A couple of "moderate" writers in a time of crisis

For pan-Arab writers like Abdulbari Atwan of Al-Quds al-Arabi, there was never any doubt about the nature of Bush-administration policy in Iraq and the whole region. It is anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. But "moderate" Arab writers have traditionally kept open the defence of incompetence or other extenuating circumstances. For one moderate writer, it seems as if something in his way of thinking snapped as a result of the Saddam lynching. Here's Daoud Shiryan writing on the opinions page of the moderate newspaper Al-Hayat yesterday:

Today, after the boasts of Maliki about the execution of Saddam in this barbaric way, and the agreement of the American government to this hanging, in this grotesque way counter to all American and human values, we need to stop talking about the American policy mistakes in Iraq, because what they are doing in that country is in pursuance of an intentional and a filthy plan, [where] they dissolved the Iraqi army, and then it was up to us [Arabs] to find excuses for their policies, undertaken in deliberate ignorance of regional history and Iraqi social structure, and when they permitted the adoption of a constitution that ended the Arab nature of Iraq, we called that democracy, but then came the execution of Saddam, and [finally] it was made clear to us that Washington is acting according to a savagery that is unprecedented, and they are now supporting a gang of Shiites to take the place of the neo-cons in the project that they call the new Iraq...

In other words, says Shiryan, the days when you could argue that the Americans were making mistakes in the region are over. It is an ugly thing to have to admit, but they are clearly acting deliberately, and the days of excusing them for making "mistakes" are over.

Here's another "moderate" writer, the Egyptian Fahmy Howeydi, writing this time in Asharq al-Awsat. He criticizes the lack of meaningful action by moderate Islamic authorities to counter the sectarian violence in Iraq, referring to a statement last week by a group headed by the famous preacher Qaradawi, which called attention in a vague way to the need to do something. But Howeydi says if they aren't going to name names or assign responsibility or take specific actions, then this is an issue that should be taken up by broader regional or international groups like the Organization of the Islamic Conference, or the Arab League. That is his first point. His next points have to do with how Iraq got the way it is; and what needs to be done immediately.
First how the fitna originated. He says his personal orientation had always been that he was Muslim and any Muslim stood in the same relationship to him as any other, regardless of sect, but he continues:

This (non-sectarian) attitude of mine started to change gradually with the advent of sectarian activities in Iraq, and I cannot overlook the fact that the occupation planted the seeds of this fitna when it undertook the formation of the first interim governing council on a sectarian and racial basis, which had he effect of marginalizing Sunni Arabs, and also had the effect of stimulating an extravagant craving on the part of Shiite leaders for ever deeper and broader influence, and a striving for more control of land and wealth, and then they went a step further in proposing the idea of "federalism", which for them meant a 9-province district in the south, where most of the country's oil wealth is located. And in order to implement that, groups affiliated with the so-called death squads used threats to ensure the sectarian "purity" of the areas in question, using methods unprecedented in the history of Iraq, a country where clans and tribes and marraiges were always mixed Sunni and Shia...

In other words, the seeds of fitna were sown by the occupation, which assigned quotas in the initial governing council according to sect and race, and that was what started the process of sectarian competition for influence and power, and this mushroomed via policies like federalism (and de-Baathification, which he doesn't mention) with the result that we now have.

On the question of what needs to be done Howeidy says it appears the Mahdi Army already controls East Baghdad and is now attacking Sunnis in the western part of the city, and there are all the various rumors of their benefitting from American air cover, Iranian funding and arms, and so on. There hasn't been any condemnation of any of this by the Najaf Shiite authorities. And even more important, Iran should state clearly its position on "the current ethnic cleansing", for instance by setting up a commission of inquiry.

While Howeydi lays the blame for starting the cycle of sectarian violence clearly at the feet of the American occupation, he says the most urgent current need is for Iran (and the Shiite authorities in Iraq) to step in and clarify what their position is. Howeydi differentiates between what was first in the causal chain of events, and what is first in terms of immediate requirements for action.