Middle East Conflict Reminds Me Of Pulling Weeds In My Lawn

While nearing the homestretch on a recent weed pulling session in my front yard, I came across an idea that seemed rather brilliant at the time, until I reexamined my discovery.

The conflict in the middle east is rooted in an aged old division between Muslims that occurred upon the death of the religions founding prophet, Mohammed. At the time, tradition stated that election was the means in which a successor should be elected (Sunni belief), whereas some (Shi'ites) believed that the successor should come from Mohammed's lineage. Today, those roots have evolved into a tangled web of conflict, as each side continues to force Muslim nations to declare an allegiance to one ideology or the other. Add the presence of Christian's and Jews in certain pockets of the middle east, and the entire scene is a powder keg constantly waiting to erupt.

Yet, it can be basically symbolized in the simply act of lawn care.  Whether you choose the slow and marginally effective chemical approach, or you prefer the old fashion method of pulling them at the root, the goal is still the same.  Rid the area of the undesirables.  Often times both methods are employed, but the process demands diligence and persistence.  Weeds are a life form that functions like all life forms; to preserve their future.  Genocide is not a word that we consider when talking about lawn care, but to the weeds that are under attack, it is the essence of genocide.

The grass is often greener on the other side of the fence, but every lawn that appears to be free of weeds is simply an illusion.  Weeds are a constant that requires weekly attention, lest they begin the inevitable journey of repopulating the region and eventually overtaking the land altogether.  Those who call the middle east home, deal with this same constant evolution of time and space within their homelands.  At different times, their space becomes occupied with undesirable elements that are difficult to look at each day without acting to eliminate them. To the Sunni, it may be the Shi'ite.  To the Shi'ite, it might be the Christians or Jews ruining the landscape for everybody else.  In the end, the issue is driven by individual perspectives of people who are much more alike than they are different.  In other words, the entire middle east conflict is an illusion of distorted perspectives.  One day the militant group you support becomes the oppressive regime that looks and behaves just like the weed you thought you'd removed and vice versa.

Michael Leiter, an American counter terrorism expert who served under both President's Bush and Obama, offered a perspective that bears consideration.  While Leiter approved of the President's current actions in Iraq, he voiced the legitimate concerns of Obama's critics who ask how Obama can execute this "narrowly tailored mission and the (somewhat) broader regional concern of the tactical battle around Kurdistan, without addressing the broader conflict in the region?", said Leiter during and MSNBC interview.  In expanding on the "broader conflict", Leiter especially noted how the future of Iraq will ultimately impact certain neighboring countries like Jordan, which will ultimately force the hand of the U.S. to act anyway.  In hindsight, Leiter suggested that the U.S. presence in Iraq would have stiffened the spines of Iraqi's who ultimately must pave their own future.  Leiter also noted that our continued presence might minimize the likelihood that the Sunni, Shi'ite conflict takes on a retaliatory behavior (weed pulling), as it often does once one side or the other assumes control.

The official press version of these matters only further complicates the nearly impossible response that America, and President Obama, must make.  In Iraq, the failure might have been in leaving so abruptly and allowing outside factions, namely ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, based in Syria) to fill the power vacuum created in our absence.  In principle, I stand with the President on the importance of pulling our troops from endlessly "pulling at weeds".  In the final analysis, it would take a strong armed dictator (like Saddam Hussein) or unprecedented regional acceptance of the grass and the weeds and the flowers and the most peculiar plant, the Christian Kurds trapped on top of the mountain, to maintain peace in Iraq.

High atop a mountain in the Kurdistan region of Iraq are a nation of Christian Kurds that are being threatened with certain genocide if they don't receive aid to their mountain perch. Surrounded by ISIS militants, these Kurds are certain to be gunned down if they pursue safe passage from the mountain, so President Barack Obama has immediately moved to destroy the ISIS militants that are threatening these Kurds, and to insure humanitarian assistance gets to those people on that mountain before death overtakes them all.  Air strikes and air drops are under way as we speak, and the Kurdish Peshmerga (the military group fighting to stave off ISIS) is receiving U.S.support towards their goal of defeating ISIS, the newest weed to invade Iraq.

