Daniel Byman and Kenneth Pollack have a long article in the Washington Post which discusses the challenges in Iraq and some policy remedies. The article is titled,
What Next?
Their opening sentence declares that Iraq is in civil war, the recommendations in the article are from this position.
Civil war is difficult to describe and is usually thought of factions inside a nation-state warring openly against each other in a manner that consumes most of the state. This is complicated in Iraq by the presence of the US Forces in such large numbers. Byman and Pollack argue in the article that the only dampener on the civil war in Iraq being worse is the presence of these troops.
The violence in Iraq is high; higher month to month than the recent Lebanese conflict. Which is an important point that Byman and Pollack make in relation to the greater destructive nature of civil war than an open conflict between nations. The label this destruction and disruptive force "spillover".
They identify several aspects of spillover;
- Refugees
- Terrorism
- Radicalisation of neighbouring populations
- Copycat secessionism
- Foreign intervention
- Persuade Iraq's neighbours not to intervene. The authors point out the difficult of coercing the Sauds and Kuwaitis, as well as some compromise needed with Iran to limit, rather than stop their meddling.
- Avoid picking factional winners. The current strong local leaders are rarely the ultimate winners. For instance the Taliban which ran Afghanistan didn't exist when Russia chose to support Najibullah.
- Keep the Kurds from seceding. This could cause wider conflict in Turkey and Iran if the Kurds decide to become a nation-state. The authors argue this may require more economic aid to the Iraqi Kurds
- Maintain the borders. This includes stemming the flow of refugees, militia, foreign invaders and terrorists. The point of this policy is keep the violence in Iraq and stop it spilling over into a wider regional conflict and civil war.







