Voting and Governing
posted by Will
Voting is good. Seeing waves of Kurds flooding the polls in Kirkuk is a hopeful sight.
But that is all it is--hopeful. The Iraqi election is just another first step. Another positive start that should have come earlier, should have been planned better, executed better. But where to from here? Zalmay Khalilzad will still be in charge. When will the government start governing? Will it be secular, headed by ambitious secular friends of the U.S.? Or, will it be religious, composed of forces like followers of Moqtada al-Sadr and the pro-Iran Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq? If it is perceived as being too close to U.S. intentions, will it be seen as legitimate? If the government is a democratically elected theocracy, will it be a "democracy" like Iran?
cont'd after link
Bush has avoided sounding too optimistic. That's a nice change. Now he must find a way to make sure that we don't sabotage whatever small chance there is that this election will actually create a government that both represents the diverse interests of the Iraqi people and protects those interests once someone is put in charge. The trick will be getting someone in power to stabilize Iraq--but they can't have a mandate to do anything, lest they their opponents simply rebel.
I hope we have a plan this time around. This whole problem comes from our failure to plan. I hope that now we have a plan and that it includes our forces getting out of there very soon.
But that is all it is--hopeful. The Iraqi election is just another first step. Another positive start that should have come earlier, should have been planned better, executed better. But where to from here? Zalmay Khalilzad will still be in charge. When will the government start governing? Will it be secular, headed by ambitious secular friends of the U.S.? Or, will it be religious, composed of forces like followers of Moqtada al-Sadr and the pro-Iran Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq? If it is perceived as being too close to U.S. intentions, will it be seen as legitimate? If the government is a democratically elected theocracy, will it be a "democracy" like Iran?
cont'd after link
Bush has avoided sounding too optimistic. That's a nice change. Now he must find a way to make sure that we don't sabotage whatever small chance there is that this election will actually create a government that both represents the diverse interests of the Iraqi people and protects those interests once someone is put in charge. The trick will be getting someone in power to stabilize Iraq--but they can't have a mandate to do anything, lest they their opponents simply rebel.
I hope we have a plan this time around. This whole problem comes from our failure to plan. I hope that now we have a plan and that it includes our forces getting out of there very soon.
1 Comments:
While certainly an accurate portrayal of the political balance, or imbalance, during Saddam's time in power, I'm not sure how the fact that Sunnis have a different political history in Iraq than Shiites and Kurds informs the process going forward. The salient fact is that these factions will have a difficult (or impossible) time getting along, regardless of who used to be protected or why. This is true especially when foreign influence from Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and organizations like Hezbollah are added to the mix. Simply saying that Sunnis used to be protected while everyone else was exterminated doesn't change the fact that a precarious poltiical balance needs to be struck in Iraq, and a seemingly endless number of factors could tip it deeper into chaos. Should Sunnis just be left out of the process no matter what, because they used to be protected? Will Shiite domination simply hold them in check, or perhaps forcibly punish them for their decades of unjustified supremacy? That sounds to me like a surefire way of guaranteeing a long-term insurgency. And it doesn't sound terribly enlightened ... or democratic.
Post a Comment
<< Home