Want democracy in the ME? Embrace Shia

OP-ED: A new partner in the Mideast, By Stephen Kinzer, Boston Globe, March 14, 2008

A nice summation of how to get our way the fastest in the region. Key thing in general, Vali Nasr would argue, is that, if we want democracy to emerge on some level over time, we need to get a lot more comfortable with the reality of the Shia revival. They're half the population from Lebanon to Pakistan.

Comments

[William R. Cumming]

Probably too late. We have thrown the dice in the middle-east and it rolled 'Sunni" some time ago. So now it would be useful to have a really tight demographic breakdown of various Islamic sects and their zones of occupation. Once again it looks to me like strangers will be dividing up the middle-eastern tribes into geographic areas. Only this time the divider-uppers will not be the west or the USA. The Islamic world long ago rejected unification. The demise of the Ottoman Empire and its impact on Islam needs a lot more study and analysis. All it takes is Iraq and Iran working together to frustrate an outside efforts at reform. This already appears to be happening on a de facto basis, led by the ineptitude and ignorance of the West that so long could spell "OIL" but could not distinguish between Muslims and Islam. The permutations and combinations in Islam make the split in the Roman Church between Western Church and Eastern Rites, and the Protestant Reformation seem simplistic by comparison.

[Peter C. Brown]

Christian Science Monitor has an article in the March 20 edition ( see URL below) about a debate in the Pentagon over creating a 20,000 person force of "Combat Advisors" to train indigenous forces. They suggest it is meeting opposition. Is this important? The idea seems to support the Blueprint.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0320/p13s01-usmi.html

[tammy swofford]

Too little, too late, Mr. Barnett. We didn't peer back far enough historically prior to entering Iraq.

[J Canepa]

I do not see how the US position against Iran, right now, could be stronger. All it takes is one air strike on Iran's one refinery. Without a refinery, or for that matter, a Navy: no gasoline no diesel, no economy.

The US could secure its oil requirements with peace in both Iraq and Iran, so the peace path seems obvious to all, except the war nutters.

A win-win bargain could be arrived at right now. With Iran permitting the free flow of its oil on the open market and the US standing down in the Middle East, being the basic bargain.

With spigots open in the “I” countries oil will eventually settle at fraction of the current $100 per barrel. If and when this happens there should another several decades of mutual prosperity.

Supposing, however that Iran is crippled by US air strikes, the likelihood then maybe decades of insurgent warfare with no real winner and an US economy, very much oil dependant, on the ropes.

[Dirk]

It's also worth remembering that [current crop of cook mullahs aside] the brand of Islam native to Iran is strikingly liberal and even urbane. That place is ripe for an advantageous religious re-formation.

[Louis Heberlein]

The problems are not based on religious issues. It is the tendency to retain nomadic tribal cultural factors in Afghanistan, Iraq, and parts of Pakistan that keeps rational national communities from evolving. We need to get Iran, Turkey and Pakistan to act as rational models and regional mentors.