Been Winning So Long, I've Lost It - The Long War TL

[Blochead]

PROLOGUE

"So we are a schizophrenic culture of sorts, a nation of amateurs that can almost magically transform itself into a culture of professional killers."
- Victor Davis Hanson

"The situation... in Central Asia is similar to that of all civilized states that come into contact with half-savage nomadic tribes without a firm social organization. In such cases, the interests... of security always require the more civilized state have a certain authority over its neighbors... The state must therefore make a choice: either to give up this continuous effort and doom its borders to constant unrest... or else to advance farther and farther into the heart of the savage lands... where the greatest difficulty lies in being able to stop."
-Chancellor Aleksandr Gorchakov

" We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."
- John McCain

---

Outside Parachinar, Pakistan
December 2001

"We are not supposed to be here. So make every shot count."

Just a few hours ago, America had almost come away empty handed from Tora Bora. Now, watching the surviving Taliban escape across the border, the President and CIA had decided they would not squander any second chances. The Special Forces in the hills and mountains had met the enemy, but they were not theirs.

A column of slow moving Toyota trucks, braving the fierce mountain winter, had received the militants not far from the border. Once they were in Parachinar proper, they would be impossible to reach without even more severe diplomatic consequences. What was about to happen would be bad enough, acceptable only because of what victory might bring.

Nobody reached Parachinar that day.

.50 caliber rifles proved adequate for stopping the vehicles. Caught in the crossfire, the rest of the Americans advanced under cover to bring their full firepower to bear. Thousands upon thousands of tracer rounds riddled everything within the valley. Here there would be no air support, and they could move no faster than the enemy - everything worth engaging had to be stopped in the valley.

Now the teams were within range of personal arms and a proper firefight began, with the Americans leapfrogging through the remnants of the column. When the shooting finally began to quiet, the Americans began cataloguing their spoils. The caravan, at first, appeared unexceptional - truck beds of Islamist fighters and supplies. Then the video cameras were found. In the truck behind it, a dying man with an old Army-pattern woodland camouflage jacket and a AK-74SU. Some pair of classified American eyes traced its way up a long, blooded beard to meet his face, widening in surprise. The soldier took out camcorder and started taping, signalling to his comrades, with a smile of grim satisfaction. It was a macabre scene, but what little empathy for their enemies these men usually had could not have existed after what happened three months ago.

If they found some way to explain this, the American public would get an early surprise for Christmas.

[Blochead]

PART I: 1998-2000

“Our nation is chosen by God and commissioned by history to be a model to the world.”
-George W. Bush, 2000

---

December, 1998
“… In other news, political consultant Karl Rove, a major figure in the Texas Republican Party and instrumental part in Governor George W. Bush’s campaigns, died today after a car accident…”
-KTBC (FOX affiliate) news

January-February, 2000

“The battle between John McCain and George W. Bush continues, with no signs of ending soon. Bush, whose early success in the Iowa caucus was soon countered by John McCain’s victory in New Hampshire, has managed to take only Delaware since that defeat. Today, on the last day of February, he will need to pull off a strong victory in Virginia or Washington to remain a viable candidate…”
-CNN News, February 29, 2000

“While we have had past differences, in the end, we must remember this party’s proud tradition of doing what is right for the country. And John McCain is a man who understands that tradition. I am proud to endorse him today, and I hope you will be proud to lend him your support and your votes throughout the election year…”
-George W. Bush’s concession speech, March 8, 2000

[Nicomacheus]

Very nice. A Victor Davis Hanson quote and a McCain Candidacy in 2000 and an early "victory" for the War on Terror.

All of this makes me think that you'll turn SARS into a worldwide epidemic by 2004 and by 2006 McCain will be delivering on the legacy of Lafayette by freeing Paris from Gaullist oppression. J/K

Look forward to more.

Great Style, btw.

[Vextra]

I too am intrigued by this. With McCain in power, it makes me wonder if they'd even bother going into Iraq in the first place, especially if they get Osama in the Winter of '01. As to Afghanistan, I suspect it will remain a sinkhole, but perhaps a stronger, more willing Coalition, might be able to stabilize the situation by now, or at least minimize casualties.

