PTB vs. PTA Smackdown: Some Sunday Reading
Back on June 23, a guest poster on Abu Aardvark (now revealed to be Sam Parker at the United States Institute of Peace) usefully framed Iraq's central political cleavage as a clash between the "Powers That Be" (PTB: Dawa, ISCI/Badr, IIP, the Kurds) and the "Powers That Aren't" (PTA: Sahwa/tribes/SoIs, Sadrists, independents, secularists, etc.). This paradigm overlaps with, but greatly complicates, the standard Shia vs. Sunni and Arab vs. Kurd dichotomies typically used to define ongoing communal struggle in Iraq. Based on discussions with U.S. commanders, diplomats, Iraqi politicians, and Iraqi citizens during Dr. iRack's recent Iraq excursion, and emerging shenanigans by the PTBs, Dr. iRack thinks Parker is exactly right.
For readers interested in exploring this issue further, Dr. iRack recommends a few recent articles:
1. Reidar Visser's excellent discussion of the Kirkuk issue, provincial elections, and the PTB/PTA paradigm.
2. Michael Gordon's NYT Magazine article on the PTB/PTA clash within the Shia community.
3. A very good WaPo piece by Sudarsan Raghavan and Ernesto Londono on how the PTB/PTA conflict plays out regionally across Iraq.
The security improvements in Iraq are real but reversible. They cannot be sustained if the PTBs lock the PTAs out of politics. Period.
42 comments:
It's kinda sad how if Maliki weren't as pigheaded and greedy, we could have some real gains. Oh, well. I'm not sure I expected much better out of politicians.
Dr. iRack
I was quite interested by your phraseology: Based on discussions with U.S. commanders, diplomats, Iraqi politicians, and Iraqi citizens.
Very curious, your order of phraseology. Could it be that really nearly all you met were Americans, who are known for their own special point of view? (That was my experience when I was dealing with Bremer's crowd). And that you only met one or two Iraqis.
After reading Colin Krahl's briefing on his visit, It is 100% clear that the Americans in the Green Zone are living in cloud cuckoo land.
How about a few details to back your assertions?
I failed to see the link to your Aug 7 piece, but I change nothing. The only citations of Iraqis are from the NYT.
Green Zone Americans might as well be watching Iraq from Helsinki. Iraqis have become sophisticated at peddling their agendas to gullible, culturally-obtuse Americans of the cut of Dr. iRack. We saw this all over the Middle East. The only difference is that Iraq is sizing up to be the region's most authentic democracy and that means that the grade of politics will be higher that anything else the likes of Dr. iRack have been exposed to.
Sam Parker "is a fluent reader of Arabic" according to his profile. Which means that he can't really speak the language and use it to communicate with Iraqis. He may get the basics but not the nuances that are the bread and butter of politics. Why should we rely on Sam Parker when trying to understand what Iraqis are saying?
That said, the term "the powers that be" is really, really silly.
Does Kahl know any Arabic?
Is Dr. iRack proficient in Arabic? Or does he practice his Urdu during his brief stop-overs at the Green Zone?
Even if Dr. iRack was fluent in Arabic - which he has said before, he isn't - his visits are coordinated by and conducted with the American military, I assume. (Or does he private military companies - and is Dr. iRack Peter Singer in disguise!) That said, just because Dr. iRack doesn't speak Arabic, and is dependent on the US military, doesn't mean he's wrong (enough double negatives?). It does mean he has some selection bias issues he might care to address on this blog (or not), or in other venues (or not).
The more interesting question, and the one I'd like to ask, is: what theoretical framework, if any, is Dr. iRack deriving his "powers that be/aren't" from? What empirical cases suggest these dynamics play themselves out? Is this an example of Ollivant's observation in Perspectives on Politics that Iraq is well-viewed as a country transitioning from authoritarianism? Is this Huntingtonian - inadequate institutionalization of the populace's political demands leads to weak states - or some other concept?
To the 'mamao' at August 17, 2008 10:52 AM:
I doubt you can question Reidar Visser's credentials.
just because Dr. iRack doesn't speak Arabic, and is dependent on the US military, doesn't mean he's wrong
You're right in theory, anon; it's just like all those histories of wars which only use the sources from one side.
