Iraq Leadership: The Perpetual American Veto
FIRST INSTANCE: Engineering 'Democracy' Post-Invasion The US engagement in shaping Iraqi leadership didn't begin with the current Maliki saga, nor entirely with the 2003 invasion. However, the post-2003 period cemented the pattern. Following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) effectively dictated the initial political trajectory, including the
selection of an interim Governing Council. While elections followed, the heavy hand of US influence, backed by significant financial aid and military presence, made any truly independent political ascent challenging. Maliki himself, initially seen as a compromise candidate, emerged from this very system in 2006, receiving tacit US approval despite later disagreements. REPETITIONS: The Maliki Years
and the 'De-Ba'athification' Lever First Repetition (2010): Fresh off a perceived electoral challenge, Maliki's bid for a second term in 2010 was met with significant US pressure to form an inclusive government. While presented as promoting stability, the underlying mechanism was Washington's power to grant or withhold legitimacy. The US, having invested heavily in the Iraqi state, effectively
maintained a veto over key political appointments. This period also saw the deepening of 'de-Ba'athification' policies, often interpreted as politically motivated purges, which contributed to exacerbating sectarian tensions – a consequence less scrutinized by Western media at the time. Second Repetition (2014): The most direct parallel to today's scenario. As ISIS gained ground across Iraq in