawal and focus on humanitarian goals to ensure a long term security that would lead to economic, social, and political stability (Porter 478).

Iraq, in general is not the threat to world security although it cannot be denied that most Sunnis and Shias come from Iraq who are believed to bring security risks to the nation and the world. Recommendations are identified which are viewed to help Iraq build a strong government and maintain security and peace.

Works Cited

Al-Istrabadi, Feisal Amin Rasoul. “Rebuilding a Nation: Myths, Realities, and Solutions in Iraq.” Harvard International Review 29(1) (2007): 14-19.

Charles Cogan, “The Iraq Crisis and France: Heaven-Sent Opportunity or Problem from Hell?.” French Politics, Culture and Society 22(3) (2004): 120-129.

Frank, Michael J. “U.S. Military Courts and the War in Iraq.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 39(3) (2006): 645-695.

Kaufmann, Chaim. “A Security Dilemma: Ethnic Partitioning in Iraq.” Harvard International Review 28(4) (2007): 44-51.

Nasr, Vali. The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006. 21.

Pillar, Paul R. “Great Expectations: Intelligence as Savior.” Harvard International Review 27(4) (2006): 16-2-.

Porter, Elizabeth. “No Just War: Political Reflections on Australian Churches’ Condemnation of the Iraq War.” The Australian Journal of Politics and History 52(3), (2006): 471-486.

Sariolghalam, Mahmood. “The Shia Revival: A Threat or an Opportunity?.” Journal of International Affairs 60(2) (2007): 201-205.

Zelnick, Robert. “Iraq: Last Chance.” Policy Review 140 (2006): 3-18.