Thursday, March 26, 2015
Political Mayhem Thursday: Confusing facts and foreign policy
Every morning during the week, I open the door to my house and the New York Times is lying there, in a little blue plastic sheath. If I shake off the snow and open it up, I find a wealth of information both wonderful and confounding. And sometimes, pretty confusing.
For example, yesterday's paper reported the news that Saudi Arabia has organized a 10-nation military force to invade Yemen, which has pretty much fallen apart due to civil unrest. In an attempt to explain what is happening, the Times offered up this:
The country appeared to be sliding toward a civil war as dangerous as any in the region, with elements of a sectarian feud, a regional proxy conflict, the attempted return of an ousted authoritarian and the expansion of anti-Western extremist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State eager to capitalize on the chaos.
The Houthis, a minority religious group from northern Yemen, practice a variant of Shiite Islam and receive support from Iran.
But they are also collaborating with Yemeni security forces still loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, the longtime strongman who was pushed from power amid the Arab Spring uprising but now appears to be orchestrating a comeback in alliance with the Houthis.
So... Iran, Al Qaeda, and Isis are apparently on one side, and Saudi Arabia is on the other, with a bunch of other nations. Sigh. There is an awful lot I don't know.
And that's a problem. As some politicians talk about a war with Iran, even well-educated Americans are often pretty clueless about what is going on in the Middle East. The simple take on things is that it is Israel v. Everyone Else In The Region, but that explains almost none of the recent conflicts in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Egypt, and, well, Yemen.
Is it ethical to for the US to take military action in a region when we don't have an informed national conversation about the conflict we are entering?
For example, yesterday's paper reported the news that Saudi Arabia has organized a 10-nation military force to invade Yemen, which has pretty much fallen apart due to civil unrest. In an attempt to explain what is happening, the Times offered up this:
The country appeared to be sliding toward a civil war as dangerous as any in the region, with elements of a sectarian feud, a regional proxy conflict, the attempted return of an ousted authoritarian and the expansion of anti-Western extremist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State eager to capitalize on the chaos.
The Houthis, a minority religious group from northern Yemen, practice a variant of Shiite Islam and receive support from Iran.
But they are also collaborating with Yemeni security forces still loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, the longtime strongman who was pushed from power amid the Arab Spring uprising but now appears to be orchestrating a comeback in alliance with the Houthis.
So... Iran, Al Qaeda, and Isis are apparently on one side, and Saudi Arabia is on the other, with a bunch of other nations. Sigh. There is an awful lot I don't know.
And that's a problem. As some politicians talk about a war with Iran, even well-educated Americans are often pretty clueless about what is going on in the Middle East. The simple take on things is that it is Israel v. Everyone Else In The Region, but that explains almost none of the recent conflicts in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Egypt, and, well, Yemen.
Is it ethical to for the US to take military action in a region when we don't have an informed national conversation about the conflict we are entering?
Comments:
<< Home
I just listened to the 03/20 edition of Diane Rehm's International News Round-Up, and they discussed this situation in Yemen. It was all new to me.
Most of what we have learned about the conflict has come from in depth interviews, etc... on the Diane Rehm Show. A wealth of information.
That said here is a rundown of the religious makeups of the countries you mentioned. For the most part Arabs practice a Sunni form of Islam.
Iraq - 65% Shia / 35% Sunni and a smattering of Kurds in the northern borders of Turkey. Sunni's are primarily located in the northern areas of Iraq (Tikrit was Saddam's home town).
Iran - a Shia Majority
Saudi Arabia - majority Sunni
Libya - 97% Sunni
Egypt - 90% Sunni with the rest mostly Coptic Christian
Tunisia - Sunni
Syria - mostly Sunni but Assad was a member of a sect aligned with the Shia minority in Syria
Yemen - Sunni with a Shia rebel minority
Then of course with ISIS (Syria), ISIL (Iraq) both extreme off shoots of Al Queda (bin Laden - Sunni extremist). Yemen was also a base for Al Queda at one point.
Is it ethical to commit to a war in this region? Hell if I know.
That said here is a rundown of the religious makeups of the countries you mentioned. For the most part Arabs practice a Sunni form of Islam.
Iraq - 65% Shia / 35% Sunni and a smattering of Kurds in the northern borders of Turkey. Sunni's are primarily located in the northern areas of Iraq (Tikrit was Saddam's home town).
Iran - a Shia Majority
Saudi Arabia - majority Sunni
Libya - 97% Sunni
Egypt - 90% Sunni with the rest mostly Coptic Christian
Tunisia - Sunni
Syria - mostly Sunni but Assad was a member of a sect aligned with the Shia minority in Syria
Yemen - Sunni with a Shia rebel minority
Then of course with ISIS (Syria), ISIL (Iraq) both extreme off shoots of Al Queda (bin Laden - Sunni extremist). Yemen was also a base for Al Queda at one point.
Is it ethical to commit to a war in this region? Hell if I know.
About the only thing the Sunni and Shia agree on is kill Israel. Otherwise, they want to exterminate the heretics - i.e. the other faction.
The western powers after WW! divided up the areas of influence for themselves and disregarded religious and tribal affiliations. Add oil to the mix and it gets even more volatile (pun intended).
As a family member with over 40 years of diplomatic experience in the region put it "You could separate and disarm the factions and put them in habitats at opposite LaGrange points and they would find some way to throw rocks at each other."
I don't think there is any use in us trying to sort it out by force - except to play Whack-a-Mole and keep it to a level not involving atomic weapons.
Lee
The western powers after WW! divided up the areas of influence for themselves and disregarded religious and tribal affiliations. Add oil to the mix and it gets even more volatile (pun intended).
As a family member with over 40 years of diplomatic experience in the region put it "You could separate and disarm the factions and put them in habitats at opposite LaGrange points and they would find some way to throw rocks at each other."
I don't think there is any use in us trying to sort it out by force - except to play Whack-a-Mole and keep it to a level not involving atomic weapons.
Lee
# posted by 
: 2:18 PM
: 2:18 PM
oh and let's not forget that the Shia rebels (Hoothies) in Yemen are occupying the border area with the Saudi's and also the mouth of the Suez Canal (passage of oil freight heading to the Mediterranean.
The plot thickens....
And Mark - Diane's voice grows on you.
Post a Comment
The plot thickens....
And Mark - Diane's voice grows on you.
<< Home
