The recent congressional hearing about Iraq have cited generals who testified that Iraq descending into civil war. It may be that different religious groups in Iraq have been attacking each other. This is not and will not be a civil war as long as the United States is occupying the country. Bosnia, Lebanon even Afghanistan have had civil wars. Iraq is an occupied country on the verge of anarchy. This is what would happen if the United States withdrew its troops from Iraq. This is also an effect of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

The invasion removed the dictatorial government of Iraq. Clearly this government was a repressive regime, but it was able to provide stability to the country. It was naive to believe that it would be possible to remove Saddam Hussain by military force and still be able to preserve stability in the country necessary for a new democratically elected government to establish itself. This may, however, never have been the goal.

An alternative to forcefully removing Saddam Hussain was to assist an Iraqi movement similar to that in Serbia. Ironically such peaceful movements have been much more successful in achieving a regime change than military intervention.

The U.S. did invade Iraq. Iraq is descending into anarchy. The people of Iraq must be given the chance to bring peace to the country. Electing a new parliament and thus a democratic government is not enough. Those responsible for the violence in Iraq must be isolated and rejected by the public. As long as the U.S. is not able to rebuilt the countries infrastructure, provide food and jobs for the people of Iraq. Until the Iraqis are able to rebuild their country, the extremists will thrive and violence will continue.

Popularity: 11% [?]

Here are some excerpts from an excellent oped by Jimmy Carter:

Prisoner exchanges are common to all conflicts. As Jimmy Carter states below, this has been common praxis over the past years. He also hints that the current Israeli backlash due the the latest Palestinian and Hezbollah attempts at prisoner exchange will not change this.

One of the special vulnerabilities of Israel, and a repetitive cause of violence, is the holding of prisoners. Militant Palestinians and Lebanese know that a captured Israeli soldier or civilian is either a cause of conflict or a valuable bargaining chip for prisoner exchange. This assumption is based on a number of such trades, including 1,150 Arabs, mostly Palestinians, for three Israeli soldiers in 1985; 123 Lebanese for the remains of two Israeli soldiers in 1996; and 433 Palestinians and others for an Israeli businessman and the bodies of three soldiers in 2004.

This stratagem precipitated the renewed violence that erupted in June when Palestinians dug a tunnel under the barrier that surrounds Gaza and assaulted some Israeli soldiers, killing two and capturing one. They offered to exchange the soldier for the release of 95 women and 313 children who are among almost 10,000 Arabs in Israeli prisons, but this time Israel rejected a swap and attacked Gaza in an attempt to free the soldier and stop rocket fire into Israel. The resulting destruction brought reconciliation between warring Palestinian factions and support for them throughout the Arab world.

Hezbollah militants then killed three Israeli soldiers and captured two others, and insisted on Israel’s withdrawal from disputed territory and an exchange for some of the several thousand incarcerated Lebanese. With American backing, Israeli bombs and missiles rained down on Lebanon. Hezbollah rockets from Syria and Iran struck northern Israel.

It is inarguable that Israel has a right to defend itself against attacks on its citizens, but it is inhumane and counterproductive to punish civilian populations in the illogical hope that somehow they will blame Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking the devastating response. The result instead has been that broad Arab and worldwide support has been rallied for these groups, while condemnation of both Israel and the United States has intensified.

Here is the crux of his article:

These are ambitious hopes, but even if the U.N. Security Council adopts and implements a resolution that would lead to such an eventual solution, it will provide just another band-aid and temporary relief. Tragically, the current conflict is part of the inevitably repetitive cycle of violence that results from the absence of a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East, exacerbated by the almost unprecedented six-year absence of any real effort to achieve such a goal.

…

The general parameters of a long-term, two-state agreement are well known. There will be no substantive and permanent peace for any peoples in this troubled region as long as Israel is violating key U.N. resolutions, official American policy and the international “road map” for peace by occupying Arab lands and oppressing the Palestinians. Except for mutually agreeable negotiated modifications, Israel’s official pre-1967 borders must be honored. As were all previous administrations since the founding of Israel, U.S. government leaders must be in the forefront of achieving this long-delayed goal.

The end of Israeli occupation in the West Banks and Gaza is essential to ending the conflict. Israel must pull out of all territories not belonging to Israel. As an occupational power you will never have peace.

Popularity: 10% [?]

It came as it had to come. Israel’s bombs hit a building causing about 50 civilian casualties. Finally the outcry was big enough to compel Israel to stop the bombing for 48 hours. This deadline will run out at 1:00 am and there is no sign that Israel will extend the cease fire.

On the contrary, it is clear that Israel is willing to continue fighting. There are also no signs that Israel will now make a greater effort to prevent further damage to the Lebanese citizens. Israel has locked itself into this conflict and is willing to expand it. Rice’s assurances that a lasting cease-fire will be possible this week have faded.

Syria is obviously preparing for an Israeli attack. Iran has lashed out at the U.S. and Britain. Hopes that the tragedy in Qana could bring Israel back to reason have diminished. An end to the conflict , and the suffering, seems as far away as ever. Even worse the situation seems to be escalating.

With the U.S. reluctant to exercise pressure on Israel to halt their offensive. The EU must act alone to bring an end to the conflict in Lebanon.

Popularity: 11% [?]

The fighting in Lebanon has been going on now for 17 days. Hundreds of bombs are still being dropped on Lebanon. The talks about cease fires continues. Today Toni Blair and George Bush met. There are no signs of the coflict ending though. Ending the conflict is just not a simple thing to do.

There are just too many unanswered questions about how a peacekeeping force shall be able to secure peace in the area. The plausibility of such a mission being a success is not convincing. It all depends on Isreals objectives.

They claim they want to disarm the Hezbollah in south Lebanon. This is the most credible and sensible objective. A U.N. peacekeeping force cannot achieve this, though. A NATO opperation similar to that in Kosovo is more likely to succeed, is politically very controversial and therefore very unlikely. If Israel will not stop until the Hezbollah are disarmed the fighting will have to continue much longer.

Israel may be persuing a much larger objective. When Condoleezza Rice met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert she talked about “a new Middle East”. This hints at an Israeli objective beyond just disarming the Hezbollah. Syria and Iran are constant threats to Israel. The Bush Administration has also accused these countries of supporting terrorism. Regime change in these countries is very much in Israel’s interests and an escalation of fighting may open opportunities to attempt such a regime change.

Whatever Israel’s objectives are, they will continue their military operations until they are achieved. If of course public pressure or even diplomatic pressure from other states increases to a critical mass, Israel may be forced to end their offensive. This public pressure is increasing and the longer the conflict last, the greater the pressure will be. The pressure will have to be emense though before Israel agrees to a cease fire.

For Lebanon time has just about run out. Even if the fighting ends in the next few days, the damage has already been done. All diplomatic efforts will have come to late.

Popularity: 13% [?]