Of course, the War on Terror might also escalate, given that OBL could now be turned into a Martyr....

I look forward to more of this, and I find myself wondering why something so simple and ingenious hasn't been thought of before.

[Blochead]

Originally Posted by Nicomacheus

Very nice. A Victor Davis Hanson quote and a McCain Candidacy in 2000 and an early "victory" for the War on Terror.

I picked up Autumn of War a few months ago and only got the chance to start reading it now. It was a good reminder of what many Americans felt in 2001 and the extreme expectations and fears of both sides of the debate. This TL is in large part inspired by it.

All of this makes me think that you'll turn SARS into a worldwide epidemic by 2004 and by 2006 McCain will be delivering on the legacy of Lafayette by freeing Paris from Gaullist oppression. J/K

We'll see where it goes. I've only got the TL outlined up to that moment in December 2001, though as we catch up to that point we'll find that the attacks have gone VERY differently as well - the question of Iraq is not yet resolved, though it is certainly on the table.

Look forward to more.

Great Style, btw.

Thanks! I'm going to be trying some more narrative excerpts for this one, though there are still some parts that will lend themselves better to my traditional format.

Originally Posted by Vextra

I too am intrigued by this. With McCain in power, it makes me wonder if they'd even bother going into Iraq in the first place, especially if they get Osama in the Winter of '01. As to Afghanistan, I suspect it will remain a sinkhole, but perhaps a stronger, more willing Coalition, might be able to stabilize the situation by now, or at least minimize casualties.

Afghanistan is definitely going to turn out differently. Iraq is still an open question, as stated earlier - if the US does go in, the case will be stated in a different way than OTL's administration did, given the differing cabinet that McCain is going to have.

Of course, the War on Terror might also escalate, given that OBL could now be turned into a Martyr....

It will certainly be different, I'll give you that.

I look forward to more of this, and I find myself wondering why something so simple and ingenious hasn't been thought of before.

Thanks! To be honest, I haven't fully thought through the consequences of it myself. So it will be as interesting for me to write it as it will be (I hope!) to read it.

[Blochead]

PART II: 1998-2000

“… Despite the braggadocio of past years, we have in fact done very little – and so invited war onto our shores.”
-Victor Davis Hanson

“That's the challenge of pessimism; it's really hard to aim low enough that you're pleasantly surprised around as often and as much as you're unpleasantly surprised.”
-Eliezer Yudkowsky

---

There were a lot of bombings in 1998.

The first were directed against the United States – In Kenya and Tanzania, al Qaeda killed hundreds of Americans and Africans both. Perhaps most ironically of all, bin Laden cast his rhetoric in a criticism of African policy that seemed to be some exaggeration of Clinton’s liberal critics – al Qaeda struck at Africa to “avenge” the invasion of Somalia, the genocide in Rwanda, and other crimes. This is not to imply al Qaeda had any particular affinity for American liberalism, but perhaps, in retrospect, it is not hard to see already in 1998 signs of the world polarization that would come in the following decades. As the US response struck Sudan’s largest pharmaceutical factory and targets in Afghanistan, (followed by Operation Desert Fox), many Islamic countries began denying the use of their bases for military operations against others.

The attack against the USS Cole in 2000 was the last of the pre 9/11 attacks by al Qaeda against the United States. Though due to its military aim it did not meet the formal definition of terrorism, the attack was widely condemned as such. American concern about terrorism was growing, but Americans at this time were nevertheless more concerned about war with Iraq, Russia (after a close call at Pristina International Airport) or China than any central Asian backwater. Although there were no reprisal attacks after those on the USS Cole, this did not deter al Qaeda in any way. As the world would soon find out, their plans were about to undergo drastic escalation…

“In the fall of 1999, the ten operatives selected by Bin Ladin for the planes operation were chosen to attend an elite training course at al Qaeda’s Mes Aynak camp in Afghanistan. Bin Ladin personally selected the veteran fighters who received this training, and several of them were destined for important operations…By January 20, 2000, the ten-aircraft strategy had the clear consensus of al Qaeda’s command structure – the attack would be in three, coordinated phases – one against each coast of the United States, and a third targeted at East Asia.”

