Iraq crisis has become a hub of sectarian crisis between Sunnis Shias and the Kurds. The Shia majority state command was given to Nouri-Al-Maliki after the US forces withdrew and since then sectarian war has heightened with ISIS attacking and capturing Iraq’s major towns with chief aim to establish a Caliphate.
The tension between the Shia and Sunnis can be attributed to several factors.
The Iranian revolution of 1979 when the Shah was overthrown and replaced by a Shia head Ayatollah Khomeini watered the seed of already planted enmity. The situation in Iran is such that Sunnis have no mosques of their own, no representatives on top and are unemployed.
Another reason is the illegal invasion of Iraq by US in 2003. Iraq, a Shia majority state was at that time tyrannically governed by the Sunni leadership under Saddam Husain. US intervention shook the foundation of his tyrannical but stable rule and Iraq lost the stability of its political system.
Nouri -Al-Maliki who was made the premier following US withdrawal did less to subdue the Shia Sunni schism as he followed a narrow and exclusivistic agenda and several Sunnis were left unemployed and had no representation in the government.
ISIS, which was an offshoot of Al Qaida is now determined to establish Sunni dominated regime and US trained Iraqi military has so far been unable to respond to their wrath effectively.
In the absence of US backed support, the situation Is likely to worsen and the big question is that had there been no US intervention back in 2003, would the situation be different? And how can United States attack ISIS now, when it provided them a free run in Syria to topple the Bashar-al-Assad government.
It has been seen in the Syrian conflict as well that interventions by big powers has only heightened the regional conflicts and given rise to autonomous war parties. The irony can be seen that on one hand NATO is supporting the anti regime parties in Syria. And on the other they are fighting against the same in Iraq by attacking the ISIS camps.