Some Iraqis might be kicked out of the National Alliance, which was formed two days before Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim died, while the Alliance is getting ready for the parliamentary elections in early 2010. Before this date, it is preparing itself to settle the strained relationship with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who prefers to sing outside the flock, unless forces under the new-born political alliance secure the extension of his mandate after the elections. Al-Maliki has enough reasons to feel pessimistic about the train of the Iraqi-Syrian relations. Once this train took off under the slogan of "strategic cooperation", it was besieged by the dust of the recent "Al-Qaeda invasion" on the Black Wednesday, claiming the lives of 100 civilians in Baghdad. Just as the announcement of the "Strategic Cooperation Council" was surprisingly made to surpass a lengthy history of coldness and discords between two countries, Iraqis were quick to accuse Damascus, claiming that it is sheltering "terrorist organizations", and they called on it to hand over Wednesday's Baathists who are blamed of fomenting the incident from behind the borders. The pace of destruction and collective killing of civilians in Mesopotamia has increased, and it all happened within the framework of justifications of the pessimism surrounding Al-Maliki's political future and the fate of Iraq as a whole. As such, it challenged the ability of the government – and that of its security and armed forces – to fill the "American" gap. Thus, the government's project of victory over terrorism turned into a long battle that threatens the country of being defeated. Questions about Al-Qaeda's awakening after its' supposed fading away– or at least that was the nature of the announcement – as a result of the government successes under American sponsorship, must be of the kind that accumulates clouds of pessimism in the sky of Baghdad. This applies to the question about the repercussions of the shaky trust among the partners in power, namely the Shiite parties. There is another question about Al-Qaeda's controversial standpoint regarding Al-Maliki's unity (Al-Dawa Party), and the "isolation" of Iraq among its neighbors. The prime minister accuses Al-Qaeda of wanting to keep Iraq unsteady, or at least to let it overlook anything that threatens its stability, without distinguishing between the Arabs and others, and between the Arabs themselves. When Ankara advises Baghdad to feel reassured about its role as a helping hand, comparing the latter to the "Iranian role", no one is convinced that it is offering its' services for free, while the Turkmen card is always ready to serve as a cover for the Turkish interests, whenever the Iraqi Kurds ambitions of leading a separation project become a threat. When Tehran watches the countdown to the American withdrawal from Iraq, it is not a mere announcement of a "divine victory" over the foreign forces in the region, inasmuch as it represents an attempt to fill the gap in an Arab country that has always represented the biggest source of anxiety for the Islamic Republic. Within the race to the vacuum, it might be said, even with the naivety present while investigating observable facts, that there is a regional competition to fight Al-Qaeda… in Mesopotamia, and also to justify the "complicity" between the organization's networks and some pro-Baath Iraqi officers, in the face of foreign interests! It is such a surreal image of the sick man of the region, while the "Black Wednesday's" explosions are reviving doubts about the regional conflict escalation over his legacy. The more heated the conflict becomes, the fiercer terrorism and murder get, and the blood of the innocent Iraqis will not convince the United States to keep its forces and cancel its pullout plans. What is alarming in the midst of Al-Maliki's unity and anger, along with the isolation of Iraq, is for American President Barack Obama to decide to speed up the pullout from the quagmire of fire, which is the most likely option, so that other kinds of war break out. Worries persist about the possible failure of the current coalition government in preparing for elections that are supposed to fold the page of the quota-system period and the division of the government's loot, or about the launch of a period where the country is fragmented, on the basis of refusing to rotate the ill-gotten gains. Years have passed since the American invasion took place and shattered the unity of Iraq. The ruling coalition forces and parties failed to confirm the credibility of their practices, namely their conviction in the principle of decentralization of power, for the sake of which, these forces collaborated with the occupying forces, under the slogan of toppling Saddam's dictatorship. Years after the invasion, the situation of power is still unchanged and only few people remember the cost of the fight that Muqtada al-Sadr's supporters had to pay, before his bloc joined the political conflict to get a parcel of the booty. A few people will care about the costs of "Al-Qaeda's jihad" in terms of killing, because the current period…is an electoral one! Who would believe that security is among the priorities of the coalition government, while it is exchanging accusations and distributing them among internal and external parties?
