A taste of democracy
Who would have guessed? Without any party holding a clear majority the Iraqis are finding it difficult to come to a consensus on who should do what. It’s ironic that one of the key disagreements between the Shiites and the Kurds is over who should head the oil ministry. That position is more coveted than the presidency. I’m shocked after years of sectarian warfare they just can’t all kiss and make up.
The US may get their puppet leader after all. Allawi is an artful politician who is thriving in the current amateur environment. He has declared that he will represent the opposition party. If the Iraqi people get fed up with the lack of progress made by Jaafari then, by the time the next round of elections occur in December 2005, Allawi will be poised to take over. That would be a best case scenario for the Bush administration but for the Iraqi people he may be a “Saddam Lite”.
The US may get their puppet leader after all. Allawi is an artful politician who is thriving in the current amateur environment. He has declared that he will represent the opposition party. If the Iraqi people get fed up with the lack of progress made by Jaafari then, by the time the next round of elections occur in December 2005, Allawi will be poised to take over. That would be a best case scenario for the Bush administration but for the Iraqi people he may be a “Saddam Lite”.
posted by mochi at 7:30 AM
9 Comments:
We, as Americans, take Democracy for granted as, for the most part, its all we know. The fact is that the Iraqis do not know Democracy and it just does not seem that they will be tolerable of any results as there are so many different political groups. There are Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds, and small break offs of those groups as well. Correct me if Im wrong, as I am unfamiliar with the voting results, but what will potentially further hurt this push for Democracy, especially in a country that was taken over and had this system forced down their throats, is that it is not America with two corporate-controlled political parties. There are multiple parties involved and given that, a majority vote may be inconceivable. Moreover, I cannot see a nation in turmoil with a new political system accepting results with a winner gaining 40% of a vote. What I have posted here is more concern than opinion, I request enlightenment from you, my fellow bloggers. Is my concern here legit?
I think it is legitimate concern. When I read about all of the arguing between the Iraqi elected officials, I feel more optimistic. This is the way a republic is supposed to work. What is going on over there right now sounds a lot like our own House of Represetatives, or Britains House of Commons. What you said about multiple parties is a good point. But remember that many republics in Europe also have multiple parties. When it gets time to vote, they usually have a way of making deals and forming coalitions. Maybe I am a little too optimistic but I believe that representative democracy can work anywhere with any race and any religion. I have known a few Iraqi's and I am currently friends with a Khurdish family and they are wonderful people. I really hope everything works out in their country. We will just have to wait and see.
CH and GD, I happen to think that democracy is born of revolution. Historically it has happened that way anyway. I also happen to believe that democracy is a heart condition, and requires the faith and commitment necessary to see it through (I'm speaking in a secular sense here). The problem with the Iraq scenario is that democracy has been artificially seeded, and in the sight of the Iraqi people, its just another form of government/leadership. I am not looking down on the Iraqi people, but I think that the vast majority of them are culturally opposed to the proposition of democracy, and that if the United States were to withdraw the artificial impetus that is behind the current movement, the nation would go right back where it was. We have the rest of the Arab nations as models for comparison, and its hard to imagine that we, even in our arrogance, could overcome centuries, yea millennia of culture.
GD, you may uphold Japan as an example, but I don't think that it ever became the democratic nation that most westerners think it is. I realize Rush Limbaugh says that we must be optimistic, etc. but we have to tinge it with a dose of realism and real world perspective. We look at current examples of Khadafi and his dissembling of his weapons programs, and that I think is a result of fear and the caution of an aging dictator, not the realization that democracy works.
Overall, I do believe that democracy can work for anyone but the price has to be paid in order to have lasting ownership. I just don't think the Iraqis paid the price--so how can they truly appreciate it?
I would like to refer both of you to my still-developing model at:
http://newssnipet.blogspot.com/2004/12/more-to-come.html
If we consider Iraq under Saddam as being at the south pole of the model (fascism), the only true way to reach democracy (the north pole) is to go through the circle by way of revolution. Due to the United States intervention, we have unseated Saddam and begun to artificially PUSH Iraq up the right side of the circle. As you can see, there are many obstacles (Sadir, for example, fits right in the "Radicalism/fundamentalist mold), much of Iraq is hovering between Ochlocracy and Radicalism right now. We may be able to push Iraq up the side of the circle to eventual democracy, but the cost and sacrifice is going to be staggering. I would say, oh...about twice the cost of the revolution they should have started themselves.
Look forward to both of your comment and critique.