The point I was making is that what we are being presented with here, is not, in fact, analysis, but a line being put over by the Americans in the Green Zone, which they would like us to believe.
It's the same story, Sam Parker, Colin Krahl, Dr iRack.
Playing up the divisions in Iraq, as the issue of "PTB vs PTA" attempts to do, is a means of diverting attention from something else, presumably what Krahl called Maliki's "overconfidence".
How can Dr iRack distinguish the truth if he only talks to Americans?
Actually Visser (a self-proclaimed leftist socialist) has been consistently wrong on Basra and the Mahdi Army. But that doesn't stop him from confidently marching on to get Kirkuk wrong too. Who's going to call him out on it? No one, because no one is interested in what's going on in Iraq; Iraq is just a prop for the Obama Nation.
a self-proclaimed leftist socialist? Does that disqualify him? You sound like an ad hominem bullshitter to me.
Who's going to call him out on it?
Certainly not you because you apparently don't have a clue. Visser knows a lot more than certain 'Americans' that have been involved in running things over there.
I doubt you can question Reidar Visser's credentials.
Nobody is going to question Visser's competence as a scholar or linguistically. However, at the time I met him a couple of years ago, he had never been to Iraq (perhaps he has since then). A knowledge somewhat theoretical then.
I thought he was bit off-line believing the "PTB vs PTA" stuff, particularly as his source was a couple of months old, before the publication of the original SOFA conditions - that's the big divide point in current Iraqi politics, when things changed a lot. Maybe even Dr iRack's visit was before then (he'll have to tell us).
By the way, re anon at 1:32, Visser's analysis on Kirkuk looks ok to me. as to what will happen who knows?
Separate from all the attacks on peoples' credentials from anonymous commentators who, by definition, have unspecified credentials, there is a curious lack of substantive critique.
Which aspect of the analysis is wrong?
What aspect of Iraqi politics is being ignored or mischaracterized?
Are there no Iraqi divisions? Are they all a fictional creation?
Or are there indeed important divisions, but people who make the PTB/PTA distinction are identifying the wrong ones?
Is my assessment too pessimistic or not pessimistic enough?
In general, it would help facilitate a civil, productive debate if folks in the comment stream made, you know, actual arguments. No?
And, for the record, most of Dr. iRack's visit was not in the Green Zone.
Iraq is sizing up to be the region's most authentic democracy and that means that the grade of politics will be higher that anything else the likes of Dr. iRack have been exposed to.
oh my. we really don't want to discuss the topic do we? i am curious, exactly how radical is it to consider a topic presupposing there are 'powers' that exist in iraqs government, along w/'powers' that exist outside the government vying for influence. from the pushback, very radical indeed it seems. maybe because it implies iraq is less than a democracy? or that the government is not a reliable reflection of the will of the people?
oh my, what other country does that remind us of?
sorry, it seems we were cross posting dr irak.
fascinating: Given this and a couple of other threads, Id say Abu M has been put on some neo-con troll list. Ah, soon we will have the swiftboating of Abu M-staff.
Get ready for some standard troll attacks, they go like this: One writer makes what seems like normal polite arguments, yet uses lots of given emic keywords (Obama as "far left", Iraq = "authentic democracy", etc.) This is called establishing a memetic resonance, defining the premises. Then comes a lot of personal attacks on the authorities of the opposition, a la Roves dictum of attacking the strengths. Then the polite writer distances himself from the most extreme of the haters, adding "..but they have a point".
And all the while they try to avoid discussing the subjects, or come with substansive critiscisms or constructive evaluation. Its always negative and disruptive. ANd it was all the fault of somebody else. Always. Yawn.
Dr iRack
there is a curious lack of substantive critique.
That sort of counter-attack is typical of someone who does not wish to answer. I asked you specifically to come up with some backup, to detail your assertions. You did not do it.
I maintain that you got your "analysis" direct from American officials in the Green Zone. You haven't denied it. They have good reason right now to want to construct a story. Those ol' SOFA negotiations aren't going too well.
