We Should Be Ashamed To Support Iraq... So Says The NY Times

The Endgame in Iraq

Iraq is becoming a country that America should be ashamed to support, let alone occupy. The nation as a whole is sliding closer to open civil war. In its capital, thugs kidnap and torture innocent civilians with impunity, then murder them for their religious beliefs. The rights of women are evaporating. The head of the government is the ally of a radical anti-American cleric who leads a powerful private militia that is behind much of the sectarian terror.

While I cannot completely agree with the notion that we should, at this point in time and given the committment we have made, withdraw our support from Iraq, it is easy to understand why some have arrived at this conslusion. The paragraph above illustrates the length some people--especially religious zealots with a political ideology fueling their zeal rather than religious principle--will go to further their own standing, advantages and power base within a society.

These religious/ideological zealots come in a wide variety... Some are Shi'ite, some are Sunni, some are Baath, some are terrorists, and some are just plain outright opportunists. Some come from Baghdad, others from Mosul, and more come from Basra. Some are Arab while others are Kurdish. Some come from Iraq, while many come from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Yemen and elsewhere. But there are a few things that are shared no matter what variety they portray:

• All are extreme in their points of view


• All are entrenched in their particular ideology


• All have perverted the religious teachings to meet their own will


• All are prepared to force their will upon others


• All are trying to control the media that reports on them


• All have cast aside human decency, natural law and basic principles of law & order


• All are opportunistic and thrive on chaotic moments created by zealous fervor

If you examine the above list of characteristics, one can apply that list to the Christian Right, the political ultra-conservatives, as well as the political ultra-liberals. All are extremists and willing to apply principles of fascism to achieve their own agendas. The trouble with extremeists is that they are always extreme, always willing to forego rights and principles in favor of their own agendas, and always willing to pervert the interpretation of sacred writings (Bible, Koran, Constitution) to their own understanding of the world.

The Bush administration will not acknowledge the desperate situation. But it is, at least, pushing in the right direction, trying to mobilize all possible leverage in a frantic effort to persuade the leading Shiite parties to embrace more inclusive policies and support a broad-based national government.

THe Bush administration will not acknowledge the desperation of the situation because it would mean admitting that the Bush Doctrine is as erroneous as the intelligence that Bush relied upon to go to war, in direct conflict with the public relations spin the Bush gang has put upon the Iraq effort, and as screwed up as most of the activities in Iraq.

One vital goal is to persuade the Shiites to abort their disastrous nomination of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari. Mr. Jaafari is unable to form a broadly inclusive government and has made no serious effort to rein in police death squads. Even some Shiite leaders are now calling on him to step aside. If his nomination stands and is confirmed by Parliament, civil war will become much harder to head off. And from the American perspective, the Iraqi government will have become something that no parent should be asked to risk a soldier son or daughter to protect.

Arab and Middle Eastern culture is prone to be inclusive and exclusive in the same breath. Status among Middle Eastern peoples--Arabs, Kurds, Persians, etc.--is an essential part of how they define themselves. Unlike in our westernized culture, names are meaningful in the Middle East. A name can tell other from which region a person and their family comes from. It can tell someone whether they are Shi'a or Sunni. A name can tell someone whether a person is of an upper or lower social class. Names also can distinguish between royalty, clerics and lay persons.

The whole of society in Iraq not only depends upon names, but regions, tribes, religious associations, religious sect, and economic status. An Iraqi person weighs all sorts of these types of distinctions before associating with others... and makes decisions to include or exclude based upon these distinctions. While Iraq has had some experience with political affiliation via the Baathists, it was essentially affiliation based on opportunity to be in or out of power. Which is why the vast majority of Baathists were also Sunni. These social behaviors also explains why there are so many Middle Eastern nations ruled by single status families or political parties... Al-Saud in Saudi Arabia, Al-Khalifa in Bahrain, Baathists in the Hussein regime of Iraq.

Unfortunately, after three years of policy blunders in Iraq, Washington may no longer have the political or military capital to prevail. That may be hard for Americans to understand, since it was the United States invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein and helped the Shiite majority to power. Some 140,000 American troops remain in Iraq, more than 2,000 American servicemen and servicewomen have died there so far and hundreds of billions of American dollars have been spent.

And we have made many fiscal blunders as well. Not to mention the number of injured and/or disabled service members, the number of Iraqis killed or injured, and the political fiasco that has been produced by the failure to form a coalition government.

Yet Shiite leaders have responded to Washington's pleas for inclusiveness with bristling hostility, personally vilifying Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and criticizing American military operations in the kind of harsh language previously heard only from Sunni leaders. Meanwhile, Moktada al-Sadr, the radically anti-American cleric and militia leader, has maneuvered himself into the position of kingmaker by providing decisive support for Mr. Jaafari's candidacy to remain prime minister.

These issues and events actually illustrate the points made above.

It was chilling to read Edward Wong's interview with the Iraqi prime minister in The Times last week, during which Mr. Jaafari sat in the palace where he now makes his home, complained about the Americans and predicted that the sectarian militias that are currently terrorizing Iraqi civilians could be incorporated into the army and police. The stories about innocent homeowners and storekeepers who are dragged from their screaming families and killed by those same militias are heartbreaking, as is the thought that the United States, in its hubris, helped bring all this to pass.

Of course, the idea of incorporating these predominantly Shi'ite militia forces into the army and police would give Moktada Al-Sadr, the Shi'ites in general and Jaafari a distinct advantage in the form of military/law enforcement might to force their version of "law and order" on all of Iraq.

It is conceivable that the situation can still be turned around. Mr. Khalilzad should not back off. The kind of broadly inclusive government he is trying to bring about offers the only hope that Iraq can make a successful transition from the terrible mess it is in now to the democracy that we all hoped would emerge after Saddam Hussein's downfall. It is also the only way to redeem the blood that has been shed by Americans and Iraqis alike.

The key is to develop small "majlis" groups in each neighborhood or village, each reporting to a district majlis, and each of those reporting to a regional majlis, and these reporting to the national legislative body. By establishing this type of system, local leaders can be effective in getting important basic things accomplished, thus securing their power base. These local leaders will then have to form coalitions within a defined district to get things accomplished, thus securing the leadership and power base of the district leaders. Then these district leaders will have to form inclusive coaltions with regional leaders, thus securing the regional leadership power base... and these regional leaders will have to form alliances with the national legislative body.

Failure to build these concentric circles of affiliation, political power and influence will lead to continued failure... it's in their nature... it's who they are.