Home » Nooze » Shia vs Sunni

Shia vs Sunni

There are many conflicts that have seized the attention of the world today – Ukraine vs Russia, Gaza vs Israel, even Hong Kong vs China. There is also an Ebola epidemic and a general failure of the world’s economy to gain traction.

But there is one conflict simmering just below these headlines which has the potential to affect the entire world more profoundly than any of them – the growing conflict between Sunni and Shia Moslems, now stretching across the Middle East.

It has taken many forms on many fronts, but they all point to a potential for a much wider and nastier war than we have ever seen. And the US, as usual, has a position that might only encourage instability and ultimately make us one of the great losers if things get much worse.

ISIL on the march.  Yes, these monsters must be stopped.

ISIL on the march. Yes, these monsters must be stopped.

The most visible conflict between Shia and Sunni involves ISIL, the radical conservative Sunni group that has caused so much havoc across Syria and Iraq. There is little doubt that they got their start with fighters and weapons that came from the largest Sunni nation, Saudi Arabia. Their support for the revolt against Bashar al Assad in Syria, a Shia aligned but secular Baathist government, has openly been criticized as the real genesis of the problem.

Other conflicts may not seem as important, but show how the fight is spreading. A Shia led revolt recently toppled the government in Yemen. The ongoing demand for rights by Shia groups in Bahrain has led them to boycott the next national election, fueling an escalation of that crisis. And Iraq has now been split by the arming of Shia and Sunni militias that are growing in both violent capabilities and stature as the central government wobbles.

But it is Saudi Arabia that remains at center even as the conflict highlights the role of the largest defender of Shia Islam, Iran.

Saudi Arabia sentenced to death, by beheading, a leading Shia leader, Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, whose only crime appears to be speaking openly about the rights for Shias. But they are also pulling back from the conflict by suddenly banning citizens from fighting in foreign wars, a complete reversal from their stand of encouraging fighters in Syria until recently. They are clearly scared by the monster they have created and the potential for it to turn on them.

Saudi Arabia is the guardian of Mecca, which gives them a lot of power.

Saudi Arabia is the guardian of Mecca, which gives them a lot of power.

That’s where Iran comes into the picture, a nation previously known for exporting their own conservative religious views by armed conflict. That has clearly abated as Iran has settled into a much more constructive role as a vocal but cautious defender of Shias everywhere. Their role in Iraq fighting ISIL has been restrained. Both sides of this conflict have come to understand that radicalization ultimately threatens their own power as much or more than it has the potential to advance it.

Part of the problem throughout the region has been that the US has actively encouraged Saudi Arabia as its main ally to take a more active role in the region – which included opposing our main enemy, Iran. That puts the US firmly on the Sunni side but with one important caveat – we are on the side of the Sunni power structure that has consistently been corrupt while capriciously flirting with dangerous radicalism.

If the recent action in Saudi Arabia has come because they are legitimately scared about a potential threat from the radical Sunni wing that they created and supported, the US is very likely to wind up on the most pathetic and unsupportable side of a nasty revolt.

Again, that takes us back to Iran. The US has never been willing to do what it takes to open a real dialogue with Iran and normalize relations, which is terrible. The big stumbling block has always been Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which are impossible to ignore. But Iran’s status as a rogue nation supporting conflict is waning and there is a lot of room for the US to normalize relations as fast as possible.

There are also many good reasons why this is essential, stretching even into the need for a source of natural gas for Europe that isn’t Russia.

Burning of a communist newspaper in Tehran, 1953.

Burning of a communist newspaper in Tehran, 1953.

What should the US do in this situation? It’s clear that we have to back away from Saudi Arabia as a high risk liability and open up relations with Iran as soon as we can. I have long felt that a trust building exercise is in order. Last year, we admitted the CIA’s role in the 1953 revolution that installed the Shah in Iran. We should fully declassify all of that material and apologize for what we did. Following that, Iran should apologize for seizing our embassy in 1979. We can then apologize for shooting down Iran Air 655 in 1988. Iran can then apologize for supporting terror.

Something like this as a way of clearing all the bad blood between us and starting over might be the breakthrough that we need to open up the negotiations over nuclear material and bring Iran back into the family of nations as a full, normal member. And it would open an outlet for cooling down the problems between Sunni and Shia that the US is sorely on the wrong side of no matter what happens.

