Sectarian violence unleashed after the US disintegration of Iraq is linked to the Syrian conflict and the death toll will only climb since extremist elements hijacked the sectarian instability in the region, political analyst Chris Bambery told RT.

“Everyone in Iraq must be terrified that the situation in

Syria is spilling over into Iraq” Bambery said as Tuesday’s

attacks in the country kill over 40, a day after over 70 people

were murdered, escalating fears of all-out sectarian war between

minority Sunnis and majority Shiites.

In the biggest incident on Tuesday, a car bomb exploded near a

Sunni mosque in Baghdad killing 11 people and injuring 21.

In a separate incident, a bomb outside a cafe in southern Baghdad

killed six more and wounded 18.

A decade after the hanging of Saddam Hussein, Iraq is bitterly

divided between the Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites and with no

power-sharing deal insight, violence is again on the rise.



“It is based on the decision by the Americans when they occupied

Iraq to separate Iraq off into these three areas,” Bambery told

the viewers.

It is also being fueled by the Syrian conflict where predominantly

Sunni insurgents are fighting President Assad. Another Syrian

neighbor, Lebanon is seeing Shiite Hezbollah forces fighting

alongside Assad’s troops, a minority Shiite-linked Alawite

sect.

Overall it is estimated by the UN that over 700 people died in Iraq

in April, a number Bambery warns will only rise as “we have now

seen an alliance of al-Qaeda elements in Syria and al-Qaeda

elements in Iraq, who are involved in sectarian violence in both

countries.”

RT: The Sunni demand for more independence, is it a

realistic goal?

Chris Bambery: I think it is realistic given the Kurds in

the North have effectively separated from the rest of Iraq. But I

think this is unfortunate decision. It is based on the decision by

the Americans when they occupied Iraq to separate Iraq off into

these three areas. Iraq has been a unified country for a long time.

And yet doing so based on the sectarian headcount by dividing the

country up, particularly be excluding the Sunni from having any

control of the oil fields was a recipe of the sectarian conflict.

And that’s what we’ve seen. But what is adding spice to that is the

question of what is happening across the border in Syria, because

we are seeing an alliance between al-Qaeda elements in Syria and

Sunni Salafists in Iraq — they’ve united — and have been involved

in these attacks. And I think everyone in Iraq must be terrified

that the situation in Syria is spilling over into Iraq. Indeed

across the region we are seeing a possibility of further tension, a

possibility of it spilling over in Lebanon. This sectarian violence

which is terrible in Iraq is becoming very intertwined with what is

going on in Syria with almost an open border between the two

countries there.

RT: Would handing more self-rule do anything to

stop the violence?

CB: I don’t think it would stop the violence. I don’t think

the people carrying sectarian attacks particularly the targeting of

Shia are motivated by the issue of creating an autonomous region

for the essentially majority of Sunni population. They are

motivated by sectarianism, let’s be honest about this. Even if they

were granted the autonomy inside Iraq, they are going to use that

as continuation for that kind of sectarian killings. As I said they

are spurred on by what is happening in Syria, which is increasingly

a sectarian conflict, my answer is no- that would not stop

sectarian killings. I think, unfortunately they are only likely to

get worse.

RT: Where would the line be in allowing more

freedom to self-govern and the country’s disintegration?

CB: Yes, the country is disintegrating. As I say, Americans

have to take the blame for that because of the system they imposed

in Iraq, giving independence to Kurds in the North, who of course

were allies with them against Saddam Hussein, and then they are

suggesting they would split the Shia alliance in the rest of Iraq

and that opened up a Pandora’s box, which really is almost

impossible to stop now. But this is not going to stop sectarian

violence. I think people across the world should be absolutely

clear the responsibility for that does lie on Americans and what

they did in 2003 and the subsequent occupation of that county.

RT: What about Syria – is it heading in the same

direction?

CB: That must be the fear. Because I say there is almost

an open border between Syria and Iraq. There are many refugees from

Syria inside Iraq and we have now seen an alliance of al-Qaeda

elements in Syria and al-Qaeda elements in Iraq, who are involved

in sectarian violence in both countries. We have Iraqis fighting

along with Free Syrian Army and Islamists inside Syria. So the

possibly because of this, in fact I would say it is spreading –

and increasing the sectarian campaign in Iraq is becoming

deeply connected to that inside Syria. Geography of

instability is spreading and that threatens to destabilize

elsewhere in the Middle East, particularly Lebanon.

RT: With Lebanon’s Hezbollah now involved in Syria –

how much will this influx of military manpower going to shift

momentum in the fighting?

CB: I think the fighting has been in impasse for some

time. Neither side is capable of producing decisive victory.

Whether Hezbollah is battle-training fighters, battle training

against Israelis can shift the balance, let’s see. But let’s be

clear as well there is intervention from the other side. It is

clear, everyone and their dogs knows, the Saudis, the Qataris

pouring arms, the Americans are providing training and if Hezbollah

increases its intervention on the side of the Assad regime, I

think that it is likely that they are pushing for Western

intervention. Some of the governments in America and Britain seem

quite keen on increasing, arming the rebels inside Syria and

proving other means. So, I think we are seeing very dangerous time

and I think when the moment comes to the question about Syria, one

is very important, I think, the decision to exclude Iran from next

week’s conference in Geneva on the possibility of political

solution is profoundly mistaken, because there can be no agreement

between the various powers in the world over the question of Syria

with no Iran at the table.

This article originally appeared on : RT