Iraq, Sectarian Violence, and the Myth of the State

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, a Shiite, appears to be moving against his Sunni rivals only days after American troops left the country.

Days after American combat forces completed their withdrawal from Iraq, it seems the country is on the brink of political chaos and perhaps even civil war.  Many Sunni Arabs (who make up a minority of the population but were favored under Saddam Hussein’s regime and now fear reprisals from the majority Shiites) have boycotted parliament.  Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki (a Shiite) has accused the Iraqi Vice President (a Sunni) of running death squads and has demanded that the Kurds (who enjoy a largely autonomous region in northern Iraq, where the Vice President fled to escape an arrest warrant) hand over the Vice President or face the consequences.  The Vice President is now calling for Prime Minister Al-Maliki to be replaced. There is increasing concern among Sunnis, Kurds, and some Western analysts that Al-Maliki is becoming a dictator like Saddam. And yesterday a coordinated string of bombings shook Baghdad, killing at least 63 people and wounding 185. Al Qaeda in Iraq, the Sunni insurgent group, has been blamed for the attacks.

These troubling events highlight the fact that while the state may be a useful analytical concept for political scientists and other observers, the notion of a unified sovereign entity within identifiable borders frequently bears little resemblance to reality.  Critical theorists have sought to “deconstruct” simple concepts like the state and reveal a much messier underlying picture: in Iraq’s case, the messiness is comprised of three major ethno-sectarian groups, a fledgling central government that is not in complete control of its territory (see Kurdistan) and a population that frequently sees itself less as Iraqi than Sunni, Shiite, or Kurd.  While an iron fisted ruler like Saddam Hussein or a powerful occupation force like the Americans may have been able to create a sense of unity for a time, the underlying realities are emerging as U.S. forces withdraw from post-Saddam Iraq.  As one recent news analysis put it:

“While the U.S. troop surge of 2007 helped tamp down Iraq’s violence – and, the US hoped, created ‘space’ for sectarian reconciliation – in the years since, Iraqi politics have remained largely driven by sect and ethnicity, their politicians pursuing a zero-sum game for absolute power.”

Is the concept of the state still a useful way of making sense of the world, or is it a dangerously outmoded concept in today’s globalized  world that obscures more than it enlightens?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s