Identity and peace in Iraq

Once again, I had planned to talk about what is happening in Pakistan, but my lovely wife is coming back from New York in quite early tomorrow morning necessitating an early rise on my part, and a fellowship application has taken up all my time today, so another abbreviated post is the order of the day. The New York Times has run a story on a neighborhood, Bab al Sheik, in Baghdad that has been spared the violence that has torn the rest of the country apart. What makes this neighborhood unique?

“All of these people grew up here together,” said Monther, a suitcase seller here. “From the time of our grandfathers, same place, same food, same everything.”

The people in Bab al Sheik have a shared identity. The know each other, have intermarried, and identify with each other. There are no 'others,' only reflections of the self. It is telling that the dynamic of Bab al Sheik has been repeated, albeit with less success, across Baghdad:

Much of today’s Baghdad sprang into existence in the 1970s, when oil nationalization drew Iraqis from all over the country to work. The city’s population more than tripled over the course of 20 years, and new neighborhoods sprawled east and west. The war and civil conflict have seemed to take a heavier toll in those areas than in some of the older neighborhoods.

In one neighborhood, Dora,

residents were from all over. That never seemed to matter until the basic rules of society fell away after the American occupation began. The only bulwark left against complete chaos was trust between families, and in Dora there was not enough.

Bab al Sheik is also characterized by moderate religious views. I suspect that there is a direct relationship between the communal identity and the moderation of religious views. It is telling that when outside extremist religious actors, both Sunni and Shia attempted to make inroads in the neighborhood, the residents threw them out. Unfortunately, moderation is not the currency of choice in Iraq, and the neighborhood stands neglected by the various parties that control the flow of money. The mosque where moderation is preached is falling into disrepair. What could the US do differently? It is too late now, but the neighborhood approach might have served the US well when it still controlled the country. By allocating resources to neighborhoods and encouraging identities tied to neighborhoods, the US may have built stronger ties between individuals and pre-emptively emphasized that aspect of their identity to head off more divisive identifications. A side benefit to this approach is that, often, as James Scott argues in Seeing Like State, it is locals who are have the on the ground knowledge to put resources to best use or know how day-to-day operations really play out. That means that reconstruction efforts may very well have, well, reconstructed, instead of the current debacle.