A spate of attacks widely blamed on Al-Qaeda seems designed to tip Iraq back into all-out violence at a delicate moment when politicians are struggling for power after an inconclusive parliamentary election. Five months of political drift before a government was formed after the previous poll in late 2005 set the scene for the Sunni-Shiite carnage that convulsed Iraq in 2006-07. This year, no clear winner emerged from the March 7 vote, fueling fears another prolonged political vacuum could foster bloodshed. So far mainstream factions are talking, not shooting. “This is not yet a glide path into civil war as in 2005-06,” said Iraq expert Toby Dodge of Queen Mary, University of London, adding Iraqi security forces were now much stronger. “For the moment it looks as though the Iraqi army has the capacity to keep the militias under control.” This could change if violence proliferates, political disputes spin out of control and the security forces begin to splinter in the absence of strong state institutions. “Then we would be in a dangerous pre-civil war situation,” said Joost Hiltermann, deputy Middle East director of the International Crisis Group. “It wouldn't be the same sectarian war as in the past, but between various groups. It could go into a sectarian dynamic, but it is not as clear as it was then.” Al-Qaeda fingerprints? There is no proof Al-Qaeda carried out the assaults that have killed more than 100 people since Friday – and some Iraqis harbor darker theories, implicating senior politicians. Baghdad's security spokesman has blamed remnants of Al-Qaeda and supporters of ousted Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein. The varied choice of targets would seem to fit the Sunni militant group's goals of sparking civil war and proving the impotence of the Iraqi state as US troops prepare to leave. At least 35 people were killed on Tuesday when bombs wrecked seven civilian buildings in mainly Shiite districts of Baghdad. Two days earlier, 41 people died in suicide car bomb attacks on the Iranian, Egyptian and German embassies in the capital. On Friday, gunmen killed 24 people in a Sunni village south of the city. Many of the victims belonged to the US-backed Sahwa (Awakening) movement of Sunni tribesmen and ex-insurgents who had turned against their Al-Qaeda co-religionists. That shift helped US troops and nascent Iraqi armed forces to weaken, but not destroy the network, which has still managed to carry out a few spectacular suicide bombings since August. The probable perpetrators of the latest attacks were sending three signals tied to a strategy of reigniting sectarian strife, according to Iraqi sociologist Faleh Abdul-Jabbar. “For the Sahwa it was a revenge message, telling them to return to the insurgency because the government could not protect them or pay them,” the Beirut-based academic said. “The regional and international message to Iran, the Arab world and Europe was that you shouldn't support or deal with this government because we are here to destabilize everything. “The message to the government was that you cannot protect the people; your security achievements are a pipe dream.” Abdul-Jabbar drew parallels with Iraq's previous descent into civil war, but with complexities that defied any simple definition in terms of Sunni-Shiite polarization. “There are four Shiite factions, each with its own agenda, class roots, cultural norms and political aspirations,” he said. “The Sunni bloc doesn't exist.” Even though many Sunnis voted for allies of former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, a secular Shiite, it was wrong to see him as the voice of Iraq's once-dominant Sunni minority, he added. Sunni discontent Nevertheless, Dodge said, sectarian tensions could intensify if Shiite factions exclude Allawi from a coalition government, marginalising Sunni voters seeking a fairer share of power. If that happens, he said, Iraq would be “heading away from reconciliation, back into much more sectarian instability”.
