Mathew:

Very briefly as I am on the road on business and should be productive.

(i) I have been making essentially the same argument since at least mid-2004; that effectively there are no real effective Iraqi drivers againtst civil war.
(ii) His sketch for the regions seems close enough to what I have suggested, except I expect the urban area around Baghdad, highly mixed population wise to be Beiruit, a heart of darkness and the center of the conflict. I would expect that the South will be (relatively) calm (barring an inter-Shia civil war, which can not be excluded but I regard as relatively low liklihood), as the Kurdish north ex the fracture zone in areas like Mosul and Kirkuk.

I think I have been saying this for a long time, and so far I believe I have been largely on target.

The key here, and here lay aside Shahid's observations, is not "what Iraqis are saying" but understanding (once you get a sense of the "parties" and real power stake holders) where the incentives are.

Given the collapse of security and the fact that the US forces have zero clue as to how to create security (they are running effectively deaf and blind, and will become, as in Lebanon, captive to local interests with agendas and a desire and ability to "use" the Americans against domestic enemies), all the drivers are to civil conflict because all the drivers are to using violence to divvy up the power pie. Anything else is mere wishful thinking.

The lesson here then is that there is, now, no avoiding civil war. The only thing to be done is to let Iraqis beat each other up side the head until they get tired of it and want to make nice. As in Lebanon, the guys with the guns have to feel enough pain to want to give it up.

Bummer - Shadid was supposed to speak tonight at the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (www.ccfr.org), but it seems to have been cancelled. However, lots of other interesting stuff is on the plate, if anyone happens to be in the neighborhood:

http://ccfr.org/events/eventall.asp

Collounsbury -- I think you analysis is right on except that the model isn't Lebanon, it's Yugoslavia. Once it truly begins, they'll never "get tired of it." The Shia and Kurds, at least, will simply secure their respective territories and let the rest of the country go hang.

BTW, I've been enormously impressed with the political maturity shown by the Kurds over the last several years. I think they've played their hand brilliantly, once again, with respect to the constitution. They can't lose, regardless of what happens in the rest of Iraq.

If the constitution fails, they're cut off from the oil-rich and potentially powerful south by a Sunni no-man's land. Since that will leave the Kurdish area the only stable and (relatively) liberal bit of Iraq, they'll get massive diplomatic (and probably financial) support from the rest of the world (bar, possibly, Turkey and, of course Iran) for an independent Kurdistan. If the constitution fails, they'll have a de-facto independent Kurdistan anyway.

The only remaining piece of the puzzle for them is really Turkey, and the Turks won't oppose them forever.

Thanks for the comments, CL.

Matt:

Well it is a cut rate price, yes?

TS:
Maybe, except Yugo land was aborted by Euro land and Western intervention eventually.

You're right in the 1-5 year horizon - 10 to 15 it is another game. Recall Yugo land did not get to indulge itself in barbarism like Lebanon did, so the comparables are off.

That said, I am not sure how to read the tea leaves in re Kurd land versus Shia land, versus united state status. My one sense is that with EU land slipping away for the Turkish generals, their capacity and desire to fuck the Kurds back and forward will increase, and unlike the sad joke Arab militaries, the Turkish army can really go to town. Or as my old dad said, having served with Turkish units in combat some years back, the Turks, they're no joke.

"My one sense is that with EU land slipping away for the Turkish generals, their capacity and desire to fuck the Kurds back and forward will increase, and unlike the sad joke Arab militaries, the Turkish army can really go to town."

Do you think they will do so, that other disincentives (U.S., etc.) are insufficient? And if they did, how much of a fight do you think the Kurds would be able to put up?

"Matt:
Well it is a cut rate price, yes?"

Yes, but don't worry, you'll make it up in volume.

I personally think the Turks would be foolish to go into Kurdistan - after all, having fought through the mountains, what do they do when they get there?

The answer, if you haven't got it already, is "get suicide bombed by the jihadis until they give up". If I were a Turk I'd arm the Kurds as a tough-arsed buffer state between me and the Iraqi terrorism research centre.

Loun,

When you say "go to town", I imagine you don't only mean "be ready to kill a lot of people and car very little for laws of war" because Arab militaries must be much like that (not that they have a monopoly). I imagine you mean effectiveness. Why do you think are the reasons the Turkish military is more effective than Arab militaries?

"The answer, if you haven't got it already, is "get suicide bombed by the jihadis until they give up". If I were a Turk I'd arm the Kurds as a tough-arsed buffer state between me and the Iraqi terrorism research centre."

Why would the Turks arm and support a group that could (potentially) cause instability within their own borders? Lest one forgets, there is a sizeable Kurdish population in Turkey. The Turks arming the Kurds in Iraq will never happen.

"Why do you think are the reasons the Turkish military is more effective than Arab militaries?"

My take - Part of it is history. With the advent of a modern Turkey (since Attaturk), the military has played a much more prominent role within Turkish society - much more so (in my opinion) that neighboring Arab countries. And I mean prominent in the sense of developing and unifying Turkey as a modern nation-state, not just an arm of the government and/or political party in maintaining/projecting their own power (think Baathists in Iraq and Syria and to similar extent Nasser/Sadat/Mubarak in Egypt).

