×
TODAY IN TAP ONLINE. Everyone now knows that Iraq is being torn apart by ethnic and sectarian conflict, and many analysts have proposed accelerating the break-up (or strong federalization) of the country as part of a U.S. withdrawal policy. But Robert Dreyfuss today argues that, without American policymakers noticing, a loose coalition of nationalist elements in Iraq has been emerging in the last year, centered around opposition to both the U.S. occupation and the Maliki government. The coalition -- including "moderate and secular Sunni and Shia, Sunni religious parties, supporters of Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, the dissident Shia Fadhila party, the Sunni resistance-linked Association of Muslim Scholars, much of Iraq's armed, Sunni-led resistance, and various independents" -- could be key to a stable Iraq following a U.S. withdrawal.
[F]or most Iraqis, the vast majority of whom oppose the U.S. occupation, an alternative to Maliki is foremost on their minds. Moreover, on May 10 a majority of the Iraqi parliament supported a resolution calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country, reflecting a growing consensus among the Iraqi public and the political class. That resolution reveals the political glue that could hold together a new governing bloc in Baghdad. No one knows, at this stage, whether that glue -- namely, opposition to the U.S. role in Iraq -- is strong enough to overcome the enormous difficulties inherent in uniting, say, Sadr and secular-minded Sunnis. On the other hand, it is safe to say that no Iraqi government that supports an open-ended U.S. occupation will have a prayer of getting Iraqi public support.Read the piece to find out why "the end of the Maliki government and the start of a U.S. withdrawal are one and the same thing."
Meanwhile, yesterday we posted Jon Margolis's wrap-up of Sunday's Democratic primary debate; he'll be reporting from New Hampshire on the Republican's debate tonight. Also, Addie Stan explains what bothered her about last night's televised event featuring the Dem candidates discussing religion. And Matt Yglesias weighs in on the discussion of individual mandates in health-care plans that has gotten so much attention since Barack Obama unveiled his mandateless heath-care proposal last week. Matt argues not to believe the hype: the mandate idea is "crippled by a terrible flaw at its heart."
Read the pieces, and discuss them in the articles' own comment threads.
--The Editors
