With all these sensible sounding exit plans for Iraq being bandied about, I have a dumb question.
Why couldn’t Shiite Iraq unite with Iran? I don’t mean this in the normative sense of why shouldn’t they. Clearly, it’s against U.S. foreign policy interests, and I know I’d prefer theocratically flavored democratic government to an outright theocracy layered on top of a fledgling representative democracy. But in the descriptive sense, to what extent does Shiite Iraq have a national affinity with Iran? I assume both populations speak Farsi (or do they?), but language and religion alone don’t create a nation. Is the situation like Poland - living divided for years but eager for unification once the opportunity strikes? Is it like Belgium, where for all their internal divisions, the Flemish don’t see themselves as Dutch, nor the Walloons as French? Or is it like East and West Germany - parts of the same nation, only parts whose experience living as different states creates divisions and frictions, even a subnationality? The answer may have an impact on how we should proceed, even given the normative reasons for a separate Iraq listed above.
No comments have been added to this post yet.