Let's hear all about the long evenings you spent dining with the Iraqi pols, all the tea you drank with the man in the street, your intimate knowledge of the Baghdad suqs. How are the shops doing in Rashid Street? What about the farmers round Diwaniyya (I used to know a lot of that sort of people)
I don't think you can do it, Dr iRack. Tell me about riding in Marine helicopters, no problem. Tell me about what Iraqis are actually thinking, no way.
> They cannot be sustained if the PTBs lock the PTAs out of politics. Period.
An assuredly true statement, but who asked the sunni's to boycott the elections? wasn't us, or the shiites or kurds..
not that makes any of it right, but it does help explain the situation they're in now..
they weren't locked out, they didn't bother opening the box.
alex: So basically, you are saying that nobody who doesnt spend lots of quality time wth Iraqi pols and who has an intimate knowledge of the Baghdad bazaars are not allowed to make analysis based on facts on the ground as percieved by various channels of information? Doesnt this more or less disqualify the whole of the universe outside the Iraqi populace these days? Your critiscism is blatantly negative and meant to disqualify the arguments of your opposition through personal attacks. How epublican of ya, sir.
I miss SNLI.
2
Honestly Dr Irak - would you refer the Republicans in congress as the "powers that Be"?
This is so gauche and Americo-entric. The level of ignorance about the Iraqi political system seems abysmally low.
Can you at lease use the terminology "Government" and "Opposition" when referring to the (elected) Iraqi Government and those who are opposing its policies so there can be a grown up discussion?
"How are the shops doing in Rashid Street? What about the farmers round Diwaniyya (I used to know a lot of that sort of people)"
Alex
since you seemed to be all the rage with Iraqi pols why don't you give us your take on things, or maybe some experieces or credentials rather than spewing your forth BS
fnord
you're quite incorrect. I'm a socialist.
my criticism is quite specific: I think Dr i was fed a story by US officials in the Green Zone, in order to divert attention from the big problem for them right now, that is the near failure of the SOFA negotiations.
I'm sure there is continued inter-party conflict. A little vote-rigging? I'm sure they do. The Republicans do it too, maybe the Democrats as well. It has not yet brought down the United States; near, maybe you will argue.
It's no good going on about trivial issues, when the big one is not being addressed (and absolutely no-one is touching it): what is the politics behind Maliki's continued refusal to sign the SOFA?
That kind of analysis would be extremely helpful, but I am 100% certain that the US authorities in the Green Zone do not want Dr iRack touching it. Much better to suggest there are continued splits among Iraqis, Sadr is on his way down, etc.
“Sam Parker 'is a fluent reader of Arabic' according to his profile. Which means that he can't really speak the language and use it to communicate with Iraqis.”
Parker has done television shows in Arabic.
“Actually Visser (a self-proclaimed leftist socialist) has been consistently wrong on Basra and the Mahdi Army.”
Visser has for several years highlighted the two trends that remain dominant in the south today: Basra regionalism and Iraqi nationalism.
My credentials? First visit to Iraq in 1977. Two books about Iraq published. I'm rushing to finish the manuscript of the third. but not in the field of politics. That enough for you?
Anyway, I haven't any more time now.
Iraq is just a prop for the Obama Nation.
fnord, i don't know if you're familiar w/the swiftboaters new book. this is a sure sign the ones you mentioned are here.
who asked the sunnis to boycott the elections? wasn't us, or the shiites or kurds..
nobody had to ask them to boycott. after a little genocide stacking the decks against them why should they participate in an election supervised by an invading force. it was a completely logical response.
They cannot be sustained if the PTBs lock the PTAs out of politics.
a logical response to this statement of fact would be to go back a few years and justify the situation because the sunnis did not participate in the last election? please.
we have supported, created and empowered a ptb whose control we cannot sustain. it is now to our benefit to buffer this power by empowering others who may carry out our objectives. only there is no guarentee those objectives will be carried out by the inclusion of the others.
the US is not a benign force promoting democracy in iraq for there are lines that democracy cannot cross. some spelled out in the sofa, mou, and bearing point desgned constitution. iraqis can't democratically decide to have a socialist form of economy. they cannot deny the US basing rights. they obviously cannot democratically elect sadr. these are just examples of things iraqis can't democratically do. a nationalist oil ministry? please. no privatization of iraqs resources? please.
