With Iraq’s army, backed by the United States and its allies, at Mosul’s gates, the long-awaited move to retake Iraq’s second city from ISIL is expected to begin this month.
Writing in the pan-Arab London-based daily Al Hayat, columnist Mustafa Zein wondered exactly who will be liberating Mosul from the ISIL.
He noted that the Kurds seek to be at the forefront, while the Iraqi government wants to take part in the popular mobilisation that has already proved its capacity to fight in Ramadi, Fallujah and Saladin.
“The Americans prefer that the popular mobilisation remains on the outskirts of the city. Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s troops are waiting at the city gates and the Turkish prime minister accuses the mobilisation of sectarianism and insists on taking part in the battle to preserve its Sunni entity,” he said.
“The tribes are divided between government partisans and opposition. Osama and Atheel Al Nujaifi have their own militias that are ‘readier than ever’. Shia and Sunni religious leaders are divided in their opinions. Iran maintains its silence, reassured that Al Abadi will not let it down. The parliament has no say.”
It was a case of “liberators against liberators”, each of which is pursuing its own post-ISIL agenda, he said.
“Masoud Barzani, president of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region, aims to further weaken the centralised state. In most of his statements, he is heard saying that he will not give up what the Peshmerga has liberated,” Zein noted.
“His goal is to form a province independent of Baghdad and conduct a survey on placing the ‘disputed’ territories of Nineveh under his control. He is backed by part of the Yazidis, the Shabaks and Al Nujaifi.”
Turkey is restoring the glory of the Ottoman Empire, he added, and “using the battle to tighten its grip and lure Barzani followers into excluding the PKK”.
He noted that Tehran is confident of its power in southern Iraq, in the Iraqi parliament, in the government and militarily, through the popular mobilisation, as well as through the Kurds in Sulaymaniyah near its borders.
“The US has been delaying the liberation of Mosul, which it links to the situation in Syria.
“Washington is totally aware that the battle for Mosul is related to the battles taking place in Aleppo. As such, it does not wish to get it over with before it gains a foothold in Syria,” he said.
The Americans’ successive failed attempts to complete this mission and Russia’s participation in the Syrian conflict have left it hesitant about ousting ISIL forces from Nineveh and have led to several statements by its commanders about the lack of readiness on the part of the Iraqi forces.
He concluded that the complicated situation in the east, the absence of a unified Arab strategy and the drowning of the two most important countries in the blood of their divided people is allowing everyone to enter this swamp.
Writing in the pan-Arab London-based daily, Al Arab, Dr Khattar Abou Diab said that regional and international participation in the battle of Mosul is not limited to the US and Iran, but also includes Turkey, France, the UK, Germany and, of course, Saudi Arabia and Arab countries concerned with the Iraqi issue.
“It is obvious that president Barack Obama’s administration is striving in the last months of its term to fulfil its plan to uproot ISIL from Mosul,” he wrote.
But apparently these plans did not include the participation of Arab tribes in Nineveh, he noted, while the possibility of involving local forces from Mosul based in Bashiqa camp and trained by Turkish forces there remains vague.
“The confusion that reigns over the Mosul liberation plan is not only related to logistic details and the participating forces, but mainly revolves around the situation of Iraq’s second city after the battle is over,” he wrote.
He said the scorched-earth policy employed in Tikrit, Ramadi and Fallujah has raised concerns among the Iraqi people about possible demographic changes.
“Of course, there is also the Kurdish factor and the international support of the Peshmerga. France’s assistance is not limited to air forces but includes artillery and experts on the ground.”
He concluded that the outcomes of the battle for Mosul are likely to affect the fate and the constitution of Iraq as well as the battles taking place in the north of Syria.
He expressed concern over a new regional equation in which Tehran will protect the interests of Ankara at the expense of what is left of a regional Arab regime that received its knockout blow with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Translated by Jennifer Attieh
translation@thenational.ae