-9/11 Commission Report

“… the final results are in, and we should be expecting a concession speech shortly. We have 302 electoral votes for McCain-Thompson and 236 for Gore-Lieberman. John McCain will be the next President of the United States.”
-CNN News, November 7, 2000

[maverick]

Been Winning So Long, I've Lost It - The Long War TL

Not the conventional, America-wank scenario, it would seem...quite the contrary actually....

Can't wait for more...is it that they get too confident and expand the war until they are overstretched or that they put too much will and energy into a conflict that they've lost from the get-go? (Like Afghanistan, like anyone could win a war in Afghanistan)

[Blochead]

PART IV: 2000-2001
“For other nations, utopia is a blessed past never to be recovered; for Americans it is just beyond the horizon.”
-Henry Kissinger

“We are living in the aftermath of something. Are we on the eve of something else?”
-Charles Morice

---

These were the last years of the “End of History.”
In Mexico, seven decades of PRI rule ended with the election of PAN candidate Vincente Fox to the Presidency. He would be a key ally of future President McCain in the reform of American immigration law. Vietnam, the great albatross of America’s Cold War experience, welcomed Bill Clinton and hoped for integration into the growing world economy. His “third way” ally, Tony Blair and his Labour Party, won a victory in British elections the next year. The People’s Republic of China’s economic transformation was met global recognition, winning a bid to host the Olympics in 2008. Even the Balkans seemed to be looking a brighter place – Slobodan Milosevic had surrendered to federal police and would be tried for war crimes in due course.

Recognizing hindsight, it was easy to be optimistic. But the turn of the millennium gave equal fodder for pessimists.

Not long after Israel ended its 22 year occupation of southern Lebanon, it became entangled in a new battle in Palestine. Surrounded by throngs of Israeli police, opposition Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The al-Aqsa intifada began soon afterwards, and by the next year Sharon’s Likud Party would lead Israel – this tussle would not end quickly. But the Jews and Arabs had been fighting for thousands of years, thought the 21st century man; it was tragic, but the liberal democratic order could not triumph in a day.

Bombs were falling on Iraq once again. Defying the Security Council, Saddam was once again dragging out the diplomatically excruciating process of unconventional disarmament. This would be President McCain’s first major international problem, and he was certainly not going to cut Saddam Hussein any slack. The RAF and USAF began tearing apart Iraqi air defenses with impunity.

“… I am sorry about the thorough search, but you know the men who tried to kill me came as reporters too… I think God was trying to keep me here, really. For the struggle that was to come… September 9th. The attempt on my life made a few papers, but I think it would have made more if it was successful. I suppose a cynic could say that if I had died, the West would have noticed more. The ISI connection, al Qaeda’s involvement… I could have told them that, if they were listening.”

- Ahmad Shah Massoud, in an interview with Frontline, 2002

[Nicomacheus]

Originally Posted by Blochead

“… I am sorry about the thorough search, but you know the men who tried to kill me came as reporters too… I think God was trying to keep me here, really. For the struggle that was to come… September 9th. The attempt on my life made a few papers, but I think it would have made more if it was successful. I suppose a cynic could say that if I had died, the West would have noticed more. The ISI connection, al Qaeda’s involvement… I could have told them that, if they were listening.”

- Ahmad Shah Massoud, in an interview with Frontline, 2002

Now that's interesting. A far different invasion of Afghanistan?

I assume you mean the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the primary Intelligence service of Pakistan, rather than the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.

[Blochead]

Originally Posted by Nicomacheus

Now that's interesting. A far different invasion of Afghanistan?

It will be different, but there are still going to be some parallels - hence the fighting at Tora Bora in December. It has the potential to help out the government in the long term if the USA can keep a major player like Massoud on its side though.

I assume you mean the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the primary Intelligence service of Pakistan, rather than the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.

Of course. Massoud was one of the leading voices against Pakistani intervention in Afghanistan, so it would not be at all surprising if the allegations of ISI involvement were true.

