Get unlimited digital access to $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Chaos in Baghdad [Editorial]

Just when it seemed the situation in Iraq couldn't get any worse, the government moved a step closer to collapsing into chaos on Sunday when its president, Fuad Masum, formally nominated a candidate to replace the country's authoritarian prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, in an effort to break the political paralysis gripping the country since parliamentary elections in April. From there, things went straight downhill.

President Masum named Haider Abadi, a member of Mr. Maliki's own Shiite Islamist Dawa Party, as the next prime minister, urging him to forge a broad coalition government to unify the country against Sunni extremists who have taken over large swaths of Iraq in recent weeks and are threatening to march on the capital. But late that evening Mr. Maliki defiantly rejected the president's call to step down and ordered tanks and special forces troops to take up positions around the Iraqi seat of government in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone. The move has every appearance of being a coup d'etat, with Mr. Maliki in the role of former dictator Saddam Hussein attempting to rule the nation by force.

The chaos among Iraq's governing elites could hardly come at a more inopportune time. In recent weeks, fighters from the radical Islamic State of Iraq and Syria have overrun large swaths of the country in a drive to create a cross-border Islamic state. They have already captured the city of Mosul in the north as well as two crucial dams that supply much of country's water and electricity, and now they are threatening the semiautonomous Kurdish region around Irbil. Unless the government in Baghdad can rally around a leader capable of persuading all of Iraq's ethnic and sectarian communities to rise up against ISIS, the nation could cease to exist as we know it.

Mr. Maliki is the last person to do that job, however. He is singularly unsuited to forging the kind of broad national unity government needed to check the insurgents' advance and instead has proven to be a polarizing, divisive figure who has alienated Iraq's Sunni minority by arresting and torturing their leaders and marginalizing Iraqi Kurds by refusing them a fair share of the country's oil wealth.

Last week President Barack Obama authorized American airstrikes against ISIS forces closing in on Irbil and airdrops of humanitarian aid to tens of thousands of Yasidis, an ancient Kurdish religious and ethnic group, trapped on a mountain after fleeing the militants' advance. While the airstrikes appear to have allowed the Kurds' Peshmerga militia to regain some of the ground lost to ISIS, their effect may be only to delay the militants' advance. Meanwhile, reports that some Yasidis have taken advantage of the U.S. air campaign to escape into neighboring Syria may also represent only a temporary setback for the insurgents.

Given the gravity of the threats facing the country, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has warned Mr. Maliki not to try to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power to a new government headed by Mr. Abadi. But U.S. options for enforcing that message are limited. During his eight years in power, Mr. Maliki consolidated his control over the Iraqi military and police forces and created special operations units loyal to him alone rather than to the government.

If Mr. Maliki does decide to hang tough, his rule conceivably could be challenged by militias of rival Shiite political parties and others who have lost confidence in his ability to lead the country, including even members of his own party such as Mr. Abadi. Even Iran, which backed Mr. Maliki during his rise to power, now believes he has become such a toxic figure that it will be impossible for him to rally the nation's defenses. It cannot welcome a power struggle in Baghdad that devolved into civil war between pro- and anti-Maliki militias, leaving the country ungovernable and easy prey for an ISIS thrust into the capital.

While President Obama warned last week that the limited airstrikes and aid drops begun Friday could last many months, it seems the U.S. has yet to settle on a long-term strategy to keep Iraq from falling apart. Mr. Maliki is clearly an obstacle to uniting the country in its own defense, but despite the frustration that has produced in Washington it's far from obvious that any other Iraqi leader, including Mr. Abadi, would be much better at this point. Members of Iraq's corrupt political elite are notoriously far more obsessed with accumulating power and wealth for themselves than with safeguarding the future of their country.

That's why President Obama is right to view any U.S. intervention there cautiously. Ultimately America can't fix the dysfunctional Iraqi political culture that produced the situation in which the country now finds itself. We can support leaders who are willing to reach out to all Iraq's sectarian and ethnic communities, and give groups like the Kurds, who have long been loyal U.S. allies, access to the weapons and intelligence that allow them to defend themselves. But ultimately it's going to be up to Iraqis to make the hard choices needed to keep their country together. Until they do, the U.S. is better off sticking to the limited role outlined by the administration so far.

To respond to this editorial, send an email to Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Terrorism and Islam
    Terrorism and Islam

    Recently, a Sun poll asked readers whether "avoiding the phrase 'Islamic extremism' when referring to certain terrorist groups take[s] away their power as religious leaders, as the president contends?" (Feb. 19).

  • Confronting terrorism requires force
    Confronting terrorism requires force

    Regarding Barbara Risacher's recent letter on the war on terror, the least attractive option is to fail to respond forcibly to terror — a view the writer apparently favors ("New thinking in war on terror," Feb. 26).

  • Obama fails to recognize Muslim terrorist threat
    Obama fails to recognize Muslim terrorist threat

    I could care less what the global war on terrorism is called ("Not a holy war," Feb. 20). But two thoughts come to mind.

  • Islam is a religion of peace
    Islam is a religion of peace

    As an Ahmad Muslim, I believe Islam condemns terrorism and that there is no room for any violence in the name of blasphemy. The Qur'an constantly exhorts people to think while also telling Muslims to ignore the ignorant and provocative, not harm them.

  • Our real Mideast problem: Support for despots
    Our real Mideast problem: Support for despots

    I agree with both presidents Obama and Bush that the U.S. is not engaged in a war against Islam and that the Islamic State, or ISIS, does not represent a legitimate interpretation of that religion ("Not a holy war," Feb. 20).

  • Obama not standing up to terrorists
    Obama not standing up to terrorists

    I am a committed U.S. citizen who loves his country, a former U.S. Marine and a participating Jew, but I am currently feeling some concern and fear. I strongly believe that when leadership loses the respect and trust of the majority, it's time to re-evaluate or step aside. I believe that we...

  • With ISIS, give peace a chance
    With ISIS, give peace a chance

    Finding a president asking Congress for permission to go to war is about as rare as finding a liberal Republican. So it was a surprise to read that President Obama has formally asked Congress to authorize military operations against the Islamic State ("Obama seeks war powers," Feb. 12).

  • Oversight in the ISIS campaign
    Oversight in the ISIS campaign

    President Barack Obama's decision to ask Congress to formally authorize the use of force against the Islamic State, or ISIS, under the War Powers Act sparked the predictable partisan reactions, with Democrats complaining the proposed authority is too broad and Republicans fretting that there...