by Patrick J. Buchanan
“Apart from political maps of mankind, there are natural maps of mankind. ... One of the first laws of political stability is to draw your political boundaries along the lines of the natural map of mankind.”
So wrote H.G.
Wells in What Is Coming: A Forecast of Things to Come After the War in
the year of Verdun and the Somme Offensive.In redrawing the
map of Europe, however, the statesmen of Versailles ignored Wells and parceled
out Austrians, Hungarians, Germans and other nationalities to alien lands to
divide, punish and weaken the defeated peoples.
So doing they set
the table for a second world war.
The Middle East
was sliced up along lines set down in the secret Sykes-Picot agreement. But
with the Islamic awakening and Arab Spring toppling regimes, the natural map of
the Middle East seems now to be asserting itself.
Sunni and Shia
align with Sunni and Shia, as Protestants and Catholics did in 17th-century
Europe. Ethiopia and Sudan split. Mali and Nigeria may be next. While world
attention is focused on Aleppo and when Bashar Assad might fall, Syria itself
may be about to disintegrate.
In Syria’s
northeast, a Kurdish minority of 2 to 3 million with ethnic ties to Iraqi
Kurdistan and 15 million Kurds in Turkey seems to be dissolving its ties to
Damascus. A Kurdish nation carved out of Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran would appear
to be a casus belli for all four nations. Yet in any
natural map of the world, there would be a Kurdistan.
The Sunni four-fifths of the Syrian population seems fated to rise and the Muslim Brotherhood to rule, as happened in Egypt. The fall of Assad and his Shia Alawite minority would be celebrated by the Sunni across the border in Iraq’s Anbar province, who would then have a powerful new ally in any campaign to recapture Sunni lands lost to Iraqi Shia.
With its recent murderous attacks inside Iraq, al-Qaida seems to be instigating a new Sunni-Shia war to tear Iraq apart.
The Sunni four-fifths of the Syrian population seems fated to rise and the Muslim Brotherhood to rule, as happened in Egypt. The fall of Assad and his Shia Alawite minority would be celebrated by the Sunni across the border in Iraq’s Anbar province, who would then have a powerful new ally in any campaign to recapture Sunni lands lost to Iraqi Shia.
With its recent murderous attacks inside Iraq, al-Qaida seems to be instigating a new Sunni-Shia war to tear Iraq apart.
The fall of the
Alawites in Damascus would end the dream of a Shia crescent—Iran, Iraq, Syria
and Hezbollah—leave Hezbollah isolated, and conceivably lead to a renewal of
Lebanon’s sectarian and civil war.
The losers in all this? Certainly Iran, which seems fated to lose its only Arab ally, Syria, and its land link to Hezbollah.
That would make
Israel a winner. But Israel’s situation appears more perilous than it was a
decade ago.
In Egypt, the
Muslim Brotherhood has replaced Hosni Mubarak, who kept the peace in Sinai and
the lid on Hamas. Recently, new Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi met with
Hamas’ Khaled Meshaal at the presidential palace in Cairo. The Sinai is
becoming a no man’s land where terrorists plot and Africans cross to Israel.
To Israel’s east,
there is no true peace with the Palestinians, and the Jordanian throne has
rarely been shakier. On the Golan Heights, quiet for decades, the future may
see Syrian troops loyal to a militant Sunni regime in Damascus. Hezbollah sits
on Israel’s northern border. Beyond is a Turkey no longer friendly.
Israel is blaming
the atrocity in Bulgaria, in which Israeli tourists were massacred, on Iran. But
neither the Bulgarians nor the Americans appear to know who did it. And why
would the Iranians, who, following the slaughter, publicly denounced such
atrocities against civilians, do it?
Were an Iranian
hand to be found in this act of barbarism, it would give Israel justification
for an attack, igniting a war in which America could be dragged in.
Why would Iran
want a war with the United States when that would mean destruction of its air
force, navy, missile force and nuclear program, a crippling blockade and
perhaps destruction of its vital oil facilities on Kharg Island?
Whoever was behind
the attack on the Israeli tourists seems to want a war between the Jewish state
of Israel and the Shia state of Iran.
Who would benefit
from such a war?
Answer: Al-Qaida,
which, during the Iraq War, urged the United States to bomb Iran back to the
Stone Age. An al-Qaida affiliate has also attacked Israeli vacationers before,
at Egyptian resorts on the Gulf of Aqaba.
“There is an international plot against Gulf states in particular and Arab countries in general ... to take over our fortunes,” says Dubai’s chief of police. “I had no idea that there is this large number of Muslim Brotherhood in the Gulf states.”
What is al-Qaida’s
goal? Ignite Sunni-Shia wars and Muslim-Christian clashes in Arab states. Draw
in the Americans to smash Iran. And when the Sunni are ascendant, expel the
Americans and Christians, isolate Israel and set about creating the caliphate
of Osama bin Laden’s dream.
If a U.S. war on
Iran is good for al-Qaida, how can it be good for us?
No comments:
Post a Comment