Iraq is a mess. There are many places to lay blame and many frameworks in which to view the conflict. The fact of the matter is, there are really no innocent parties, just a vicious cycle of the oppressed and the oppressors changing places, coupled with foreign parties exerting external influence on an unstable state. One framework that has emerged is viewing Iraq as a sectarian conflict, pitting Sunni against Shia. This is a dangerous framework and needs to stop. Everyone loses when the conflict is painted as sectarian, including Canadians.
There have been at least two publicly documented cases of Canadians joining the terrorist group the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria ("ISIS"). The recruiting methods of ISIS have a clear "us versus them" sectarian tone. ISIS plays on religious notions of martyrdom and anti-Shia rhetoric.
The first Canadian reported to have joined ISIS was Salman Ashrafi. Ashrafi was educated and employed and is of Pakistani descent. It does not appear that he had an affiliation to the conflict in Iraq. The crowd that Ashrafi affiliated with and which is alleged to have pushed him towards joining the terrorist group wrote about martyrdom and killing the enemies of Allah on the Internet. Martyrdom is considered a high honour in Islam, and has become a powerful tool to lure others to take extremist actions.
Farah Mohamed Shirdon, another Canadian who has joined ISIS, is of Somali descent. Again it does not appear that Shirdon has an affiliation to the conflict in Iraq. The rhetoric employed by Shirdon is even more alarming than Ashrafi's crowd. Shirdon is reported to have tweeted "Beheading Shias is a beautiful thing." This is a blatantly clear sectarian statement.
Canada is the best state in the world at working together with people of different religious backgrounds. Sectarianism has no place in Canadian society, and it is highly alarming that there are Canadians joining foreign terrorist groups that utilize this rhetoric and pray on the incorrect notions of honour in killing those who are different.
Sectarianism is even worse for those involved in the conflict in Iraq. The sectarian rhetoric is used when it serves the political interests of the parties involved in a conflict, and it creates a dangerous cycle of oppression.
Iraqi history demonstrates this point. The Ba'ath party in Iraq began as an Arab nationalist movement in the early 1950s. The party actually initially consisted of majority of Shias. The Shias over time lost interest in the movement, and Shia membership vastly declined. The Ba'ath party under Saddam Hussein attempted to silence the Shia in Iraq, especially after the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran. Iran consists of a majority of Shias, and Saddam oppressed the Shias for fear of an Iranian style revolution in Iraq.
During the Iran/Iraq war in the 1980s, Iran clearly used a sectarian rhetoric to garner support from its citizens for the war against the Saddam lead regime in Iraq. Saddam remained in power after the war, and is again considered to be oppressive towards the Shia. Fast-forward to the American invasion of Iraq in the 2000s, and a government lead by a Shia, Nouri al-Maliki, is installed in Iraq. Maliki failed to gain the support and trust of the Sunnis in Iraq. One of the reasons for the rise of ISIS, who describe themselves as Sunni, was the failures of Maliki, and what is seen as a Shia-controlled government ruling over a minority Sunni population in Iraq.
ISIS has made it clear that they want to eradicate the Shia. This has lead to the killings of many Shias, and even Sunnis who do not sympathize with their cause. It has also lead to the formation of Shia militias that have reportedly targeted Sunnis in Shia majority cities such as Baghdad.
Throughout this history the various parties have take advantage of sectarianism when it suits their political goals, most commonly to remain in or gain power. This creates a vicious cycle of defining those who are different, creating fear around them and oppressing them. History has also indicated that when sects are oppressed it creates the conditions for the employment of sectarian rhetoric by extremists. This rhetoric needs to stop in order for the vicious cycle of violence to end.
There have been some good responses by religious leaders on the sectarian issue. Take for example, the high-ranking Shia cleric Ali al-Sistani. Sistani called for all Iraqi's to join the Iraqi state army to fight ISIS. He did not call for only the Shia to join, but all Iraqis, and he stated that they should work within the Iraqi state system. These are distinctions that have largely been glossed over, and the perpetual cycle of sectarianism is still rearing its ugly head.
In Canada, the Canadian Council of Imams ("CCI") issued a statement to combat radicalization of Muslim youth, stating: "Canadian Muslims are law-abiding citizens and no one should get involved in international wars on the belief and excuse that they are helping their Muslim brothers."
It is clear that CCI is not employing sectarian rhetoric and they have stated that the current conflicts in the Middle East are international wars, which do not have to do with helping other Muslims. The conflict in Iraq is a serious one that needs to end, however, it should not be painted as a sectarian conflict. When sectarian rhetoric is employed, everyone loses, because the vicious cycle of turning the oppressed into the oppressor continues.
MORE ON HUFFPOST: