|
as far as splitting the shia and the sunni
it won't work. It's amazing how quickly we forget the lessons from the past. National divisions based on ideology never work. I can't think of any case where a division have worked. Let us take U.S. history as an example.
We seem to forget that one of the most brutal civil wars ever fought happened on American soil. Granted there are some differences between the U.S. civil war and the current situation in Iraq, yet there is enough similarity to draw conclusions which are surely applicable to this situation.
Firstly, there has to be a unified government. American tried to function as a buch of independent govenements and states and it didn't last. There was a myriad of reasons for this but it can boiled to to lack of cooperation. No two states can work together (does splitting oil revenues ring a bell here?) without some form of unified governemnt and it cannot be solely economic. Economic cooperation is good but it does not provide the stability necessary for a long standing, peaceful, relationship. Economics is known as the study of scarcity, it is a game of ruthless consumers, and consumption. Beware he who steps in the Lions den. An economic agreemnt would most likely add gasoline to the inferno raging between these two groups. A unified soverign nation would supply a set behaviors and laws which would be understood by both sides. If this were poker, a unified governement would set the rules of the game, because you can't win without knowing how to play your hand.
How do we do this? This is the ten million dollar question. I'm sure I'll catch alot of flak no matter my suggestion so I'll just be frank. Fristly allow all sides to be represented even the bad ones ie. diplomacy. Second draw up a set of rules that they all can agree on, yet doesn't involve ultimatums. One danger in drawing up laws especially religious laws, and most especially islamic law stems from it's absolute nature. One point that must be made clear is there will be no violence, subjugation, or attempted genocide for any reason, religious or otherwise. I understand this is especially difficult given that bigotry and violence is evidently apart of the dogma for these people. Yet we've seen that before in the Protestant Catholic wars in england and to a lesser extent the Protestant trials here in the U.S. So how was it done?
Once they came to the table there was no official endorsement of either side by the newly formed government. This compromise must be made and it will, so long as there is the understanding that no one will leave the negotiating table until a resolution is reached.This leads to the second conclusion, other nations such as Syria, and Iran must be brought in to this proceess. They are already parties to this conflict, moreover they are apart of the religious community. If they can be brought into negotiations, and if they can reach an agreement the smaller factions will undoubtedly follow.
to be continued...
|