A Letter to President George W. Bush

Honorable George W. Bush, President of the United States of American

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, D. C. 20500

December 12, 2006

Dear Mr. President:

In light of the Baker-Hamilton report, which prescribes America’s surrender to her enemies, we all know, a defeat before a few groups of terrorists would end U.S. prestige at the global level and would stigmatize its image and reputation for years to come. The fact is, as you know it, leaving Iraq without completing the mission will not end the conflict. Instead, it will lead the current situation into regional chaos. 

What is happening in Iraq is the result of years of discriminatory policies of Iraqi governments since the inception of the Iraqi state. Not a single Iraqi government ever employed a policy of unification or built bridges among the sectors of the divided society. Instead, the Iraqi governments led by the Sunni Arabs used every uncivilized measure, only to keep the country together. However, a state government imposed by  force does not necessarily produce the entity known as “nation” in the imaginations of its citizens. As a result, Iraq never became a nation accepted by its various ethnic and religious factions. Therefore, Iraq has never been a unified nation as we know it.

Because the sectarian division is as old as Iraq itself, it seems only remotely possible to pull Iraq back together. Iraq has been an artificial country with no ancient history behind it. The Iraqi identity came to existence only after the WWI. The two main ethnic groups, Kurds and Arabs were shackled together against their will, and then the Iraqi society was divided across the religious and ethnic lines. The Sunni Arab minority was entrusted to rule the country, often times with an iron fist.

What could America do to keep the “Iraqi territorial integrity” together while satisfying the Iraqi complex society? The only viable option that can sustain itself for a long period of time is division from within, and give regional control to each respective population. It is the only working policy that would bring the situation under control. Kurdistan is a living example. The same model can be applicable to the Shiite south. They, soon, can administer their affairs and develop their region. The Sunni Arabs might continue to have problems with the new reality, however, sooner rather than later, the new situation would compel them to come to terms with the reality and accept the fact that they are only accepted as partners in the country instead of having ownership over the country.  Eventually, they too, would begin to form their local government and strive toward developing their region.

The Baker-Hamilton report stands against dividing Iraq into three autonomous regions without offering a single strategy as to how to unite Iraq’s different ethnic and religious factions. Again, Baker’s recommendation reminds the world of the efficacy of his stand when he steadfastly stood against the division of the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. His prediction was based on the notion that the division of these countries would destabilize the world, and would affect Western interests, but the reality was exactly the opposite of what he had anticipated. Not only the world did not become destabilized, but also greater majority of the former Russian’s and Yugoslavian’s countries chose democratic systems and developed friendly relationships with the Western world, proving Baker’s prediction false.  

Negotiation with Iran and Syria should not even be an option for the U.S. government since these countries have been adamantly opposing the U.S. policies in the Middle East. At this critical time it wouldn’t be an odd idea for America to consider President Nixon’s doctrine vis-à-vis Iran and Iraq. He believed, if Iran and Iraq continued to create problems for the West, “The United States should adopt a policy of isolation and containment toward both. The objective should be to give both countries problems at home so that they cannot cause problems abroad.” Now, such a policy can be adopted toward Iran and Syria.

This policy would spare America from negotiating with Iran and Syria as proposed by the Baker-Hamilton report, an approach that might lead America to compromise its values to satisfy them. It would also place the U.S. in an awkward position, where it might alienate its regional friends, the Kurds.

Mr. President, the U.S. administration should rise above the phobia created by the regional countries against dividing Iraq into three autonomous regions. Future reality will prove that to stabilize the region is to divide Iraq into the three autonomous regions. It will be the only viable solution, which brings the Iraqis together, and enables America to pull out of Iraq undefeated. 

An indication that regional autonomy for Iraqis will benefit the larger Middle Eastern countries can be seen in the gradual strengthening economic relations between Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan.  This is a proven reality such an approach is workable.

Sincerely yours,

Kirmanj Gundi, Ed.D.

Associate Professor,

Cc:       Honorable Dr. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State

            Honorable John McCain, U.S. senator

            Honorable Joe Biden, U.S. senator

            Honorable Lamar Alexander, U.S. Senator

            Honorable Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator

            Honorable Jim Cooper, U.S. Congressman