The other is its association with NATO - Turkey has been a strong US and European ally for a long time. They've been privy to a lot of developing/new technologies in NATO's hands, as well as enhanced/improved training techniques.

Shadid's comment sounds like it's roughly describing the present situation. So, yeah, accurate, but not exactly useful. The question is what happens next, whether the next step comes next year or in ten.

I don't think the militias could get tired of beating each other unless the situation ended in victory or enforced peace. I don't see the Lebanese civil war as having ended because the militias got tired of it. I see that prolonged peace as Syrian-imposed. If Iran and Iraq could sustain a horrible full-scale war of attrition for 8 years, what's to stop the mere trickle of manpower and supplies needed in comparison to sustain a militia level civil war for decades? It's happened in countless places. I think it would be a mistake to count on fatigue to end it.

The Lebanese civil war ended because the Maronites lost and began fighting each other and Syria.

Yes, that's not a bad way of looking at it: the Lebanese civil war ended because the Syrian army and its associated Lebanese militias won, not because both sides got tired.

Yes, that's not a bad way of looking at it: the Lebanese civil war ended because the Syrian army and its associated Lebanese militias won, not because both sides got tired.

Late to the party, but just in case anyone is reading ...

I would expect that the South will be (relatively) calm (barring an inter-Shia civil war, which cannot be excluded but I regard as relatively low likelihood)

I'd put it as a medium to high likelihood, as al-Sadr and SCIRI have been poised near each other's throats all along -- it was the underlying conflict when Mookie occupied the Imam Ali shrine last year, and nearly flared up again just a few weeks ago. As soon as the U.S. army (which Sistani & SCIRI used to beat al-Sadr's militia in submission last summer) is out of the picture, I think it's game on.

First to Swopa:
Sadri-SCIRI scuffles are a given, however that is not the same as a Shia' civil war. I expect that for a variety of reasons including self interest that they will not go to town on each other, even the scenario of a US ground forces pull out as in that case the Sunnah hatchet men will provide quite enough distraction.

Second, regarding the Lebanese issue:
I rather believe the commentators neither understood my point nor the context - although I admit I was collapsing some conflict theory into a mere side reference.

Primo, "getting tired of it" is of course relative, but in regards to Lebanon, the fracturing of the Maronis, the eventual successful domination of the Syrians all came in large part because good portions of the militias etc. were indeed suffering general fatigue and had experienced enough pain such that compromises that were not on the table in 85 were when the accords were hammered out.

Finally, regarding the Turkish army, rather simply the Turkish army to my knowledge, when contributing troops to NATO and UN actions has generally impressed outside observers as a disciplined (if brutal) force that is no joke. The Turks do not suffer from the same issues as the Arab armies (and I note also one must recall that Attaturk built the modern Turkish Army out of a proper army that stood up European forces).

Who the fuck do you think you are ?? huh.?? this message goes to all the people who wrote sth in this forum in this subject... how do you know all that shit is true huh ?? are you Turk ?? or did you take part into the Turkish army or sth?? i think you heard all of this shit from ur parents, friends and from fucking liar newspapers.. All you wrote is not joke and serious.. but.. you must be carreful with what did you write.. you are talking about how Turks think about this subject.. u are trying to think like a Turk.. but u dont know that... u dont know how a feel is to be a Turk.. so u cant predict all of that shit.. and those comments are gossips.. so.. i am a Turk and i am giving you that advice = dont think foolish and dont make any comment about those subjects if you arent sure %100... in fact.. you had better not make any comment because some comments have no respect..

and... pls dont forget that... Turks are completely different from Arabics.. Turks are not Arabics.. indeed, i dont know how other ppl think about that but i hate Arabic and Arabic people!!!

lounsbury and please can I ask you who the hell do you think you are as well?? Your stupid post is full of grammar mistakes, if you really want to discuss in these kind of blogs or forums first of all learn how to write in English, second of all be polite and do not swear at anyone with no reason without even reading and understanding the comments completely.I don't know who he is, but what he wrote about the Turkish army is mostly true,and let me add one more thing to attributes of Turkish army:Bravery. Those who had grandparents having the chance to fight alongside the Turkish brigades in the Korean War got to know them from first eye and probably witnessed how tough and effective they were.And Tormentor if you hate Arabs that's your problem that shows how weak,brash and disrespectful you are.Neither of you two can ever speak in the name of Turks.I feel sorry for you.

Well, this is just a bit odd.

First, merhaba Onur. At least I can figure out what you're writing.

Tormenter, on the other hand, well..... He does say he is a Turk. Sorry he hates the Arabs. Seems something of a waste of emotion. Else, I have no idea what his problem is.

But returning to Onur, yes, indeed regarding the Turkish army, those who have had relative exposed to it have had the occasion to hear about how touch ane effective the Turkish units were. As it happens, two generations of my family had close contacts, and I have done a nice little amount of business with Turks. I would not care to speak in the name of Turks of course.

However, I do observe for the outsiders that the Turkish army is not some little Arab pseudo-Army by all accounts. My dad and grand-dad were quite impressed, and that in the day when people like them tended to dismiss "wogs" ..... stupid racism, so I am more impressed Turks cut through it.

Okay, so people (and not just robots) DO comment on old threads.