Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Navigation
home > by publication type > daily analysis > What ‘Civil War’ Means for Iraq
| Prepared by: | Lionel Beehner |
|---|
Many say Iraq now qualifies as a civil war, but the White House disagrees. (AP)
The current debate over how to label the bloodshed in Iraq—set off by a number of news outlets’ decisions to describe it as a “civil war”—is nothing new. John F. Burns wrote in the New York Times back in July 2005 of violence “ever more centered on sectarian killings, with Sunni insurgents targeting hundreds of Shiite and Kurdish civilians” and reports of Shiite death squads “retaliating by abducting and killing Sunni clerics and community leaders.”
In September of last year, CFR.org asked a number of experts whether Iraq qualified as a civil war. Most responded that it was approaching one. Violence in the country has since taken on a new ferocity and an intensified sectarian nature, as the number of bodies in Baghdad’s morgue pile up. Also, defeatism has set in among some officials, both American and Iraqi, which stands in marked contrast to the higher hopes last year at this time ahead of permanent elections.
But in Washington there remains little consensus (Newsweek) on what kind of war is underway in Iraq. White House officials say it is too fluid and amorphous to be a civil war. After all, there is still an insurgency raging; Shiites are feuding among themselves in southern Iraq; and Sunnis hardly constitute a unified camp. Most civil wars, moreover, are ideological in nature, not sectarian, historians say. Domestic politics also plays an important role. Donald Kagan of Yale University says use of the term “civil war” is a ploy (PBS) by those favoring a U.S. pullout from Iraq.
Yet others say Iraq qualifies as a civil war. “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck,” says CFR Senior Fellow Max Boot, in this new Backgrounder. Outgoing UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Iraq was "much worse" (al-Jazeera) than civil wars in Lebanon and elsewhere. Military analysts say there are important implications if Iraq has graduated from sectarian strife or an insurgency to civil war. Some analysts say the Pentagon should throw out its counterinsurgency playbook and choose one of two options: Pick a side (and make sure it wins out militarily) or mediate a power-sharing settlement.
In the midst of this debate, President Bush met with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Jordan. The timing of his trip coincided with a leaked memo that questioned the Iraqi leader’s competence. Bush reaffirmed his faith in the prime minister, while Maliki in turn promised his forces would be able to secure Iraq by next June. Anthony H. Cordesman, an expert on Middle East military affairs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, writes that effective security forces may not be enough to avert a split-up of Iraq or a larger civil war; a “lasting political compromise” is also required.
The viability of Iraqi security forces will also factor into whether Bush adopts the recommendations put forth by the upcoming Iraq Study Group. The bipartisan commission’s report, due out December 6, is expected to recommend pulling back fifteen combat brigades (NYT) (without setting a fixed date for withdrawal) and opening dialogue with the Iranians and Syrians. National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley told Meet The Press the president will review recommendations by the commission and suggested there “are going to be significant changes” (Video) in Iraq. Another leaked memo, sent to the White House by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld two days before his departure, called for a "major adjustment" of the Iraq strategy and admitted slow progress.
Criticisms of the commission are already surfacing. Newsweek columnist Michael Hirsch says its report will be a “bust” because of its call for consensus-building. Fred Kaplan of Slate agrees, adding that U.S. leverage over events in Iraq is “miniscule.”
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
Expert Conversations on World Events
In The Closing of the American Border, Edward Alden goes behind the scenes to tell the story of the Bush administration’s struggle to balance security and openness in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
In Termites in the Trading System, Jagdish Bhagwati reveals how the rapid spread of preferential trade agreements endangers the world trading system.
America Between the Wars explores how the decisions and debates of the years between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Twin Towers shaped the events, arguments, and politics of the world we live in today.
Complete list of CFR Books.
This report lays out a thoughtful agenda for U.S. policy toward the Democratic Republic of Congo, arguing that what happens there should matter to the United States--for humanitarian reasons as well as economic and strategic ones.
In this report, CFR Senior Fellow Michael A. Levi analyzes the potential use of deterrence in preventing terrorist groups from acquiring nuclear weapons and recommends a new approach to U.S. declaratory policy, as well as ways to improve U.S. capabilities to determine the sources of terrorist attacks.
Complete list of Council Special Reports.
This report argues that the United States must lead with domestic action on climate change and proposes a U.S. negotiating strategy for a global UN climate agreement that includes commitments from all major economies, while also promoting a less formal Partnership for Climate Cooperation that would focus the world's largest emitters on implementing aggressive emissions reductions.
This Task Force report examines changes in Latin America and in U.S. influence there, while taking account of the region's enduring importance to the United States. The Task Force offers an agenda for U.S. policy toward Latin America and identifies four critical areas that should provide the basis of a new U.S. approach.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR.
“ Minor League, Major Problems:” Charles Kupchan argues that a league of democracies would not secure cooperation among democracies and would expose the limits of the West's power and legitimacy.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1-212-434-9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
To request permission to reuse Council materials, please email publications@cfr.org or fax +1.212.434.9859.
Please include the complete information of the requested work—author, title, sections/pages to be copied or reprinted, and number of copies to be made—along with a brief description of where and how you would like to reuse the work.
You may also request permission for Council material through Copyright Clearance Center. For more information, please click on the link below.
Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
Copyright 2008 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