This paradigm overlaps with, but greatly complicates, the standard Shia vs. Sunni and Arab vs. Kurd dichotomies typically used to define ongoing communal struggle in Iraq.
the tactic of dividing people by sect was implemented at the beginning by the invader. it made it simpler for the american public to comprehend the slaughter. it also reinforced the meme of islaofacsim which is an intgral part of the US/IS propaganda machine, especially in the upcoming election (notice mcCains answer last night regarding 'evil'. islam!) the overwhelming message the ptb DO NOT want people to comprehend about divisions is the nationalist vs federalist. the divide iraq group (who would end up w/the oil spoils, privatized naturally) vs the iraq as a whole, socialist crowd.
politics must be visualized as friction of fanatical religious characters, as long as those fanatics aren't on 'our side' which viola! they are!
so we have the ptb, the dividers (parker callsunity means every faction gets its piece of the pie. ) vs the nationalists. (who rightly understand a divided iraq is a weaker iraq). saddam was secular as was the government prior to invasion. so what we want is a secular government willing to play economic ball and divide iraq into manageable sections that still creates the image of democracy.
here's where i think parker is mistaken
the stronger the PTB get, the Iraqi people will look past the dubious makeup of the government and just be happy that the state has returned and there's a modicum of law and order. At least for a while, and at least as long as the government is rich, at least as long as the US is there to back it up, at least as long as the PTB stay united. Hardly a recipe for a stable political order, but one that will work for the time being.
what about those millions of refugees. are they really going to be welcomed home. when you strip a society of the upper class, the doctors and educators etc, do you really think they ill be welcomed back. this situation of 'stability' cannot sustain itself as long as there is even a perceived threat of people more competent to run the government/security than the people empowered by the invader.
what is the politics behind Maliki's continued refusal to sign the SOFA?
what is the politics behind the invaders continued demand they sign the SOFA?
this would be much more interesting imho
"fnord", haven't you been telling people that you're a Norwegian anarchist-syndicalist, or whatever that looney fringe group you identify with is called?
As for the poster who claims that the Sunnis were subjected to genocide, I wonder if you lay the blame on the Marines, like so many here do?
Can you at lease use the terminology "Government" and "Opposition" when referring to the (elected) Iraqi Government and those who are opposing its policies so there can be a grown up discussion?
Can you at lease use the terminology "Puppet" and "Opposition" when referring to the (election rigged)so called Iraqi 'Government' and those who are opposing its policies so there can be a grown up discussion?
My credentials? First visit to Iraq in 1976. Three books about Iraq published. I'm rushing to finish the manuscript of the fourth. but not in the field of politics. That enough for you?
plus, i'm brilliant, my dog is bigger than yours and wins trophies, and i dine w/the prime minister.
I wonder if you lay the blame on the Marines
oh please! we have contractors to do our dirty work. besides, why should we dirty our pretty gloves when we can simply train/support/look the other way when hakim/badr can do it for us?
don't be such a drama queen w/your accusations. you don't really think the marines get the full skinny on the plot do you? for heavens sakes.
2
Oh dear, I got confused, the Repubs would be the "Powers that Aren't" in the congress, wouldn't they? But doesn't the US constitution have elaborate checks balances on power, rather as the Iraqi constitution does? So nothing is ever as it seems? Could the Repubs and Dems be called "PTA's um, er Bs" - or maybe something new like HWPs, ie, "half way powers" or ATTs, ie "Almost There Theres".
Anyway, Iraq is a parliamentary democracy, a system about which US pundits do not seem very familiar. Government and Opposition are the terms, gentlemen.
speaking of looney fringes, did anybody see michael o'hanlon on fox this morning?
or william the bloody
“…if countries don’t have confidence in our ability to help them, it’s going to be a much more dangerous world.”
lol
the site crooks and liars keeps track of the looney fringe, a very amusing site. good for morning comedy, especially on sundays as the pundits are always stacked w/loons.