No matter what, this conflict has the potential to cause a tremendous amount of destruction if it continues to become worse. Saudi Arabia may be in the process of falling at the hands of the monster that they created. We should not appear to back them as our only source of stability in the region, especially if this leads to an open free for all between Sunni and Shia. We have to have legitimate standing on both sides if we are going to have any hope of being a force for peace and propsperity.

But as it stands now, events are spinning far beyond anyone’s control. That isn’t good for anyone. An open war between Shia and Sunni should be prevented, and that means that the international community led by the US is going to have to make some very important changes.

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “Shia vs Sunni

  1. The situation with Iran is ridiculous but we can’t let them have nuclear weapons. I agree it has to be resolved but they have to give that up.

    • That would also be wise, but I think we’ve made a lot of promises to people in the region. I’d hate to see Iraq suffer more, for example, and they will be ground zero for any war between Sunni and Shia (as they are now) because they are a divided, made-up nation.

      • A Woodrow Wilson policy would work. “Kurdistan for the Kurds, Mesopotamia for the Mesopotamians, Iran for the Iranians,…”
        But such a policy would not be compatible with the oil-empire policies which the US has been pursing for a very long time.

      • It is unbelievable that the principle of self-determination that was applied to the breakup of the Russian and Austrian Empires was not applied to the Ottoman Empire. We are still grappling with this horrific mistake.

  2. Saudi Arabia has been, quite obviously, the worst-run country in the region — if not the entire *world* — for most of its history.

    It was set up by a vicious warlord;
    it’s run as an absolute monarchy, with no rule of law;
    it has the most atrocious treatment of women of any country I can think of;
    it has institutionalized indentured servitude of foreigners;
    the official (and mandatory) religion is a fanatical, hateful, violent, extremist cult (the Wahabbis), which calls for a world theocracy;
    they abuse and suppress EVERY minority religious group;
    they have been systematically demolishing and destroying all of the archaeological and historic artifacts in Mecca and Medina;
    the royal family is incredibly corrupt, living lavish lives of decadance quite contrary to the official Wahabbi puritanism;
    they are also incredibly hypocritical, calling for the conversion of all Jews to Islam with the one hand and cozying up with the Israeli government on the other;
    Saudis have been the primary funders of Islamic terrorism for decades;
    they have destabilized all of their neighboring countries.

    The Saudi government is solely propped up by oil. Whenever people inside the country get ready to revolt, they are bribed with oil. Whenever people outside the country threaten them, they are bribed with oil.

    The US government, being run by complete morons, decided to ally itself fully with the Saudi government. Presumably because of the oil. This has been bipartisan policy for far too long.

    The Saudi government has been an extremely obvious liability since at least 1976. The US should really treat it as world enemy number 1, because it, frankly, is. However, the control over oil has caused the US to not do this.

    The Saudi government will not fall until its control of the oil supply is no longer important to the west. Someone said that in war, amateurs talk about tactics, while professionals talk about logistics. Well, the logistics are: we should be converting everything to solar ASAP. When we finish doing so, the Saudi government will promptly collapse, and we should be ready for that (we certainly should NOT be seen to be supporting it in ANY way).

    • Absolutely! But there is a lot of history. Saudi Arabia and Iran were called the “Twin Pillars” of Middle East policy by Kissinger around 1970. If we had somehow managed to have both today things would be very different. As it stands, I think we have to just back away from Arabia, which should be a lot easier given that we don’t need their oil. And I really think some sense of normalcy with Iran is essential.

  3. Pingback: Crude Goin’ Down | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  4. Pingback: Bibi Comes to Washington | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  5. Great article, good to see the focus on the political rather than the religious, as I think that sometimes covers over very political decisions. I thought your recommendation for the US to make up with Iran was especially interesting. It’s something I’ve wondered about and written on myself, as I definitely agree that they are potentially a better ally than the Saudis. However, I think that the Syrian war is in the way. Either Iran would have to change policy on Syria, pressuring Assad to step down, or the US would have to do a u-turn and give up on creating a moderate rebel group. Excellent blog, I look forward to reading more!

  6. Pingback: Putin, Khameni, Netanyahu – and March | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  7. Pingback: Iranian Ambition, the Great Chessgame | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  8. Pingback: A Bloody, Dangerous Game | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  9. Pingback: Crisis and Calm | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  10. Pingback: Never Ending Conflict | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  11. Pingback: Not Our (big) Fight | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  12. Pingback: The Crazy Peaks | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

Like this Post? Hate it? Tell us!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s