The end of Iraq: How American Incompetence created a war without end - Book Report/Review Example

His work The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War without an End is an attempt to classify the ground situation in Iraq to produce reasons for American failure at establishing peace. Galbraith’s extensive experience makes him an expert at dealing with such complicated affairs and this book is a written attempt to enlighten the involved policy makers and implementers. America’s war in Iraq has led to nothing but the greater bifurcation of already existing divides in Iraq’s multi ethnic and multi sectarian society.

More than a decade of continuous war between American security forces, American sponsored Iraqi security forces and the various militias has led to nothing but turmoil alone. In his work, Galbraith is of the point of view that Iraq is a divided society that has been held together by force over time (Galbraith 12): “This led to an unrealistic and futile commitment to preserving the unity of a state that was never a voluntary creation of its people, and that has been held together by force.” In Galbraith’s view, Iraq should be divided along ethnic and sectarian lines in order to resolve the complex issues of governance.

Galbraith tends to view the major factions as the Arab Sunnis, the Shiites in the south and the Kurds in the North. Comparable to other solutions that Galbraith was involved in, such as Croatia, the author exerts that Iraq’s only real sustainable solution would be to divide the nation into distinct independent blocs based on ethnic and sectarian lines: “The Kurds and the Shiites concluded that Iraq cannot function as a single state, and have worked out arrangements to divide it amicably. The Sunni Arabs refused to take part in this process .

” Galbraith’s solution might work theoretically but if implemented, it would lead to long term disputes since the region would be balkanised. Another notable aspect is that Galbraith discounts the realities of the current dispute – all involved actors inside Iraq are essentially sponsored by external powers. The transitional governments of Iraq are sponsored by the Americans, the Sadr militias are sponsored by neighbouring Iran, the Kurds are sponsored by the Americans and the Arab Sunnis are being sponsored by Sunni radicals from within the region as well as from around the globe.

Essentially Iraq’s people are hostage to the agendas of outsiders. As long as external agendas try to shape the destiny of the Iraqi people, no sustainable solution can be found. It needs to be taken to note that Galbraith is biased towards a partition based solution and does not give much currency to other solutions at all. It must also be kept in mind that a balkanised Iraq would lead to more regional trouble since the Sunni Arabs would try to wrestle control of the northern oil fields from the Kurds.

Simultaneously, the Shiites in the south would act as Iran’s regional proxy in order to capture the oil rich north. Since the Kurds are already at loggerheads with the Sunnis and the Turkish military, the armed and violent struggle for control would only intensify further. Additionally, a regional war would prompt the major regional and international players to act more aggressively. Currently, the tactic of choice for the involved factions is limited violence through acts of terrorism. In case that these factions are made independent nations, the backers of these nations would provide conventional arms and training