What are the alternative ways to resolve Iraq's dilemma of infighting caused by sectarian violence?

Answer 1

The key to managing conflict is understanding 'interests' and 'influence' and 'image'. Simply put, when all parties to a conflict (and the definition of 'all' can be very wide) generally believe it is in their 'self interest' not to fight then fighting will stop. This doesn't mean that they 'like' the 'other side', but simply that they believe that it would be in their own best interest to not continue fighting. A 'stable' society will then exist for as long as that belief is generally dominant in that society. Note that this allows for 'remnant' extremists, but they would be operating in a society that (on all sides) was hostile to their views or approach.

Influence is the key to maintaining such a society, and in getting a fractured society 'back together'. Is it possible to influence circumstances which create and maintain beliefs, and it is possible to influence beliefs themselves - and to create new ones. Generally the cruder the method (dictatorship, military occupation) the more unstable and less 'self-sustaining' it is. Generally economic (hope for me) and aspirational (hope for my children's better future) influences are longer lasting. We tend to believe (in the West) that economic and aspirational influences are stronger than religious influence, and that is confirmed by the history of the 'west' with its diminishing religious belief.

Religious influence which says 'misery and death in this life is inconsequential compared to the promise of life after death' - a view that was common in the west a thousand years ago - has trouble competing with the immediate promise of education, jobs ,consumer items, and home or property ownership. Generally speaking a man or woman who has a job, has a home and children in school with the prospect of going to university does not become a terrorist or support terrorism. Conversely, a situation of limited economic opportunity could be expected to increase the influence of religious beliefs and increase competition for whatever limited economic opportunities do exist. An individual (or group in society) that has 'nothing', has 'nothing to lose' and consequently becomes very difficult to 'influence', and is more willing to use extreme methods normally restrained by 'fear of retribution'.

Finally, the key to packaging and delivering 'influence' is to understand the 'self-image' of the people holding the belief (and to understand their image of you - the 'influencer'). This is the key to tailoring your influence so that it takes hold and works effectively in their society.

The challenge for States attempting to 'improve' the situation in Iraq is to discern what they still have the 'power' to influence and where it would be most effective. A triage based approach would look to concentrate on the parts that can be 'saved' and strengthen them, and then work from there 'in' towards the 'distressed core'. In practice that might mean shoring up the surrounding 'structure', such as Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Syria and Kurdish northern Iraq and solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The reality, however, is that there is no consensus amongst the States that have influence or interests in Iraq to solve the problems there. In fact the continuing conflict serves significant interest groups in USA, Russia and China. In that sense the Iraqi militias (and even Israel and Iran) are just very small pawns in a very much larger game of global power - and global energy - politics.

Answer 2

I think i said this somewhere else on yahoo, but i do not believe that this sectarian violence will end anytime soon. It will get much worse before it gets any better. That's just the plain truth of the matter.
Many people have criticized me for saying that Iraq is not a state and not a nation, but i firmly believe this. There was no Iraq before the 1920's and there is no reason to believe (and no indication) that a true national Iraqi identity has been formed in this short period of time. Eighty years is not a long time, especially in an ancient region like Mesopotamia.
The Kurds should have their own state. They will have to work out the exact borders of that state and the issue of Kirkuk and all that, but once that is settled (if it can be settled peacefully) then Iraq will be better off.
The real violence though is between Sunnis and Shiites. The animosity between these two Muslim sects is long and deep and will not end for the foreseeable future, if ever. Let someone (dare i say the USA) draw up a border between both areas and create a very loose confederacy that allows the Sunni areas to get some of the oil wealth.
That is about it. I do not see any other way to end the sectarian violence.
The violence caused by Muslim extremists and jihadists is a different matter and mostly confined to Sunnis.

Answer 3

Two possible solutions come readily to mind, although other solutions may be possible. One solution would be that after all the members of all the sectarian militias kill one another off, and all the suicide bombers have blown themselves up, no one will be left to continue the fighting. The other solution is for an absolute dictator to maintain order in the manner that Saddam Hussein did.

Answer 4

Re-deploy foreign troops to border positions to contain the Iraqis and protect them from external threats. Then, sit back and let them deal with their own nonsense. Once the dust has cleared, see who is left standing and deal with them at that time.

Answer 5

put sadam back in power