The Middle East is NOT going to explode in a Sunni vs Shia war!

[independentpiney]

There seem to be alot of misconceptions floating around in the discussions here recently about the Sunni-Shia division in Islam as a cause for expansion of the Iraq mess into regional war. The prospect of Iraq turning into a proxy war between Shia Iran and Salafist Sunni Saudi Arabia is very real. But just as we are there for control of oil and regional power, that will be the underlying reason for their interference with the country that separates them. Of course the religious card will be played in Iraq, because a Sunni government will align with Saudi Arabia as a Shia one will with Iran.

But Iraq is not a microcosm of the Middle East , and it's religious demographics are not typical of other countries in the region. Not understanding this appears to be the basis of several themes I've seen repeated in a number of posts. One that often crops up is that the Shia in Saudi Arabia may rise up in revolt and overthrow the Saud regime. Since Shia only make up 5% of the Saudi population, that's very unlikely. What the Saud's need to fear is that the Salafist views they've indoctrinated their people with will be turned inward on the corruption of the royal family.

Another misconception is that Syria is a Shia country,apparently because of it's relationship with Iran and support of Hezbollah. Syria is 70% Sunni, 15% Christian, 12% Alawi and 3% Druze. It's a secular Baathist state that brutally represses all Islamic movements, and the Assad family are Druze. It has established a mutual defense pact with Iran because of threats from the U.S. government. It supports Hezbollah because it wants control or influence over Lebanon because it was historically a part of Syria. It's alliances and actions have nothing to do with religion.

Outside of Iran and Iraq, Bahrain and Oman are the only countries with Shia majorities, and Kuwait,Lebanon and Yemen are the only ones where the Shia minority is 30% or more of the population. The Ibn al-Wahhab based Salafism is only dominant in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar and is in opposition to the schools practiced in the other Sunni majority countries.

The political considerations that impact relationships between countries throughout the world also apply in the Middle East. Looking at the situation as black and white. sunni/shia is a mistake.

[lastknowngood]

1. Don't be so sure take a look at the Aisa times articals and learn

a little history
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HL06Ak04.html

there is a good chance if our CIA works at it that we could have a major conflict lasting decades and providing cheep oil to the west in trade for weapons

[independentpiney]

5. You're article backs up my position

That the issues are geopolitical, not religious. And here's a little history for you- The last time a proxy war was fought in the Middle East, in the '60's, the Saudis backed Sunni South Yemen against Shia North Yemen. Who backed North Yemen? Sunni Egypt, which was at that time the other regional power under Nasser, as Iran is now.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Very true

thank you for this excellent explanation. Most Americans don't really understand Islam at all; I understand a little bit, but your post has enlightened me (didn't know about the makeup of Syria). Thank you.

[Selatius]

3. My main concern is mostly with Iran and Turkey, not Syria or Saudi Arabia

If the civil war continues to rage on, there is no doubt that contacts between Arab Shia and Persian Shia will continue to grow, especially when dealing with the Sunni guerrilla fighters. Turkey, on the other hand, is dead-set against seeing the Kurds gain any sort of independence in a civil war. They will invade if Kurdish fighters decide to declare independence if they feel the government in Baghdad is no longer effective.

[independentpiney]

8. I agree, the Turkish- Kurd situation is the 800 lb gorilla nobody

wants to think about. The majority of Kurds live in Turkey , where they are the overwhelming majority in 11 provinces. An autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan will not be allowed by the Turkish government, and if ,or rather when they invade the Turkish Kurd provinces will go into open revolt. Which will then play hell with the EU. It has the potential to turn into a far bloodier and more complex war than what we have now.

[Taxloss]

4. Assad is an Alawite, not Druze ... ?

I'm sure another DUer will correct me if I'm wrong.

The Alawites are quite interesting. They believe that the Prophet was the embodiment of God, much as Christians believe Christ was God personified. Anyway, it's not only a minority view, it's heretical in Islam, which is why Assad over-compensates with a fair amount of pandering to the Sunnis.

This article has more, but is subscription: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n16/rahi01_.html

Otherwise, interesting POV, thanks.

[independentpiney]

6. You may be right, I was going from memory of something I read

about the elder awhile back.

[mike_c]

7. EXCELLENT post-- K&R....

[leveymg]

9. Thanks. Very useful corrective. K&R

[moondust]

10. Where do Iran's ambitions stop?

There seems to be a consensus that Iran's military could defeat SA in a matter of days if not hours. So if the US pulls out of Iraq and SA backs the Sunnis, one would expect that Iran will continue to reinforce al-Sadr. How long and how far does this proxy war extend and what happens if al-Sadr wins? With Hezbollah gaining demanding usurping more power in Lebanon and al-Sadr in Iraq, does Iran continue to flex its newly acquired muscle or simply stop? Is the Iran/SA relationship historically antagonistic?

[annabanana]

11. So. . The Ibn al-Wahhab

(the most radical of the radical Islamists) are only dominant in those countries where we are most entangled financially?

Why do I not find this reassuring?

[DemReadingDU]

12. interesting, thank you