Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020


    A century on the state of Iraq .. the impossible question

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 277658
    Join date : 2012-12-21
    • Post n°1

    A century on the state of Iraq .. the impossible question Empty A century on the state of Iraq .. the impossible question

    Post by Rocky Mon 17 May 2021, 7:10 am

    [size=39]A century on the state of Iraq .. the impossible question
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    Rustem Mahmoud
    May 17, 2021
    [/size]
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    In practice, the Cairo Conference of British Colonial Diplomats, held in the spring of 1921, to define what Britain should do regarding the territories it occupied during World War I, was the event that established the modern state of Iraq in its current form. During that conference chaired by Winston Churchill, the British colonial secretary at the time, it was decided by one party to define the political borders of the Iraqi entity, after controversies that lasted for nearly five years, regarding the annexation of the province of Mosul - which has a Kurdish majority - not to do so. The conference also approved the inauguration of Prince Faisal bin Al-Hussein as king of Iraq, and excluded his other competitors, Sheikh Khazal bin Jaber, the Emir of Al-Muhammarah and Hadi Pasha Al-Omari, as the three, by chance, were from families of non-Iraqi origin.
    Before that event, "Iraq" was merely an expression of a very ambiguous geography and demography. The Ottomans and before them the Abbasids meant the space surrounding the city of Baghdad and the holy shrines south of it. The same was true for the British army, which presided over the territories of what became known as "Iraq" throughout the years 1914-1918. The British had appointed a local government in the city of Baghdad, and they were facing local uprisings one after the other, without having any vision of what the next phase of their occupation of that region could and should be. The first maps of the Sykes-Picot accords in the year until 1916 linked Baghdad only to its south, while the majority of Iraqi Sunni areas are considered part of the area of ​​influence that includes even present-day Jordan up to the white and red Bahrain, while Beirut was part of the coast and central Anatolia, and inner Syria includes the space. The western part of the Mosul province, including the city itself!
    Exactly a full century after the dawning and consolidation of the Iraqi entity as it is, the two foundational dilemmas seem to be our present and wreak havoc on the body of the Iraqi entity, as they have always been: a civil conflict based on the domination of a civil group and its monopoly on the central government. This has always resulted in a link between Iraqi civil groups and their extensions outside Iraq, more than their association with other partner civil groups inside Iraq, in addition to their awareness and political focus on their civil identities more than their counterparts from a "national" space. The other issue is related to the intense disagreement over the borders of this Iraqi entity, whether in relation to the surrounding entities, or between the internal Iraqi geographies themselves.
    This covered a whole century of the history of this country, which can be divided into four distinct phases, each of which exploded the two issues of conflict on borders and power relations between civil groups in its own way, but they are identical with each other in producing that and living on it, as two central issues around which the rest of the details of life revolve. Iraqi.
    The royal era inaugurated the model of "solution / massacre" against the rebellious civil group, through the "Simele massacre" against the "Iraqi" Assyrians in 1933. This era also enshrined the sectarian identity of power in the country, as it decided that the military college would be almost monopolized by the Sunni community, and subsequently. The secret doctrine of the Iraqi army became its Sunni sect. The identity of the ruling ministries was likewise, as only four ministries were formed, headed by a Shiite figure, out of forty-six ministries in the "democratic!" Monarchy.
    During the era of the nationalist coups, the Kurds were installed as functional and absolute enemies of what the ruling leaders considered at the time to be the absolute property of their "Arab" nationalist group. They fought open wars of annihilation against "citizens of their country" in order to bypass their natural right to partnership. But before that, they inaugurated the era of erasing the specific borders of the Iraqi entity, by overcoming it towards the aspiration of the imagined Arab imperial whole, which necessarily meant the negation of the borders of the Iraqi entity.
    The Ba'athist era was an absolute intensity of the sectarianism of the royal era and the nationalism of the two military coups. Iraq and its ruling authority in their era was just an open war against the Kurds and Shiites of Iraq. And in parallel, a powerful machine for self-exile, by transforming the state into a mere "Qatar", which is the drop that separated from the total body, according to the Baathist imagination, and since the whole struggle must be to fight the borders and borders of the country itself, to destroy it and re-dissolve it in the imagined total body !
     Eighteen years with the new Iraq after the year 2003, and the result is only two clear things: the entire Sunni areas are devastated, cities and towns completely destroyed, and millions of displaced residents from all sides. The other matter is the absolute refusal to define the final borders between the central authority and the Kurdistan region, despite the constitutional articles that are quite clear in that direction, but the solid core of the governing authority is insistent on keeping the issue of borders as an open internal wound that only produces violence and hatred.
    Throughout a whole century, since the establishment of the Iraqi entity by a completely external will and until now, the biggest and most important question in the "Iraqi political sociologist" remained without a clear answer, or even without any answer: What role did that almost absolute level of inconsistency between civil groups within Iraq, which has overlapped its inconsistency with a high level of artificiality according to which the borders of Iraq have been drawn, and on that basis the modern Iraq is formed, what is their role in the production and continuation of all this seas of violence, hatred, military coups, sectarian conflicts, fascism, nationalism and populist rhetoric, and with it, of course, the forms of massacres and cemeteries The university, the destruction of cities, the displacement of the population, the extermination of religious and national minorities ... etc ?? !!, which the Iraqi entity began and followed in every moment and detail for a whole century, is his whole life.
    There is no clear answer to that, neither epistemological, political, nor ideological. On the contrary, there are desperate attempts to bury that question and exclude it as much as possible, in all aspects and details of Iraqi public life, or those interested in Iraq. There is no answer, not because of the difficulty of the question, but because of the political implications that the answer might produce.
    To say that the organic relationship between the two matters, between the form of permanent conflictual relations between civil groups and the forms of borders within the Iraqi state, and all the atrocities that Iraq has produced during its history, will require thinking and defining the position of Iraq itself, as an entity and existence, which is not an abstract a priori, but rather closer. What is a cruel coincidence, did not produce anything but pain, for a whole century, and for his closest relatives before others. And that people should be more daring to accept coincidences as if they are sacred, especially as they destroy their lives every now and then.
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    • Back to top
      Current date/time is Tue 17 Sep 2024, 7:29 pm