[Blochead]

Originally Posted by maverick

Not the conventional, America-wank scenario, it would seem...quite the contrary actually....

Yeah, this is... different. Not quite sure of the best term.

Can't wait for more...is it that they get too confident and expand the war until they are overstretched or that they put too much will and energy into a conflict that they've lost from the get-go? (Like Afghanistan, like anyone could win a war in Afghanistan)

I don't want to spoil too much, but it's sort of a mix. Just imagine a more popular, competent, but still misguided response, I suppose.

[Iamwinterborn]

Looking forward to the next installment...

[Blochead]

PART V: 2001

“If economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion.”
-George Bernard Shaw

“The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”
-Thomas Sowell

---

“As the dotcom bubble collapse reverberates throughout the economy, it appears that John McCain is preparing a series of tax cuts to stimulate the economy… While McCain is not a believer in supply-side theory, it appears he will be cutting taxes not to raise revenue but for the traditional reasons of countercyclical fiscal policy... Most personal income tax cuts will be focused on the poor and middle class, with the exception of capital gains cuts which will primarily benefit the income of upper-middle and upper class Americans…”
-Newsweek, March 2001

“The success of McCain’s tax legislation has instilled confidence in the new administration… New legislation circulating through the Congress includes a compromise corporate tax reform bill that would reduce loopholes and lower the overall rate… More ambitious is his promise to begin reforming Social Security… While traditionally the left has been strongly opposed to anything that hints of private accounts, the proposed creation of universal 401(k) accounts with matching government grants has found some appeal among progressive economists…”
-New York Times, April 2001

“Just look at the list of targets and planes downed. This is not just an attack on the United States, or even the West. This is an attack upon globalization, on the notion of capitalism itself… An attack on modernity, because wealth and prosperity are its essence…”
- Weekly Standard, September 2001

[pieman3141]

Huh. So.. this begs the question: Which targets?

I'm not a complete expert on tax-cuts, but it sounds like McCain's policies are somewhat better. I'm unsure of what Bush's were back in the old days, though...

[Blochead]

PART XXVIII: January 2002 – January 2004

“There cannot be a crisis this week. My schedule is already full.”
-Henry Kissinger

---

“The strategies of 2005 were old ideas, then, but 2003 was their proving ground… The military had, partially by stroke of fortune and partially by intention, discovered it could collapse a state without direct application of conventional land forces. A combination of political instability and ‘overwhelming airpower against critical targets’ brought Iraq’s government to its knees and eliminated the threat of a weapons of mass destruction program or future Iraqi regional ambitions… While President McCain and western leaders lamented ethnic conflict in Iraq, particularly after the 2004 assassination campaign against Shiite expatriates and the subsequent coup d’etat, military planners instead noted the multiplier effect airpower could have on ethnic rebellion.”
-Frank Newsome, The Wars that Began the 21st Century

“Latin America: Friendship, if you can keep it

… McCain’s policies of reducing US barriers to trade and immigration in 2001 appealed to many Latin American countries… Despite an increase in funding for ‘counterterror’ measures at the border, the McCain immigration policies have allowed guest workers from all over Latin America to enjoy better lives and access to the United States. McCain won over conservative Chilean President Joaquin Lavin with a major free trade agreement in 2003, and with prospects for CAFTA looking bright, perhaps a pan-American free trade agreement is not too far off… Though undoubtedly much of the resistance to this free trade agenda will come from conflicts over agriculture protection, which McCain heavily opposes but nevertheless enjoys major domestic support in the US… At the same time, however, the US cannot expect Latin America to cooperate without significant and consistent diplomatic engagement. Though the war on terror and rogue states capture Washington’s attention now, there are political stumbling blocks to the its Latin American agenda it cannot ignore… Looming questions about the 2002 coup in Venezuela have evoked a populist backlash even as pro-US governments retain power. Such sentiments are also apparent in the ongoing “Gas War” in Bolivia, or the reaction to the 2001 Argentine fiscal crisis…”
-Foreign Affairs, January/February 2004

