Home > Politics, News & Issues > International Politics > War & Peace
Created on: May 01, 2006 Last Updated: April 19, 2007
As a soldier on my third deployment, I see the situation in Iraq from a different perspective. Every day I meet people that beg us not to leave their country, and every day I hear or see violence, insurgents against us, and insurgents against the people of Iraq. The largest problem here is the division among the people. There are three distinct factions: Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, and Kurds. These three have very little in common, and whenever violence occurs, the radicals of each group attack, kidnap and kill members of the other two groups. Therefore, civil war is always a couple mosque bombings away. This is not a temporary problem. These factions have oppressed each other since they first existed, hundreds of years ago. Even in a "unified government", the jobs go to the relatives of those in power, and loyalty belongs to the politician's faction. So here is the ANSWER:
Divide Iraq into three states, or -stans (-stan meaning "land of"):
Sunnistan, Shiastan, and Kurdistan. The Kurds have wanted this for a long time, the problem has been that there are unevenly distributed resources throughout the country, and the Kurds' idea of a separation would land them with a large part of the oil, and therefore the money. The resources would have to be divided equally between the three factions, and made a part of their state. Baghdad itself could be split in two, between the Sunnis and the Shia. Kurds apparently have little interest in the city. This is the only way that these three factions, who have so little in common, can live in the same territory at peace with one another. If violence were to rise, after the US has left the country, the stans can close their borders, enforce a curfew, and there will be peace within the states. If a larger country attacks, say Iran, the states can become unified for the duration of the war, sending soldiers to fight from all stans, answering to a three-part council. When the war is over, the soldiers go back home.
If this solution, or something like it, is not enacted, the result will be an imbalanced government that will always favor one of the three factions and disregard the other two. It is a trait of the people of Iraq that is stronger than instinct. By their method of counting, Iraq is in the year 1427. This is pretty accurate, seeing how their mindset is, still in the Dark Ages.
Learn more about this author, Michael Noyce Merino.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
The "answer" for Iraq
by Eamonn
The very idea that we (Americans) are debating the "answer" for Iraq is both preposterous and at the root of the disastrous
The "answer" for Iraq is simple, complex, and not an answer at all. For the occupying allied forces, the simple thing to
by Joe Dimeck
Prior to 2007, August in Ramadi, Iraq was just another month of Al Qaeda bullying, gunfights, and all the things one would
Vote Iraq Plan B
Regardless of which report you subscribe to, which candidate you fund or which political party you stand
A Plan for Iraq
There may be no sure fire answer to the conflict that is raging in Iraq. The safest bet for the United States
View All Articles on: The "answer" for Iraq
Helium Debate
Cast your vote!
Was the break up of Yugoslavia good or bad for Eastern Europe?
Click for your side.
Featured Partner
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
LEAP has partnered with Helium, giving you the chance to write for a cause. Browse LEAP's featured titles, pick an issue and write! You can also donate your article earnings. Share what you know, learn new perspectives and don...more