sensible ideas

[totient]

I've thought for a long time that the right answer to the Iraq situation is (and has been since about 1933) to partition the damn thing. But what I did not realize is that there was a better proposal than the naive tripartite one. David Apgar has come up with a two-state division which creates one all-Shiite state and one state with a 40-40-20 ethnic mix. What's brilliant about this isn't the rather naive assertion that the 20% Shiite population in the northern state will gain political influence by being kingmakers, but the fact that it torpedoes the idea of an independent Kurdistan (making those neighboring countries with any Kurdish population of their own much less uncomfortable) while not actually screwing the Kurds. The approximately even distribution of oil resources is also a nice touch.

Realpolitik in action. Now if only anyone would listen to him.

Comments

[palmwiz.livejournal.com]

*de*volve? The new country would include Baghdad and as such would start out with a civil war. I certainly agree that an independent Kurdistan would be (and by some measures already is) a viable state, but I think if that were recognized by the UN it would wind up being viable the way Israel is viable: with a whole bunch of neighbors whose policy is that it should not exist. Better, I think, not to push on that one.

True that Sunnis in the southern state won't want to pack up and move. But there really aren't very many Sunnis there at all, far fewer than there were Muslims in Hindu areas of India.

[enheduanna13.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, the Sunnis are already proving that they don't need significant numbers to cause significant trouble. And they believe that they're fighting a jihad against the Shia.