Galbraith on Iraq

Peter Galbraith, a senior fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, participated in discussion surrounding the drafting of the Iraq constitution. With his insider's view, he gives us some of his thoughts on the situation in Iraq in the current edition of the New York Review of Books, and finds that the general trend is in the direction of a three-state solution. Though the result of the occupation may not be a strong federal state allied with the United States, as the Bush administration wanted, he finds that this is a still a positive development:

"This is not, as the constitution's critics suggest, a complete remaking of Iraq. It is merely the ratification of a breakup that has already happened. And far from igniting a widespread civil war, the constitution provides ways of resolving the very issues that could provoke such a war: oil and territory. The "old oil, new oil" compromise in the constitution stipulates that oil revenues from current production will be distributed equitably among Iraq's regions, which means that the Sunni region will receive large infusions of money. And while current production is concentrated in the Kurdish north and Shiite south, all of Iraq's regions have unexploited resources that are likely to produce considerable revenues for them in the future."

As for the issue of territory:

"The constitution also has a formula to resolve Iraq's most enduring territorial dispute: between Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq over the oil-rich province of Kirkuk. The constitution includes mechanisms to return Kurdish victims of Saddam Hussein's ethnic cleansing to Kirkuk and for a referendum to decide its status not later than the end of 2007."

Ultimately, though the constitution is far from perfect, Galbraith finds it is Iraq's best chance at avoiding civil war:

"The strongest argument for the new constitution is that it could avoid civil war. But it has three other virtues: (1) it may hold the country together, (2) it limits Iranian domination to the southern half of the country, and (3) it provides for a more workable military strategy than the one to which the US is now committed."

The issue then becomes one of acceptance. If the current constitution is not accepted, Galbraith feels there will not be another, and in all liklihood Iraq will descend into civil war.

I find his article to be detailed and persuasive, and it's worth reading in full if you have a chance.