.Arabs stepping up in Iraq... because they expect US drawdown?
"For weeks, Arab editorialists have been arguing for - or, if you like, signaling - the need for an Arab opening towards Iraq. The seeds of this could be seen in the Neighbors Conference held in Kuwait at the end of April, where appeals were made if little actual progress. (*) Since a June 12 article in al-Sharq al-Awsat by former Jordanian Information Minister Salleh al-Qullab calling for an Arab "third way" between Iranian and American visions for Iraq, I've been noticing a dramatic increase in such articles in the Gulf press, usually asking some variation, as in in the UAE's al-Khaleej, of the theme "where is the Arab role in shaping the future of Iraq?" Many of these have been published in al-Sharq al-Awsat, a paper which is often considered to be an outlet for the views of the Saudi leadership.
Over the last few days, events have begun to catch up. In conjunction with Nuri al-Maliki's trip to Abu Dhabi, the UAE announced that it had appointed an ambassador to Baghdad and would forgive Iraqi debt ($7 billion according to the Arab media, $4 billion according to English reports - not sure why the discrepancy). Jordan appointed an ambassador, and the King reportedly plans to be the first Arab head of state to visit Baghdad. Iraq is now reportedly beginning talks with Kuwait over outstanding issues, including debt, oil fields, compensation claims, and the border. This is capped with an editorial by al-Sharq al-Awsat's editor calling on Maliki to respond to the Arab opening with real national reconciliation, and a guest editorial in the same paper by Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh."
Abu Aardvark
Even though I understand the need for Arab participation with Iraq, for one the need for Sunnie government to reconcile with a Shi'a Baghdad if for nothing else it's PR value. I have many reservation with the idea of the US pulling back so the dictatorial regimes to increase their influence over Baghdad. There is no democratic value in that. I would rather see Iraq come closer to Europe, Asia, and the US that cede the newly minted Iraq to the lions of the peninsula
Over the last few days, events have begun to catch up. In conjunction with Nuri al-Maliki's trip to Abu Dhabi, the UAE announced that it had appointed an ambassador to Baghdad and would forgive Iraqi debt ($7 billion according to the Arab media, $4 billion according to English reports - not sure why the discrepancy). Jordan appointed an ambassador, and the King reportedly plans to be the first Arab head of state to visit Baghdad. Iraq is now reportedly beginning talks with Kuwait over outstanding issues, including debt, oil fields, compensation claims, and the border. This is capped with an editorial by al-Sharq al-Awsat's editor calling on Maliki to respond to the Arab opening with real national reconciliation, and a guest editorial in the same paper by Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh."
Abu Aardvark
Even though I understand the need for Arab participation with Iraq, for one the need for Sunnie government to reconcile with a Shi'a Baghdad if for nothing else it's PR value. I have many reservation with the idea of the US pulling back so the dictatorial regimes to increase their influence over Baghdad. There is no democratic value in that. I would rather see Iraq come closer to Europe, Asia, and the US that cede the newly minted Iraq to the lions of the peninsula
posted by madtom at 6:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home