“Dean began his exploratory committee in May 2002. Since then, he has built up a small but vocal grassroots movement… Others rumored to enter the race include Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, and North Carolina Senator John Edwards… However, candidates and party members as a whole may face a long road ahead. Democrats such as Zell Miller have already effectively endorsed John McCain, but perhaps the most devastating blow may come from 2000 Vice Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman… Lieberman stated not only that he would not run in 2004, but is likely to endorse his reelection bid…”
-The Atlantic Monthly, December 2003

Meanwhile, the war on terror still raged. American forces in Pakistan began to gradually scale back their freedom of operation. Most troops operated from bases along the border or were embedded with Pakistani forces at a small scale. NATO forces in Afghanistan operated on much the same principle – large American units were usually formed and deployed independently of Afghani troops during major offensives. Otherwise, ISAF was focused on building the legitimacy of the Afghani government. For many, contact with these police or military forces were their first meeting with the new regime in Kabul, and ISAF wanted to ensure they functioned effectively. [1]

Meanwhile, al-Hamdani ruled in fear of his country unraveling. Requesting foreign support to prop his government up, he found that Saudi aid was not enough and that his security forces needed to be retrained if they were to withstand a seemingly inevitable Iranian or Turkish power play. In September 2003, when Baghdad failed to ratify an agreement to share oil revenues “fairly,” riots broke out in Kirkuk and southern, Shiite-dominated cities. As even domestic law enforcement became problematic, al-Hamdani realized he needed manpower, money, and to rebuild his security forces. The US and Western world saw this as an opportunity. In exchange for a UN observer presence to monitor ethnic violence and WMD inspection (along with the warning that America would reserve the right to create “No Fly Zones”), Iraq would have its embargoes lifted. These negotiations, which concluded in October, signaled a massive influx of military equipment into Iraq on the Saudi checkbook.

Iran watched these developments with unease. Previously ecstatic to see Saddam fall, the prospect of a Saudi puppet state was a major threat to Tehran. In response, the IRGC began to build up support inside Iraq and try and infiltrate SCIRI and Islamic Dawa party members back into the country. Both countries fell into a spiral of mutual paranoia. Terrorist incidents in Khuzestan in November lead to a security crackdown there and fears of a response in Shiite-populated provinces in Saudi Arabia, where political repression was strengthened. Both countries began competing for influence in Pakistan, with Saudi Arabia finding greater support among the military and the Iranians among Shiite-influenced reformist and opposition party members in the civilian government. On top of this, both countries faced other problems even as oil prices rose. Saudi Arabia had to cope with its own violent anti-government radicals and al Qaeda attacks, while the UNSC increasingly threatened Iran. Both countries responded to dissent with crackdowns on reformists and nationalist, sectarian rhetoric. American carriers patrolled an ever more uncertain gulf.

---

[1] Pakistan will be covered in greater detail in later updates.

[Historico]

Nice update Blochead, Itll be interesting to see how the Democratic Primary Race ends up in TTTL...Also I like the mention of McCain and his status with CAFTA and its impacts...Keep it comming

[Blochead]

Well one difference is that Wesley Clark won't run (there's a decent amount of evidence suggesting Clark only ran - indeed, only solidly went Democratic - because of the nature of the race). Dean's schtick is going to be a bit different since the Iraq War didn't happen. The Democrats will have more work to do either way.

Yeah, McCain is a pretty solid free trader and that agenda will do a bit better diplomatically... Which is not necessarily saying it'll be popular.

[maverick]

Oh, right wing Chile! you so crazy

Maybe all the good candidates lose and we see McCain vs Dean

[Blochead]

PART XXIX: May 2003 – May 2004

“I regard the death and mangling of a couple thousand men as a small affair, a kind of morning dash — and it may be well that we become so hardened.”
-William Tecumseh Sherman

“The battles are many, and the names used are varied. But the goal is one: a Crusader-Rafidite[1] war against the Sunnis.”
-Abu Zarqawi

