Middle East News
Situation is worse in Iraq; civil war possible - Saudi minister
May 5, 2007, 8:43 GMT
Cairo - In the wake of the so-called 'neighbours-plus' conference, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal in comments published Saturday said the situation in Iraq is only getting worse and that civil war could break out in the already-divided country.
'The situation in Iraq is only getting worse,' al-Faisal, who was considered one of the key players in the Egypt conference, told al- Hayat newspaper. 'We fear that the situation will deteriorate into a civil war.'
Al-Faisal's remarks followed a conference which ended Friday and was regarded by independent observers as a disappointment.
The 18th conference on Iraq since the US-led occupation of the country in 2003 brought together leaders from 21 countries along with top international diplomats but failed to bring about a landmark resolution for Iraq - neither for the long nor the short term.
The Saudi minister's statements to the conference delegations were not as pessimistic as his press statements on the sidelines.
Iraqi Premier Nuri al-Maliki, whose cabinet is under fire from the Iraqi people for failing to curb the ongoing violence despite of a fresh security plane, did not receive the expected support from some of the Arab governments.
During the conference, reports even circulated saying that al- Faisal had refused to meet with al-Maliki. If this were true it could imply the lack of Saudi support for the Shiite premier.
Saudi Arabia, a strict Sunni state, has lately been brokering peace in the region - bringing rival Palestinian factions together through a Mecca-based peace deal and slowly embarking on a much bigger role in Middle East peace and conflict issues. But so far, the state has not given its unswerving 'blessing' to al-Maliki.
When asked by al-Hayat if the Saudi government was willing to back al-Maliki's cabinet, al-Faisal said: 'We do not interfere in the internal matters of Iraq or any other country. This is up to the Iraqis.'
He added that al-Maliki's government has an important role in 'convincing' participants in the upcoming and much-anticipated Iraqi national reconciliation meeting 'that (the Iraqi government) is the side that they should trust.'
He also said that it is up to the Iraqi government to end the troubles of 'all Iraqis.'
Concerning Iraq's armed militias, who are said to have infiltrated army, police and government ranks, al-Faisal said: 'Is it acceptable that militias are part of a legitimate government now?'
Al-Maliki's ruling coalition The United Iraqi Alliance, which has the biggest representation in Iraq's parliament, includes members of al-Sadr faction. This is led by the feared Muqtada al-Sadr who is blamed - along with his backers - for the raging violence and many attacks across Iraq. The faction is also said to have supporters among police and army forces.
The presence of this and such Shiite radicals have encouraged, in many instances, Sunni voices to question al-Maliki's policies and consider them 'discriminatory.'
More than once, al-Maliki has dodged such accusations, claiming that the government clamps down on extremists from both sides - Shiites and Sunnis - and is equal to all.
But his claims usually fall on deaf ears amid the intense power struggle between both religious factions.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Jerusalem prelate tells Arab Spring youth to have confidence
- 2. More than 100 killed in Syria ahead of ceasefire deadline
- 3. At least 43 killed in Syria, despite UN criticism
- 4. 19 killed in Syria as ceasefire deadline approaches
- 5. Pilgrims flock to Jerusalem for Easter, Passover
Older Talkback
page: 1
'The longer the war continues, the more chance of an outright sectarian conflict out of control, influenced also by outsiders such as al Qaeda. '
So if we left it would get all better.... Riiiiigghhhht...
'Bush's 'GOOD/EVIL' paradigm'
Al Queda is trying to start a civil war and it is all Bush's fault... News flash pb, they ARE evil.
'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'
So we should pack up and leave Iraq then.... ???
'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'
Everyone hear that?
'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'
One more time?
'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'
Pass that along to Harry and Nan.
'At present, the opium farmers in Afghanistan pay protection to the Taliban, which in turns funds al Qaeda.'
And your point there is?
'The Iraq Study Group model was well thought out, and Bush should not have rejected it outright.'
Gee, that is exactly what he did... no wait, it isn't what he did.
'It would have required some rethinking and compromise, and neither quality is within Bush's skill set.'
When you wet the bed, do you blame it on Bush?
Re: 'So if we left it would get all better.... Riiiiigghhhht... ' etc.
---
Boy, you must have worked overtime on that set of excuses.
The opium farmers are paying off the Taliban, because we did not actually drive them out of Afghanistan. Even terrorists need funding. Our continued presence in Iraq, and the re-ignition of a 1300 year old sectarian conflict, results in militia on both sides receiving funding from oil-wealthy partisans, so that they can buy weapons to fight each other.
Yes, it's Bush's fault for not completing the mission in Afghanistan, and getting sidetracked in Iraq. He's the CIC, and he gets the blame.
The Iraq Study Group findings were proposed in order to be adopted as a complete set, and not cherry-picked, per Hamilton. Bush said 'Thanks, but no thanks', and took the parts that he chose.
-------
The House Republican leader said Sunday that GOP support could waver if President Bush's Iraq war policy does not succeed by the fall. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Bush's troop increase deserves a chance and should be funded even if benchmarks for success are not met.
'Over the course of the next three to four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan's working. Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts,' he said.
But, he added, 'By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B.'
-------
(Plan B will be setting up benchmarks for the Iraqi Government to meet, as that's the real problem, rather than our military progress vs. an enemy we cannot calculate. Boehner is trying to have it both ways - funding; and no standards for success. Won't work. He says that he 'wants to know how well this is working', but wants no standards in order to accomplish that).
page: 1
pbMay 5th, 2007 - 21:42:20
The longer the war continues, the more chance of an outright sectarian conflict out of control, influenced also by outsiders such as al Qaeda. We are past the point of repair, and Dr. Rice's willingness to be a diplomat during the conference, with countries on the wrong side of Bush's 'GOOD/EVIL' paradigm, is another good step, taken too late.
The Saudi monarchy is of course concerned for its own safety, as well as the government of Saudi Arabia and other neighboring states with great oil wealth. If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.
At present, the opium farmers in Afghanistan pay protection to the Taliban, which in turns funds al Qaeda.
The Iraq Study Group model was well thought out, and Bush should not have rejected it outright. It would have required some rethinking and compromise, and neither quality is within Bush's skill set.
Report this comment