Obama faces regional challenges more complex than boots on the ground.
On the day of our Lord, the 7th of November, 2008, Commander of the Faithful Abu ‘Umar Al-Baghdadi—the Grand Emir of Al-Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq—made an offer to the soon-to-be leader of the free (Christian) world: “Convert (or reconvert) to Islam, maintain pre-WWII neutrality, and we shall spare your people, and peace shall reign in the universe. Hell, we’ll even let you have our oil at reasonable prices!”
I’m paraphrasing Al-Baghdadi’s 22-minute audio message, but that was the gist of his offer to the incoming Commander in Chief.
Al-Baghdadi was probably hoping that Barack Hussein Obama, who was born to a SunniMuslim father, and so, by definition, was born Muslim before being converted involuntarily to Christianity by his mother at age two, still has enough Muslim in him to sympathize with the Muslim cause as per Al-Qaeda’s perverted version. (You’d think that Obama’s choice of Rahm Emanuel, the son of an Israeli Jew, to be White House chief of staff would put that notion to sleep.)
Obama can declare an end to the war in Iraq, but he knows he cannot end the US’s wider commitment to security in the Gulf.
The offer Al-Baghdadi made might have carried some weight had it been made in 2006, when Iraq looked like it was going to hell in a handbasket, or even in 2004, when Al-Qaeda controlled much of the coveted dominion of the Anbar province.
Now, though, Al-Qaeda no longer controls anything in Iraq. Its sporadic attacks only target unarmed innocent civilians, while US military casualties are at the lowest level since the war started in 2003. The Sunni Al-Baghdadi’s belated offer might have been heeded better had it been directed at those who helped “the Great Satan” crush Al-Qaeda’s multi-national freelancers in Iraq: the Shiia-dominated Iraqi government and—most surprisingly—the Grand Ayatollahs of Iran.
Not that he’d get very far with them. Although it has gone largely unnoticed, Iran ordered its militias in Iraq to stop attacking American troops shortly after the US all but cleared Iran of accusations it was developing nuclear weapons in its December, 2007 National Intelligence Estimate. That was part of what I believe was a grand bargain, struck between the Bush administration and the mullahs of Iran, that freed up US troops to crush Al-Qaeda.
But will Obama stick to the secret deal that may have been made by his predecessor? Or will Iran shift course and renew its attacks on US troops, making it more and more difficult for Obama to order a drawdown of American forces without it looking like surrender?
Tracy Quan's latest novel is Diary of a Jetsetting Call Girl, set in Provence and praised in The Nation as a "deft account of occupational rigors and anxieties before the crash." Tracy's debut, Diary of a Manhattan Call Girl, and the sequel, Diary of a Married Call Girl, are international bestsellers. A regular columnist for The Guardian, she has written for many publications including Cosmopolitan, The Financial Times, and The New York Times.
Joe Mathews is a journalist, an Irvine senior fellow at the New America Foundation, and a contributing writer at the Los Angeles Times. He previously served as Justice Department reporter for the Wall Street Journal and as a city desk reporter at the Baltimore Sun. He is the author of The People’s Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy.
Gerald Posner is the award-winning author of 10 investigative nonfiction bestsellers, ranging from political assassinations, to Nazi war criminals, to 9/11, to terrorism (www.posner.com). Posner lives in Miami Beach with his wife, the author Trisha Posner.
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Renata Espinosa is the New York editor of Fashion Wire Daily. She is also the co-founder of impressionistic fashion and art blog TheNuNu and a sometimes backup dancer for "The Anna Copa Cabanna Show."
Amanda Fortini has written for The New Yorker, Slate, Elle, and New York, among other publications. She lives in Los Angeles.
Salameh Nematt is the international editor of The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
Salameh Nematt is the international editor of The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
Salameh Nematt is the international editor of The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
Salameh Nematt is the international editor of The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
I think Obama "Needs to bust a cap in that ass"! I can't wait to see the 1st round of "Obama vs Osama" ! Hey Osama them 72 virgins are waiting and guess what? They are butt ugly and dumb as hell ! R.I.P Hail Obama
"Hail Obama". You libs crack me up. You can't worship a creator but you'll bow down to a one year rookie senator. Move to China and take all your friends with you.
@tjphilly. You conservatives crack me up. You still see the world in a Manichaean light, where all people are one type or another. You refuse to look at the Constitution's actual words and see it as a new Bible. Revolt and dissent were the true aims of the Founders, and they said as such, Jefferson going so far as to say that it's the duty of all true patriots to speak up..
I think you're the one who likes the idea of a communist paradise more. Or maybe fascist would be closer . . .
I am having trouble following a central thesis in this essay. The writer is all of the place. It seems that Mr. Nematt makes some salient points, but they are lost in the confusion of the writing. Better editing, please.
Where did my comment go?
"The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.
$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$540 billion: Annual U.S. Defense Budget."
Could negotiation with Iran lead to a more stable & manageable situation for the US? Relations with Iran would look like the old Cold War standoff, but that's a good thing. Remember that the Soviet Union's defeat in Afghanistan & subsequent collapse was what destabilized the region in the first place. It may be better to negotiate with one party, however they may posture and puff, than be constantly pestered with myriad warring factions.
So our war in Iraq was a liberation of the Iraqi people... and we are now an allied force aiding their battle against Iran - making Iran our greatest enemy in the process?
Funny. I was pretty sure it was an invasion to remove one tyrannical system and replace it with another tyrannical system... and an occupation to insure it's success.
So which is right?
If Iraq was majority Shiite, Then wouldn't a liberation mean that we would have helped the Shiites take power... and they would have allied with Iran??
I think so. And ya know what else? They would have allied with us - making Iran our ally in the process.
Then we could have looked like liberators in the eyes of the Muslims. And being friends with Israel... we might have been able to bring those two together. But at the least, we would be at peace with the world.
The conversation is confused by the fact that we assume religion defines the main factions. As the writer has pointed out cogently in the summation, religion is not the central issue, but tribal and military power distribution in the region. This fault line was drawn after WWII when the West arbitrarily decided to lump often violently opposed tribal groups into one "nation-state" in order to satisfy the post-colonial perrogatives of the US, Europe and Russia.
Remove the lensing of religious affiliation and things fall into place more simply.
Our only interest in the region is oil. The only interest the Middle East has in us is our money and popular culture. The only reason we are even discussing this is because of our addiction to foreign power sources. It's like a junkie arguing about how to make his drug pushers get along.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.