---

“In the time Kayani struggled to keep Pakistan together, ISAF operated under the illusion that the fragile country was at the very least, a partner. The reality was that most of Pakistan harbored great resentment and suspicion towards Western forces, and only fear of more violence prevented a coup by hard-line elements of the military, who understood how truly tenuous their grasp would be in the aftermath. What the military also knew but did not advertise was the state of Pakistan’s strategic arsenal. Strikes by the US during the conflict with Khan had left it crippled and in disarray. While the US had tried to target strikes so that their ability to launch or be transported would be momentarily disrupted, Kayani’s fellow officers routinely lied to the United States, Kayani, and to the Pakistani people as to the actual status of warheads. India’s intelligence community estimated that Kayani’s officers covered up the inoperability or inability to retrieve some 30% of their warheads, perhaps as late in October of 2004… The Shia-Sunni conflict and tribal insurgencies that the US had helped unleash through its interventions in Iraq and Pakistan now consumed its attention.”
-Stephen Brewer, The Age of Madness

“At least five have been killed during anti-government riots in Islamabad today as thousands gathered to protest the presence of foreign troops in northern Pakistan… Kayani’s refusal to submit a timetable for the end of the still 45,000 strong presence provoked widespread criticism among both opposition politicians and the broader population… The Pakistani People’s Party also claimed that the Americans were inflaming sectarian conflict by arming tribal lashkars in the FATA and NWFP, who have reportedly participated in anti-Shia violence…”
-Reuters, March 3rd 2004

“… As we wait for this State Department briefing, it’s important to remember that most of the regular army in Iraq is Shia, but the Republican Guard coup and al-Hamdani government was Sunni… Now the most intense fighting is here in Baghdad and central Iraq, but the reality is that this revolution has already swept hold of much of much of Iraq’s Shia south. Its leaders are broadcasting from Karbala, where two days ago millions gathered for the second celebration of Ashura since the fall of Saddam…”
-CNN, March 5th 2003
The first Ashura had been marred by tension, as Sunni security forces attempted to prevent sectarian violence from exploding so soon in the wake of the government coup and potential civil war. Now, however, the Iraqi army itself refused to pledge fealty to al-Hamdani. Regulars deserted or reconstituted their units as revolutionary forces, while homegrown religious extremists such as the Jund As-Samaa (Soldiers of Heaven) [2] lead attacks on Republican Guard units. Iran also played a strong role, with volunteers flowing across the border to fight under Shia Arab banners.

“The breaking point for this sectarian tension came on March 1st, when Iraqi security forces arrested Ayatollah Ali Sistani, an Iranian-born Shia religious leader who was a strong, moderate voice for democracy in Iraq. Sistani had always been reluctant to promote violence in the wake of the coup, but he expected Shias to claim their place as the majority population in Iraq. But in early 2004, when al-Hamdani ordered the assassination and detention of activists who had traveled from Iran, his messages and to a greater extent, his followers, became more defiant. As both Iranians and Iraqi expatriates were murdered, Sistani’s steadfast refusal to quiet down or leave unnerved the neo-Baathists. He soon became intolerable. Rather than killing him, the Iraqi government arrested him in the lead-up to Ashoura along with a dozen others in Najaf, hoping to avert a revolution. Those in power were correct to believe there would be one, but they only intensified its support.”
-Colin Reeves, The Gulf Wars

“American nuclear strategy is at a point of crisis. If terrorists have access to a nuclear weapon, how do we deter its use? The current theory is that because state resources would be required to furnish terrorists with a nuclear weapon, and we could locate that state and eliminate it… But there’s no single agency which could quickly respond for the purposes of nuclear attribution… Furthermore, how does one actually respond in the case of deterrence? In the case of Pakistan, we have not a government but an individual, acting in a manner where we cannot explicitly establish government complicity, distributing nuclear material. Suppose the next time it is a nuclear weapon, or the enriched material which is the greatest technical obstacle to constructing one privately? Do we retaliate against the government? If so, how do we retaliate? In proportion to our damage? Enough to prevent the threat of further nuclear distribution? Suppose this nuclear warhead is stolen from Russia because of a corrupt officer – we cannot risk retaliating only proportionally against Russia, because they have a nuclear arsenal too. Indeed, we cannot risk retaliating at all. Furthermore, establishing the transparency necessary for nuclear attribution and deterrence would require international cooperation by nuclear powers… But this very cooperation exposes countries to the risk of our retaliation, and indeed most countries do not feel as threatened by nuclear terrorism as we do.”
-Testimony to Congress, April 7th 2004

