This is only indirectly related to the current political campaign, but I wanted to write down this idea FWIW.
Since it is very clear that we will be withdrawing our troops from Iraq, probably before the next 24 months are up, unless McCain is elected and decides to ignore the advice of his generals, I've been pondering the issues involved.
Two of them are reparations for the harm we've caused, and leaving behind a viable society and economy.
I don't think that even Obama is prepared to say that we accomplished nothing positive in Iraq. He is on record that he believes it was a mistake, a diversion, a financial drain, and that he would act firmly to undo it as much as possible. But there still is the possibility for grossly mismanaging the withdrawal, leaving behind a smoking ruin of an economy filled with people who hate America.
One way to help with both of those things: reparations for the human misery caused by the war.
It would not be necessary to accept full blame for this; most people in Iraq, the US, and the world would accept the premise that the blame can be shared between the US and Saddam Hussein. However, Saddam is no longer in a position to make reparations, and we are.
In the Islamic world, a common way for someone to make reparations for causing death or injury (as I understand it, just based on reading), is to make a payment, or diya. The amount will vary depending on various factors, but it is usually in the range of 2-3 thousand dollars for a death, less for an injury. For the purposes of this note, let's assume that the average acceptable payment would be $5000 for each of 100,000 deaths we have caused ($500 million dollars), and that, together with another $500 million for assorted injuries, would be seen by Iraqis, their fellow Muslims, and by many throughout the world as a fair payment for the human damages we have caused. The payments would be judged by Iraqi courts according to US guidelines, and would be paid to the closest surviving kinsman, or to the individual in the case of a serious nonfatal injury.
Also, along with guidelines from the US, Iraqi courts could decide on funds to rebuild infrastructure destroyed in the war (a lot of this has already been done under the occupation); let us say that another $1 million million would be allocated for that.
This would cost the US $2 million million dollars, to be paid during and for a specified period of time (say 1 year) after we were out. The people we have damaged would have something back for their loss, which would, I believe, be approved of very much throughout Iraq and the world. But more importantly perhaps, this would feed a million million dollars right into every level of the Iraqi economy, giving it a tremendous boost. And this is much more direct that relying on Iraqi oil to jumpstart their economy, since it would be paid directly to the people.
The cost to us of $2 million million is quite significant, but tiny compared to the cost of the present war. Also, in spite of the inevitable griping from the Right that we would be humiliating the US military, there are two things to keep in mind: first, the overwhelming consensus is that this humiliation has already occurred, in spades, with the Iraq War. The second is more subtle: the payment of diya is generally considered appropriate when the death is not murder, but is the result of an accidental action, or what has been characterized as "collateral damage". That is, from a certain point of view, we would simply be paying back what was lost by the Iraqis due to collateral damages in the war.
I don't know what Obama and his advisors will decide to do about this, but something along these lines might be helpful.
Greg Shenaut