So Why No Boots On The Ground?!

Is President Obama simply avoiding the obvious criticism that would come from returning boots to the very ground we abruptly left just a few years back?  Maybe.  I personally see Barack Obama as a new aged black conservative (much like Clinton...much like myself), who's nature is to actively express U.S. military strength as a means of maintaining peace at home and abroad.  His intensive use of drones proves all that I need to know about his willingness to "go there" when necessary.  According to former Ambassador Marc Ginsberg, "This is not an issue of boots on the ground. The President has been using drone strikes in Yemen for years. Why can't we use them to disrupt ISIS?", said Ginsberg.  Ginsberg admitted what Obama realizes as well. America, especially Congress, has no further taste for war.  I personally celebrate this turn in rhetoric because I am a staunch advocate of  the expansion of drone warfare.  In fact, what other kind of warfare should one use against terrorism and militant groups who behave like terrorist? Terrorism doesn't utilize constraints, so neither should counter terrorism.

In a region struggling to determine who will chart the future of Iraq as a nation, ISIS might be seen as simply doing some weed pulling of their own.  After all, this area already has too many religious factions vying for supreme control of Iraq, even if only for the sake of their own future.  The notion of an American backed, Christian rooted faction of people having a viable stake in the discussion is peculiar for sure. In the process of war, the easiest way to avoid gaining an allegiance is to simply not need one, and ISIS does not appear to be pursuing the surrender, capture or allegiance of these Christian Kurds.

Syria absolutely has a stake in what becomes of Iraq, and they have placed their stake in ISIS.  If ISIS wins, Syria insures a safer place for Syrian's.  If ISIS loses, they become the new Hamas and Syria has to wonder if a pro Syrian regime will control Iraq, or will an anti-Syria (U.S. backed) Iraqi regime finally control what is ultimately one of the richest nations in the middle east in terms of natural resources.  ISIS will greatly dictate Syria's future(which is why Syria is all-in) thus, the entire world must recognize the importance of destroying ISIS, the second coming of Hamas. These weeds are the kind that will not peacefully exist alongside good grass. They will destroy the grass until their is no more grass to be found, or surround a mountain until a nation of people die off from starvation.

What turned my brilliant "weed pulling" analogy into a trivial example of a much more complex problem was this revelation.  All sides of this matter think that they are the grass and the other guy is the weed, and few seem willing to live alongside what they perceive as an eye sore.  In America, grass and weeds live in segregated communities.  Its a more humane form of intolerance that all civilizations come to grips with after they finish assigning power through civil war.  Palestine and Hamas have little chance of winning their civil dispute with Israel, but must find a way to live and breathe, and grow in the same environment as Israeli's even after they establish a border region that they can call their own.  There will never be an independent Palestinian economy, so there can never exist a truly distinct Palestinian nation. While not as dependent on the Palestinian nation, the same holds true from the Israeli perspective as well, but these are the revelations they shall both discover once the civil war has ended.

In essence, all of these nations are engaging in the very process we endured, and sometimes even genocide becomes a REAL part of the equation.  When exiting Iraq, Obama seemed okay with admitting that sometimes civilizations have had to watch the futile attempts man makes at genocide of man, as a way of expressing his insistence on a complete withdrawal from Iraq.  Now he says we can do something without sending troops back to Iraqi soil.

This whole song and dance reminds me of weed pulling.

If one stem or any seeds remain...the species survives.

Even when I thought I got every bit of  the weed that seeded this failed brilliance, I stopped to notice that the plant had already flowered, and only one of the blossoms remained on this impressive weed that I skillfully extricated from my lawn. My vision of lawn domination started blowing in the wind because the seeds of this weeds future had long since journey'd on their way. Actually, getting at the root of the problem was no longer the key to conquering my quest for regional purity.  I have to fight with a fair perspective on this war.

For in the eyes of God, even the grass is a weed.