“Report: Saudi and Turkish Armies mobilized.
Report: At least 2,000 killed in clash at Baghdad
State Dept: Regional talks vital”
-CNN, March 7th

Iraq burned, but it would not be a repeat of 1991. This time, the Iraqi government could not hold onto power. With the Iraqi army gutted by revolt and the infighting during the coup, there was no hope of al-Hamdani holding onto power. That was what would make 2004 all the more dangerous for the Middle East. The Saudi Arabians feared more than anything the expansion of Shia power, and mobilized troops on its border to show the Iraqis that it was prepared for the worst. Of course, the state of Saudi internal security and military readiness meant that an actual border crossing was unlikely, but providing arms was not. Turkey, on the other hand, was fully ready and willing to intervene to prevent a wider Kurdish revolt. But as the new Shia revolution seemed further along the road to success, the question arose of what form Iraq’s new government would take. Most were relatively secular, but the most militant contingents – the ones bearing the brunt of the costs of fighting – were religious radicals. As March progressed, Saudi volunteers began flowing across the border, and Saudi Arabia became a massive transshipment point for arms. Meanwhile, Turkish troops remained in place. But Iran began arming its own proxy groups in Iraq, passing on orders of Chinese and Russian arms directly into Iraq.

While al-Hamdani welcomed the influx of Saudi arms, he overplayed his hand when he allowed Republican Guard commanders to employ gas against the Shias. This brought widespread condemnation and all but a declaration of war by the Iranian government. Iranian “volunteers” flew Iranian-purchased aircraft against the Sunnis as early as March 20th – fooling nobody in the international community. Saudi Arabia responded by seeking out Russian mercenary pilots, usually employed in African conflicts, as Iraq lay in complete anarchy by April. NATO attempts at imposing a no-fly-zone were floated, but Turkey’s interest in fighting against the Kurds meant a true peacekeeping effort was very unlikely. Escalating violence in Pakistan was already putting a strain on NATO troops.

For now, the world’s attention was on the Persian Gulf and Iraq. As Iran’s nuclear program continued, Turkish troops rolled into Kurdistan in the final week of April. Possibilities of some sort of American intervention were floated, but what could America realistically do? Nobody was eager to intervene in a civil war – it seemed too late. Regional talks failed. UN calls for a truce failed.

The American primaries ultimately went to Kerry. With the world becoming a more violent place after the seeming victories of 2003, Dean and Edwards’ lack of foreign policy experience torpedoed their campaigns. Kerry was more hawkish than his fellows, had the military record to compete with McCain, and was unlikely to significantly deviate from McCain’s positions in South Asia. Some on the progressive wing of the party wondered if there were really two different candidates at all. But some commentators thought it a good sign. American politics was finally showing signs that it might have the cultural competence to conduct the war on terror, with a war veteran at the helm either way. Others, such as Andrew Bacevich, wondered if the United States was straying too far into militarism.

There were few who would know how truly irrelevant the American election campaigns of 2004 would yet become.

---

[1] Sunni extremist epithet for Shia Muslims.
[2] Based on the OTL group. It is still a cult-militia which hopes to hasten the arrival of the 12th imam by waging holy war. It is allied with the Mahdi Army, but the rise of Moqtada al-Sadr will be discussed later.

[Lord Khuzdul]

New member here. I must say this is a magnificent timeline.

So, Turkey moves. I won't say finally, because I know how sluggish my country can get when it is time to act decisively (Note that the last two times we did act, it was under the same man, who is a decreipt old wreck at this point.). Turkish government and political landscape (Two very unrelated things, believe me. Your being elected in no way guarantees your being able to actually govern the country.) are a quagmire of factions and power groups, most of them afraid of sneezing to avoid offending US, and the rest spread between dislike and violent opposition, even if they don't fit into the same slice of political spectrum. All in all, an interesting place to live in, even if it is quite frustrating sometimes. I think, ITTL, it will get even more interesting to be Turkish.