Oh dear, I got confused, the Repubs would be the "Powers that Aren't" in the congress
you're seriously missing the boat w/your dem/republican ptb meme daarlin'. it's the corporation running the globe. they have their tentacles in both parties to continue their agenda.
doesn't the US constitution have elaborate checks balances on power
have you been hiding under a rock for the last few years? didn't you know our constituion has been thrashed. what oversite? lol. maybe you missed all those signing atatements. we now have a (couch) 'strengthened' executive branch. screw congress! screw the people!rather as the Iraqi constitution lol
fnord: "I miss SNLII"
Truer words were never spoken. I hope things will calm down once this new generation of readers comes to terms with the fact that this ain't blackfive (thank God.)
First of all: Apologies Alex for lumping you in with the repubs. Your point is interesting, and valid to an extent, as is the question youre raising. Wich doesnt really explain the hostile tone towards dr. Irack, nor the lack of argumentative substance in your theory that the good dr. is a mouthpiece. Its funny to see a man being accused by both republicans and socialists of being a propaganda-tool.
I think, from what little I know of Iraq through my Iraqi refugee contacts, that the analysis of Iraqi society must include at least four levels: Religion, geographic belonging, familiar bonds/clan/tribe and class. In addition comes the new element of militia-alliances and criminal alliances, it seems to me that we are seeing the emergence of a quwam/patronage system like in AFghanistan. I think that as a working hypothesis, as a gross oversimplification, the PTB vs PTA analysis is useful, as long as you add the caveat of this underlying complexity. For Iraq experts its propably maddeningly simplified, for people selling talking points to politicans who just want to go home and snort coke on the yacht its propably a great tool.
ANd, to the lad who asked if I fault the marines for genocide and was/is a anarcho-syndicalist. No, I do not fault the Marines for genocide (a word wich is rapidly loosing its meaning as a term) though I do think that during the first two-three years the US forces as a whole allowed a ethnic and political cleansing by some of the shia militias that in some places comes very close to the legal definition of genocide. I do blame 82 Airborne for Fallujah, however, wich was Alamo for the Anbar tribes.
ANd as for being a anarcho-syndicalist? Yes sir, proud to say so, sir. We have a 100 year old (almost) union in Sweden with many 1000 members, so a loony fringe group is a bit over the top. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Sveriges_Arbetares_Centralorganisation).
To Dr. iRack
أم محمد سيدة كبيرة في السنّ من سكنة شارع حيفا في بغداد. تقول هذه السيدة: (استيقظنا في صباح أحد الأيام على صوت مكبرات الصوت تهدد بأن كل من يتستر على الإرهابين يكون إرهابياً..! المكبرات كانت لقوات الاحتلال والحرس الحكومي ومغاوير الشرطة بعد أن ملؤوا الشوارع طبعاً، وطُوّقت المنطقة من كل الجهات ولأيام طويلة، وبدأت الحملة الأمنية في قتل واعتقال الشباب من قبل قوات الاحتلال أو تسليمهم إلى مغاوير الشرطة أو الحرس الحكومي .
وكان كل السكان، بما فيهم أنا، عاجزين عن حماية أبنائهم لأنهم عرضة للقتل والاعتقال، لأن كل شاب في شارع حيفا، بنظر تلك القوات، هو (إرهابي)!!. وقد استطاع بعض الشباب الخروج، وعلق البعض الآخر في المنطقة لأن القوات سارعت إلى إغلاق كل المنافذ عدا منافذ الميليشيات.
في هذه الأيام السوداء كانت الأسرة في المنزل تجتمع في غرفة واحدة حالها حال جميع الأسر في شارع حيفا, وكنا ننام في غرفة واحدة لئلا تأتي قوات الاحتلال وتعتقل ولدي (محمد)، وبالفعل سمعنا عند الفجر انفجاراً قوياً هزَّ أركان بيتنا، وامتلأ بالدخان..!
