Bushco's blundering entry into Iraq was made with little idea of how to replace Saddam's Baathist party apparatus. The perils of imposing "majority rule" democracy on a society with little relevant political tradition should have been a giant red flag. Bushco has a very limited idea of what democracy is, and it almost excludes the republican concept of protection of the minorities from the tyranny of the majority. The simplistic "up or down vote" is the plainest expression of the raw power grab. Over the past four years, a steady erosion of minority rights has actually been a theme of Rove's drive to abolish a meaningful two-party system.
A one-party system is on the way in Iraq, as well, and it spells failure for US policies there.
MORE ON THE RISE OF THEOCRACY IN IRAQ, BELOW THE JUMP
Majority rule in Iraq, of course, means that Shia will control the government, and it doesn't take a genius to predict that a theocracy will result. This in fact seems to be occurring. In terms of what Bushco wants, (stability of the region and passive compliance with economic and military exploitation), this could be just the opposite of what is desired. US foreign policy since the 50's has favored corrupt non-sectarian dictators. I previously posted
a diary on the evolving situation in Basra, which may be more representative of the country than is Baghdad. Today I followup, with a clipped up version of a story from the
Dallas Morning News.
Democracy remains a highly popular concept in Iraq's southernmost city...Unfortunately, Basra residents say, democracy is still only a concept.
Shiite Muslim religious parties that won provincial elections in January have gained almost total control of Basra's government and are imposing an increasingly strict code of Islamic behavior on the population. The police force, dominated by the same religious groups, is enforcing religious decrees that have little or no basis in law, residents say.
Similar trends are being reported in other major Iraqi cities...
Nevertheless, Iraqis and international analysts question whether the form of democracy introduced with President Bush's strong endorsement this year is being co-opted by religious leaders bent on turning Iraq into an Islamic republic.
Residents of Basra, an overwhelmingly Shiite Muslim city of 1.5 million residents, say they never intended such a result when they defied insurgent death threats to participate in historic elections in January. But they said they expect religious groups to tighten their control and further restrict freedoms now that they hold positions of power.
"We voted because we wanted to challenge the terrorists. We raised our voice to say that we wanted this government," said Qusay Abdulmahdi Abdurrudah, a Basra baker. Having seen the religious parties in action, however, "I regret voting for them," he said.
Sectarian Shiite parties control 88 percent of the government seats.
"We have no electricity for half of the day. The water that comes out of our faucets is unbearable. It is undrinkable," said Haitham, a store clerk
Instead, he said, the democratic process "is being abused by reckless people" who confuse democracy with unbridled freedom. "Some people think democracy means you can do whatever you want," he added. "A guy takes an illegal turn and almost kills somebody. You ask him why he did it, and he says, 'This is democracy.'...
In interviews, political party leaders expressed a similar interpretation of the powers they believe they now have to reshape police forces and institute new social controls on the streets. Party militants, sometimes backed by police, are enforcing restrictions on how women may dress in public, how unmarried couples may interact and even what forms of music are permissible.
Ayatollah Muqtada al-Sadr is a prominent figure throughout the Shiite-dominated parts of Iraq, from Baghdad south to Basra. Political parties loyal to him now share control of Basra's government and have installed their militiamen in the police force, as have parties loyal to competing religious leaders.
"The police system is completely infiltrated by the religious parties," Mr. Abdurrudah said...
But party leaders say they see nothing wrong with installing their own personnel in key positions.
"The political parties that won power also won the right to share a role in the police and government forces," said Farat Ashara, a Shiite cleric and director in Basra of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.
Basra's police chief, Gen. Hassan al-Saadi,...
He told Britain's Guardian newspaper last month that three-fourths of the 13,750 police officers under his command are more loyal to their militias than they are to him. Half are working for sectarian parties, he was quoted as saying, and some have been involved in hit-squad attacks against rival groups.
"I'm more afraid now than I was before" the fall of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship in 2003, said Sablah Talal, a history lecturer at the University of Basra.
"It's hard to get a grasp of democracy," Ms. Talal said, "when you cast your vote and all you are left with is nothing but slogans."
The US seems at present most concerned with re-establishing "order" by whatever means necessary in an increasingly unpopular war. according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll published today
...barely one in five Americans -- 22 percent -- say they believe that the insurgency is getting weaker while 24 percent believe it is strengthening. More than half -- 53 percent -- say resistance to U.S. and Iraqi government forces has not changed.
Some have referred to the new US tactics as the "Salvadorization" of the war, using paramilitary tactics. Really, it is a return to business as usual US foreign policy, Bush's mouthings about freedom notwithstanding. The difference here is that the coming rule in Iraq is a theocracy, much less compliant with the usual corruption and military prsence, and probably more closely aligned with other theocracies in the region, such as Iran. Thus the rise of the Shia in Iraq, used by Bushco to establish order, will necessarily prevent the achievement of both real democracy and US exploitation.
These internally and externally inconsistent attitudes and priorities of the US guarantee, imho, that our efforts in Iraq can never achieve a solution satisfactory to the US.
We need to get out and turn this situation over to those who have some coherent and productive goals. There is no win-win solution as long as the US is involved. It's all Lose-Lose.