-Jack
Jack, what you call realism is actually pessimism. It's kind of an old style isolationist view. It is also rooted in a belief that certain people of certain races and religions need the efficiency of government that a dictatorship provides. You may not say it and you will probably deny it, but I bet you would also prefer the stability that an Iraqi dictatorship offers the region. The Iraqis have sacrificed a great deal here. However they needed our help. Bush 41 betrayed those people at the end of the first Gulf War when he told them to rise up. They rose up and we left them to be slaughtered. Our own revolution would not have happened without the assistance of a foreign power. The Soviet Bloc disintegrated because of the help of a foreign power. I remember when Gorbachev started glasnost. At that time I was only 17, but I remember saying that the Soviet Union was about to end. My reasoning was a belief that once you give a people, any people that is, a taste of freedom, they are going to demand more and more of it. You mentioned the history of the region, but let me remind you that the idea of representative government is still a relatively new concept anywhere. I consider myself to be a small D democrat and although I call myself a conservative, I am actually more of an 18th century liberal. I believe in the power and desire the human heart to be free of tyranny. Reagan said that "There is no weapon or arsenal in the arsenals of the world so formidable as the moral courage of free men and women." People like Kissinger and the Nixon/Ford crowd of diplomats said that he was an idiot and they said he needed to be "realistic". I have a feeling that you are a Kissinger fan.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
(I'll get it right sooner or later...)
Glen, you are right in your assessment. I am more than a little isolationist, and feel that as a nation we should work harder at minding our own business. I see an ideological fever developing among some Americans that poses a threat to all of our security. When the Soviet Union was on top, its imperialism was spread for "the good of the world", and we are quickly developing the fundamental mindset that it is our responsibility to spread democracy.
Glen, the Iraqi war was not pitched as a liberation effort, it was supposed to be the removal of threat. If it was a liberation effort, then it WAS indeed American imperialism. (regardless of whether we stay there or not or pretend to/not to). Iraq's recognized government did not invite us in to depose them, and I do not recall a mass appeal of the Iraqi people to "liberate" them from Saddam. The "Iraqi freedom" mantra was a ruse for the American public, and many a conservative got caught up in the hype.
In regards to the Soviet bloc-it collapsed economically, Glen, not ideologically. If you visit Russia or speak to Russians you will find that nothing much has changed beyond economic reform. The bear sleeps, but it is not dead. Putin still preaches a cautious return to the glory of the Union and radical fascist liks Zhirnovsky preach a rise to glory through conquest. The "democrats" so-called have NO voice in Russia and are quietly slipping into obscurity.
Glen, I agree with you on the issue of democracy being a new concept in the area. Look at us, it took 200 years of our own toil and sweat to get where we are...keep in mind, there were Americans in the 60s and 70s who were STILL not given equal status and freedom in this nation. We now look at the world through a self-righteous lense and demand that it follow suit?
I guess the question begs to be asked: how much are we going to have to invest in Iraq in terms of blood and resources? Is there a point when it becomes too costly?
Don't get me wrong, Glen, I believe we should be hopeful about the future and our investment in it, but we need to be more than a little careful about what stock we buy.
If you have a chance, stop by the News Snipet and give me your thoughts about Laura Bush and her trip to Afghanistan. It articulates a little of what I'm trying to convey.
Regards,
-Jack
Jack many were against Iraq and I can respect that position. However, now that we have gone ahead and went through with the overthrow of Saddam, I think it would be immoral of us to install another despot. That is what we did for years in the name of stability. That is why these people in the third world hate us, because we were hypocritical about freedom. It was good for us, but not for them. Freedom for them meant instabiltiy for us. Around 1980, the intellectuals all hailed the power of the Soviet Command Economy. Now they say that it was doomed for failure and its demise had nothing to do with Reagan, and Thatcher. I find that intellectual flip-flop interesting. Sure Russia has a long way to go, but remember in 1800, the only people who voted in this country were white male landowners who also "owned" other human beings. Of course, the Iraqi people were not protesting in the streets and asking us to liberate them. If they would have, they would have been killed. Do you think that the Russians who lived under Stalin's tyranny enjoyed it and did not want to be free. You never saw mass demonstrations there either. I am not going to make a case for us going over there. That is an old argument. The fact is that we did go over there and everyone, regardless of their position on the war, should hope the best for the Iraqi people. I hope that the United States never again installs dictators who murder and oppress people and I hope we never again deal with and prop up dictators like we did with Saddam in the 70's and 80's and the Shah of Iran before him. Not only was helping those ruthless individuals stay in power wrong and immoral, but it turned out that it was also not in our best interest. The hatred of Americans that is so fervent in the Middle East today is a direct result of that so called "stability" type of foreign policy.
Glen, I was one of the few Americans who said "I don't know" to the Iraq war. There was much intelligence I was not privy to, and still not. Therefore I took the position of, "I don't know, but I have to trust those in charge to do the right thing".
I understand the points you present and agree. I do find though that we are moving slowly toward global fascism no what boat we head there in, whether it be "democracy or socialism". Just look at where this nation has gone in the last 10 years!
Lets keep our fingers crossed though.
-Jack
Post a Comment
<< Home