وإذا بقوات الاحتلال تقف أمامنا في الغرفة، فتقدم أحد هؤلاء المجرمين وسحب (محمد) من فراشه، وحين حاولتُ أن أخبرهم بأن لا صلة له بأحد دفعني من صدري وجرّ ولدي أمام باب البيت، وهناك نفّذوا فيه حكم الإعدام وهم يتضاحكون والحرس ومغاويره يتفرجون معهم. ثم قال أحدهم: "هذا مصير الإرهابيين والصداميين..!"، وتركوه بعد لحظات جثة بلا حراك. حين أطلقوا النار عليه سقطتُ مغشياً عليّ، لكن بعدها أفقتُ وكان لساني ثقيلاً جداً، ويدي لم تتحرك، وما زلت أعاني منها لكني حاولت أن أتماسك لأني أم لستّ بنات وولد شاب في نهاية العشرينات هو (محمد) .
لم يكتفوا بمنعنا من سحب جثة (محمد) إلى داخل المنزل بعد أن قتلته القوات الحكومية، بل أصدرت أمراً ببقائها في الشارع وإطلاق النار على كل من يقترب منها، وبقيت جالسة في الشباك، بالرغم من سوء حالتي الصحية، أحرس جسد ولدي الحبيب لثلاثة أيام بطولها وعيني لم تفارقه أبداً لأني كنت أخشى أن تلتهمه الكلاب كما فعلت بابن جارنا.
وفي اليوم الرابع سمحوا لنا بإدخال الجثة إلى المنزل، وحين أخبرتهم بأني سأقيم عليهم دعوى قضائية ضحك الأمريكي مع المترجم وقال: (نحن فوق القانون. نفعل ما نشاء) إذا كان الظالم فوق القانون إذن فلا حقوق للمظلومين لأن دماءهم رخيصة جداً.!؟
لم أنسَ ذلك اليوم المشؤوم الذي راح فيه ولدي ضحية بلا سبب وهو المعيل الوحيد للأسرة، وها أنا امرأة عجوز معدمة بلا معيل وستّ بنات بحاجة إلى من يرعى مصالحهن ويأتيهن بلقمة العيش. عجوز تشكو من القلة بعد كل هذه السنين وبقلب مشروخ ثكلت فلذت كبدها بسبب حقد المحتل. إنني أقترب من الموت كل يوم، وسأترك خلفي بناتي بلا أخ يرعى مصالحهن ويسند ظهورهن. سأموت وقلبي غير مطمئن عليهن. لو كنت أعرف أن هذا المصير هو ما كان ينتظرني وينتظر ولدي وبناتي لما تزوجت وأنجبت أصلاً!!).
الأسماء والعناوين محفوظة لدينا حرصاً على أمن وسلامة العوائل .
Fnord,
Tangent to the thread, but would you consider that if you look at companies like amazon.com...many of the central arguments of anarcho-syndacalism have been adapted by companies like it?
Not all.
It would seem that many US units do as well - ref "Imperial Grunts".
Of course they are fighting an uphill battle against the puzzle palace, et al.
elf: Agreed, the squad is the basic unit in any anarcho-syndicalist organization. Or the work-team, where the foreman/sergeant holds position because of the respect of the other members. The internet is/was also a very anarchistic structure, as the old cyber-punks (of wich I am one) spent a lot of time going on about. Electronic Frontier Foundation is a very interesting org.
The best image of a anarcho-syndical army would propably be one where the sergeants came together at mobilization time and elected the general for the campaign based on merit, education and flat democracy. Its a pipedream in large structures, sure, but not the worst pipedream to live by. And it functions surprisingly well in smaller ones.
Actually, up until WWI the militas in the US (which formed the bulk of the Land Forces) often did elect their officers, and it worked.
Now not to be irreverant, but someone tell me please that we haven't got the SOI wearing safety belts?!??
elf: You might wish to brush up on the case of Sancho and Vancetti and the structures they were part of for more info into the US anarcho-syndical tradition... Or read Vonneguts "God bless you mr. Rosewater" or "Hocus Pocus" for some more sympathic focus on this tradition ;-)
Fnord,
K!
"I miss SNLII"
I'm not prone to religious remarks, but amen, brother.
Post a Comment