Manga News: Check out this week's new manga (4/6/15 - 4/12/15).
New Forums: Visit the new forums for Boku no Hero Academia!
Forum News: Check out the results for the Anime Awards 2014
Title says it all
Not really. It's been a while since Iraq was getting attention and with the withdrawal of the last US troups coming within reach, safe some 5000 that shall stay I've heard, it is desirable to talk about the countries future again. The thing is, during this liberation/occupation, that itself changed the region, the world around Iraq changed a lot. The most recent examples to name are the Arab spring and of course the economic crisis in the west.
So, how is this all going to influece Iraq coming to peace and developing a healthy, independent economy? Will the economic crisis, for example, have an influence on it, or is Iraq starting off at such a low level, that it won't be harmed anymore? Also where are the allies in this 'operation development', regional as well as international ?
I really hope the Iraqi government takes off well and manages to stabilize. I'm very pessimistic though on the outcome, only hoping for the best.
It just appears to me that the whole area is unstable with militants all over the place.
I am sure it will do as well as any country that depends on oil rent for income, has no defensible borders, has had maybe one hundred total years of independence since becoming part of Achaemenid Iran almost three thousand years ago, a history of internal turmoil dating back to the beginning of written human history, little history of national unity, and a traumatic post-Ottoman history.
Lots and lots of implications, dear sirs.
Yet first off, I'd like to start off with some importantish news on the matter, namely the iraqi government refusing to grant further immunity to US troops, thus leading to what now seems to be a complete withdrawal by the end of the year (bbc). I mean, really? It's that easy? I sincerly hope this is not a role model for other states - mainly Afghanistan and Pakistan come to mind there, but there could well be others.
Anyway, I think I might miss one of your many points, but I'll try to cover them all:
@ the dependance on oil rent: this may or may not be a valid point there since there are examples in both directions. Norway for example is rather rich mainly due to its natural resources in oil and gas to my knowledge, while on the other hand in Nigeria the money drains in corrupt channels. Yet another example are the gulf states (drawing even closer to iraq) that despite having undemocratic systems, managed to somehow spread the wealth (among the few actual residents, not the millions of workers from india and elsewhere).
@ no defensible borders / national unity / security in general: continuing from the point before, the factor is not oil itself in my opinion, but how the money gained is spent and even more important how the security develops. If Iraq is able to get back to a point of strength, filling the vacuum left behind, it could have a stabilizing effect on the whole region, especially in the direction of Syria, but also Turkey. The latter is an especially problematic case as the iraqi state would actually have to defend its people against against the outsiders, turks as well as other kurds. this in my opinion is one of the core problems in many regions of the world, that there are still nationalities denied their own state for no good reason - well, none other than controlling oil and water resources, which leads directly to the next point
@ national independence: it's true that in the past this territory was often ruled by foreigners, be it Iranians, Romans, Arabs, Ottomans, Brits or whoever (not going to count the last 9 years as occupation to avoid straying too far off topic). The thing here is, who would have thought in 1776 that a lump of tiny colonies could a) become independant and b) a democracy at that ? Who would have thought in the 1870ies that a sum of small states could shake off two Great Powers and the might Holy See? I think there are actually some examples outside of western history too, but I hope this is enough to illustrate my point. Even if it seems unlikely, it can be successful if the will inside Iraq to stay together is stronger than the outside powers.
Naturally my favorite solution of splitting up what doesn't belong together (but was glued together by colonial powers) would apply there, but reality is diffrent and there are more than enough reasons to keep Iraq together for most of its neighbors.Saudi-Arabia to curb iranian influence, Turkey to pretend there is already a Kurd state, even for Iran and Syria one could argue in the latter way. Eventually, this takes us back to how the oil money is spread / used and how the iraqi state is built. Forming a federal state was imo one of the neccessary steps to gain stability. As for the benefit of oil, despite the oil industry being most developed in the north and south, there is potential elsewhere, so alltogether it should be shared maybe with a little regional benefit. The ways not to go on the other hand are imo clearly shown in Venezuela (socialist mess) and also the UAE. Not that what they did wasn't good, but for Iraq this does not seem to be viable at all.
Hope this wasn't going too deep and yet there is still much more to write and many more points to cover :/
I read that article earlier and it is really sad to see the U.S. government suddenly pull out due them not being granted immunity. That article says that the private contractors who have been killing innocent civilians already lost their immunity. These immunity deal should never have been made in the fist place. I can understand a mistake, friendly fire but not to a level where private contractors and military get a free licenses to kill.Quote:
If crimes were committed then those people should be put to a trial.
Iraq is a country that belongs to the middle-east / northern African region which is a region filled with revolts, wars and post-war statuses. Iraq is a country that is in a post-war status itself and is currently going through a reconstruction/construction phase that will need further aid from the US and UN both with security, but also through various UN institutions as the WHO and the International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq.
It’s not only about peacekeeping forces but about creating economic reconstruction and stability within and towards the various state institutions.
Iraq is a country that can be the leading middle-eastern nation when it comes to development and economic growth through open-trade policies and international trade-cooperation with nations such as India & China, as well as the EU & US. Iraq has a lot of natural resources, amongst them minerals and oil. These are goods heavily desired by the rest of the world and having an open market policy / trade agreements with other countries and regions will strengthen the international bonds and allow Iraq to import goods they heavily desire.
I believe that international economic cooperation is a tool to strengthen transnational bonds as well as prevent conflicts from erupting.
I want Iraq to be a leading role in the middle-east, showing the rest of the nations the benefit of having open policies, trade agreements and liberal, humanist policies towards it’s people as it’s a positive-sum relation – the individuals get better living standards and the nations’ economy grows which leads to further development (infrastructural, technological etc).
We also want Iraq to be an open door to the middle-eastern trade and a nation where we can not only trade goods, but also workforce. Preferably through establishing trans-national companies in Iraq, employ Iraqi workers as well as allowing Iraqi companies to go abroad and employ our workers as it will provide further stimulation towards their economy.
I want the EU and especially the US to help Iraq through allowing businesses to establish, and to invest there. I also want the UN to work through long-term agreements to ensure the safety of the Iraqi citizen, and to ensure further humanist & economic development. We also want India and China to open their trade towards these nations and provide with both production (nationally and internationally), workers (if it’s a necessity) and reach Iraq with their demands (trading-wise).
All these are measures we want to use to ensure a strong, humanist, safe, open and developing Iraqi nation in a war-torn area.
If you have any questions regarding my text above, feel free to ask them and I will be sure to clarify everything. Both how and why.
I dont know, Iraq didnt welcome the changes in open arms, neither were there any WMD there either. the only places i saw Iraqi s welcoming the change was Cnn nd BBC the same vid was circulated all over. Iraqi ppl in general are not so happy with the Western hegemony over their land, resource and cultural integrity.
same goes for Afganistan. i have many friends from Afganistan in my university they dont say every thing to a foreigner (me) but atleast i can gather they are not really happy with the ousting of prev gov.
More like the opp