If you have trouble differentiating Sunni from Shia, here’s a joke that helps me.
On the campaign trail, a reporter asked Donald Trump if he would explain his views on the conflict between Sunni and Shia, and he said he’d be glad too. He said the difficulties go back many years, so peace between them seems unlikely. He felt that he and we had more in common with Sunni than Shia, as Shia was too leftist and generally anti-American. He agreed that relations with Sunni has problems, but thinks back to the days when they were together and sang “I’ve got you, babe.”
It’s funny because it all makes geopolitical sense — Trump sounds like either Bush — until you realize that he’s talking about Sunny and Cher, not Sunni and Shia. I find this joke a useful memory aid since so much of Democratic policy in the mid east sounds (to me) like Cher speaking. Just as Sunny was a solid Republican (and a congressman), Bush Republicans have leaned toward Sunni leaders, the king of Saudi Arabia, the presidents and generals of Turkey, and Egypt, etc. They do this partially to follow the money — oil money, and partially out of America-first interests.
Cher was/is a Democrat, and a leftist. Obama and most Democrats’ sound (to me) like Cher; they favor Shia countries and Shiites leaders. To some extent this is because the Shiites tend to be leftists (whatever that means for a theocracy) and to some extent it’s just the Wilson Doctrine of favoring elections and popular leaders even when they are anti-American. Obama’s state department made deals with Shiite Iran, and supported Shiite “moderates” in Yemen and Syria, as well as Shia organizations like Hezbollah. Al Jazeera is a left-leaning, Shiite news outlet solely owned by the king of Qatar. Obama also favored the left-leaning, theocratic Muslim Brotherhood, and this was nominally Sunni.
Trump, to judge by his speeches seems to follow the (Charles) Lucky Luciano doctrine: you do what you want on your turf, but if you hit me, I hit back twice as hard. It’s not an approach that the State department likes, as best I can tell. Instead of relying on subtle analysis, white papers, and paid moderates, Trump requires only enforcers and a consigliere/ bag man or two. Jerrold Kushner seems to fit the latter role, Don Trump’s Tom Hagan. I hope/plan to write more on this, but I can imagine Jerold saying: “Mr. Trump never asks a second favor once he’s refused the first. Understood?”
While Saudi news has claimed that Obama’s training was Shia (Shiite) and that this contributed to his leaning to Shia Iran, I see little evidence beyond that he trusts Shiite mullahs and dislikes Saudi (Sunni) kings. Similarly, the co-chair of the Democratic party, Keith Ellison, says he’s detached himself from the Shiite, Nation of Islam, but he maintains the same leftist, anti Israel, anti Saudi policies. Michigan gubernatorial candidate, Abdul El Sayed too, see his interview in the Detroit Free Press claims to be running for governor to poke a middle finger at Trump. As best I can tell, his policies match Ellison’s.
Robert Buxbaum, May 18, 2018. For those too young to remember Sunny and Cher, enjoy.
Pingback: Wilsonian Obama vs the Trump Doctrine | REB Research Blog
I don’t think either the Democratic or the Republican party likes Shiites better than Sunnis or vice versa. American policy in the Middle East during the Bush-II and Obama years exemplifies simply a naive perspective that somehow, promoting a “democratic” (small D) election that expresses “the will of the people” is going to make these countries or regions more like us and easier to be friends and allies with.
Bush-II deposed a Sunni government in Iraq in favor of a Shiite one. By disbanding the previously all-powerful Baath party, Bush-II destroyed Sunni rule of Iraq and also (presumably unintentionally) encouraged the control of Iraq by Shiites. This favored Iran by destroying the only local Sunni countervailing force (i.e., Iraq) – which Bush-I was smart enough not to do following Iraq-War 1.0.
Both Democratic and Republican administrations have over the years made and broken promises to the Kurds. Though they are Sunnis, they finally gained autonomy during the Obama administration. For clarity, this autonomy was accomplished against the interests of the Shiite central government of Iraq.
I have never heard Qatar referred to before as a Shiite country. It is a Sunni country with a Shiite majority. You know, like Iraq pre-2003. The Emir has been feuding with the Saudi Royal House for many, many, years and the Emir apparently sees an alliance with Iran as something that will put a stop to the periodic Shiite riots against his rule and especially as a counterforce to the Saudis’ desire to take over his valuable oil and gas resources. Before the arrangement with Iran, Qatar was most famous for its support of the Muslim Brotherhood, especially in Egypt, which Obama also supported, though they are Sunnis.
Per the above examples, Bush-II supported the Shiites against the Sunnis (Iraq War 2.0) and Obama supported the Sunnis against the Shiites (Kurdish autonomy). These seem to me to be rather signifiant counterexamples to your generalization. I much prefer my own generalization: the aforesaid American naiveté.
Pingback: Al Jazeera, a multi billion-dollar influence buyer | REB Research Blog