History is replete with examples of nations assembled of quite disparate parts, held together by a totalitarian leader and secret police that tolerated no sectarian friction. Examples would include the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, China, and, according to CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Iraq.
History also suggests that when the dictator goes away, when the KGB or equivalent are no more, the "nation" falls apart. That has certainly been the experience of the USSR and Yugoslavia.
It may also be what is in store for Iraq, an assemblage of three quite different parts: Kurds, plus Sunni and Shiite Arabs. At the end of World War One, Iraq was "assembled" out of pieces of the Ottoman Empire and called the British Mandate of Mesopotamia.
Like so many colonial units, Iraq's borders had little to do with the facts on the ground and everything to do with the convenience of the colonial powers drawing them. In the absence of Saddam's tough secret police and at last under the control of the Iraqis, the country could fall to pieces.
Turkey might be willing to let this happen if Iraq splits in two, probably not if it splits in three. A combined Sunni Arab and Kurdish state might be tolerable. An independent Kurdistan would be an incitement to Kurdish separatists in southern and eastern Turkey, an incitement which Turkey is likely unwilling to tolerate.
