Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s visit to Iraq, after the government was established by Haydar Ibadi, is without a doubt a beginning, which will not only provide the relations between Turkey and Iraq to continue from where its left off, but will also re-establish the trust and relations between the actors in the region. It’s clear that Prime Minister Davutoğlu’s visit has a historic meaning. It’s also clear that this visit, the meetings that are actualized and the dialogue environment that is provided during this visit will affect much equilibrium in the process that we recently passed through. Davutoğlu’s ability to establish a personal dialogue with all the actors in Iraq easily and also his personal friendship he established with all of them a long time ago, is a great opportunity for Turkey and Iraq. All the Iraqi politicians are aware of this and everyone is approaching Davutoğlu with a unique respect.
Besides, while re-establishing the relations with Iraq, it’s necessary to see that it is not possible to return to the “place where the relations were left off” during the Maliki period 5 years ago. However, the activities that had been happening for the past couple of years had paved the way for irrevocable changes in many areas.
The largest and worst result of the type of war that had broken out in Iraq and Syria is the unrecoverable lines being drawn between the people who had lived together for centuries. Meanwhile, the sides are fighting with each other in Iraq; however, mostly they become the direct and primary victims of the war, which they conduct on the proxy of other actors that are trying to penetrate the region. Besides, these actors, who are conducting the penetration war, are not actors that came a far distance. All the sides that had been met in Iraq had formed an alliance, when they dragged the dialogue problem to the war point and when the external intervention became inevitable.
Thus, following the recent events, nobody forgets to prick himself with a needle or awl. Everybody knows that in order to prevent the intervention of the external actors, it’s necessary for them to have easier communication among them. However regrettably, not everyone is uncomfortable with external interventions, because some are able to find an area for themselves thanks to these interventions.
When we look at the present situation of Iraq, we suddenly have the urge to return to the questions of the community thinkers of the Illumination period, who had derived from the question “how come a community becomes possible?” In an environment, where nobody had trust for anyone and everyone is trying to undermine each other, it’s possible to feel that trust is a blessing and security is such a humane requirement.
Being unable to trust the people around you is one of the biggest calamities that could happen to a community. Because what brings a community into existence or makes it possible is directly related with being able to trust the people you are living with. The expectation, that any moment any person around you can cause a threat, is paving the way for life to transform into a paranoid precautionary cage – of course, if you can call this life…. Especially if the danger had become a real possibility rather than just being a paranoid suspicion; then the people start to pursue a savior, regardless of where he comes from.
In Iraq, where every reason is playing a discriminator role, because of this reason, it’s a little interesting to see that ISIL had had all the sides closer to each other. I wonder; will the possibility of being a community again be possible for Iraq via ISIL hostility?
Even though ISIL can be regarded as a Sunni rage explosion, it is transforming into an interesting phenomenon, from which the Sunni tribes had also withdrawn their support following ISIL’s latest implementations, and which bestows Iraqi segments the exception of merging and acting together.
ISIL’s expressions and methods are completely foreign to all the cultural and social tissues of the region’s people, including the ones in the Sunni world. However, by not hesitating to open fronts to everyone while trying to impose this contrary expression by force of arms, it makes us think that they are liable to another rationality other than their own absolute rationality. I’m making an evaluation over the results they had caused, without making room for any conspiracy possibilities.
Even if the ISIL hostility unites at a point, it is also being voiced that this hostility is forming an excuse platform for any kind of injustice. The number of armed Shia militias is almost reaching a hundred thousand and these militias’ violent methods, terror and slaughters are not so different from ISIL’s.
Within the frame of a serious religious sect cleaning, they are killing the people in masses or forcing them to migrate. However, in the name of terrorism, only ISIL exists in Iraq’s showcase.
Within the “rendering into Shia” policy, which everyone is complaining about in the region, it is seen that ISIL’s implementations and all the precautions that are developed against it has an important role.
The funny part is; the “rendering to the Shia” policies are not based on the principal of the announcement or boosting of Shiism in a free environment, but rather completely based on the overthrowing of demographic equilibriums by means of war and violence. At this moment, communal population activities are formed by means of migration caused by machines of war, and the total sum of this becomes; “the rendering of the geography to the Shia”.
Of course, Assad and his regime become the actual actor that had been provided with an important area of opportunity by the ISIL hostility. As the ISIL hostility gradually becomes an expression and ideology, it makes everyone forget about the slaughters conducted by Assad for the past 4 years on the civilians in his country. In addition, it’s almost as if his place in the front, which is being prepared against the ISIL devil, is being prepared. And at the end of the day, the vindicated and freshened Assad is being left to the world as a gift from ISIL.
