At the heart of the terrifying meltdown in Iraq is the centuries-old hatred between two Muslim ideologies: Sunni and Shia.
The
deadly power struggle between these two rival versions of the same
faith has flared into life as Sunnis in the extremist terror group
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) advance on Baghdad, where
flailing prime minister Nouri al-Maliki - who is Shia - begged his
parliament to declare a state of emergency.
It
is a battle being watched with trepidation throughout the Middle East,
where the escalation of the traditional Sunni/Shia conflict threatens
governments and national borders.
Its
extraordinary success could not have been achieved without the tacit
support of ordinary Sunni people in the areas it has conquered.
The
Sunnis in Mosul regarded the Shia-dominated army from the south of the
country as an occupying force and were only too pleased to see the back
of them.
True,
these people are terrified of the brutal ideology of ISIS, which
specialises in amputations and crucifixions for those who do not
subscribe to its fundamentalist creed.
But for now, their hatred of al-Maliki’s authoritarian government, which treats them as a lower caste, outweighs those fears.
To add to
the tribal tensions in Iraq, the country’s north-eastern Kurdish
population - who were persecuted by Saddam Hussein and gassed in their
thousands - have established what is, in effect, their own independent
state in the north of the country.
Meanwhile,
across the Middle East, Sunni and Shia rivalries are festering like
open sores. Of the world’s 1.6billion Muslims, the vast majority are
Sunnis; Shias comprise 10 to 15 per cent - two hundred million people.
Egypt,
Turkey, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are Sunni. In Bahrain and Saudi
Arabia, the ruling Sunni treat Shia as second-class citizens.
The
Shia are concentrated in Iran, southern Iraq and Lebanon. And despite
being in the minority in Syria, they are powerful there, too: President
Bashar Assad’s ruling party belong to a Shia sect called the Alawites.
Once
you understand the Sunni/Shia divide, you can make sense of the
rivalries in the Middle East. It explains why Sunni rebels - backed by
the predominantly Sunni powers, ranging from Turkey to Saudi Arabia and
the smaller Gulf states - are determined to fight Assad’s Shia-dominated
army to the death.
And
why Lebanese Hizbollah militias (Shia) are fighting for Assad, under
the command of Revolutionary Guards officers from Iran (also Shia).
The
most extraordinary fact in all this is that the conflict goes back to
the seventh century and centres on a dispute over who should succeed
Islam’s founder Prophet Muhammad after he died in 632 AD.
The
largest group (Sunnis) wanted traditional tribal elders to decide upon
the best person; the name Sunni comes from Ahl al-Sunna, meaning the
people of tradition.
During the
years of Empire, these divisions were muted as Sunni and Shia united
against the colonial rulers, who took little account of tribal rivalry
when they arbitrarily created new countries such as Iraq, a concoction
dreamed up by Britain and France in 1921 after the fall of the Turkish
Ottoman Empire.
Two
former Turkish territories were handed to princes in the Hashemite
family. Prince Feisal, a friend of Lawrence of Arabia, would become king
of a new country called Iraq. His brother, Prince Abdullah, would rule
Transjordan - now Jordan.
Authoritarian
rulers - Saddam Hussein, President Assad and Colonel Gaddafi in Libya -
ruthlessly kept a lid on the religious rivalry.
But with their removal, the divisions have exploded throughout the Middle East and beyond.
No comments:
Post a Comment