THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
CAN CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY SUCCEED IN IRAQ?
By Alan Caruba
IRAQ'S POLITICAL FUTURE UNDER THE NEW IRAQI CONSTITUTION: CAN THE CONSTITUTION SURVIVE, CONSIDERING THE
CHARACTER OF IRAQI POLITICS & POLITICAL CULTURE? CAN CONSTITUTIONAL REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY BE
MADE TO WORK IN IRAQ, A COUNTRY TOTALLY UNFAMILIAR WITH CONSTITUTIONALISM, THE RULE OF LAW, LIBERTY UNDER
LAW, LEGAL PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, FREE MARKET CAPITALISM, & FREE & HONEST ELECTIONS AS THE
ACCEPTED MEANS OF PEACEFULLY TRANSFERRING GOVERNING AUTHORITY FROM ONE GROUP OF POLITICAL LEADERS TO
ANOTHER?
FULL STORY:
In the midst of our desire to see a happy outcome in Iraq, we must never lose sight of the ability of Arabs to reject every opportunity
to join the modern community of nations, i.e., the industrialized West and those in Asia who are working toward a more peaceful,
integrated worldwide marketplace.
Much hinges on the fate of Iraq. As Bahram Saleh, a Kurdish leader, has said,
“Iraq is the nexus where many issues are coming together — Islam versus democracy,
the West versus the axis of evil, Arab nationalism versus some different types of
political culture. If the Americans succeed here, this will be a monumental blow to
everything the terrorists stand for.”
Thomas L. Friedman, the New York Times columnist, perhaps said it best back in January, 2003, writing of the American victory
in Iraq.
“Congratulations! You’ve just won the Arab Yugoslavia — an artificial country
congenitally divided among Kurds, Shi'ites, Sunnis, Nasserites, Leftists and a host
of tribes and clans that can only be held together with a Saddam-like fist.
Congratulations, you’re the new Saddam.”
A bit cheeky to be sure, but Friedman perhaps knew that the last thing the Bush administration wanted was to occupy and rule Iraq as
we had done for many years in Japan and Germany after World War II. The U.S.A. wanted out of Iraq as fast as possible. The U.S.A.
wanted to liberate Iraq and leave the country.
The U.S.A. discovered, however, an Iraq in which the national infrastructure that had been neglected for decades by Saddam Hussein's
regime, there was opposition to occupation even by a liberating military, and the Iraqi army and police force had been utterly debased and
corrupted by the former gangster government and economy. Little wonder the first instinct of Iraqis was to loot anything that was not
nailed down.
Since the end of World War I and the subsequent fall of the Ottoman Empire, we have allowed ourselves to believe there was a nation
called Iraq. When French and British diplomats drew lines on the map of the Middle East, Iraq emerged despite the fact that it was home
to several very distinct ethnic and religious groups.
The present post-Saddam Iraq is a Humpty Dumpty sitting on the narrow edge of a proposed new constitution in a place where the rule
of law has never really existed, let alone notions that include the equal status of women or even the concept of private property.
Property rights in Iraq have always been a matter of custom, not law. Without real property rights, there can be no constitutional
democracy and no modern capitalist economy.
Consider what John Zogby, an Arab-American of Lebanese descent and noted pollster, had to say in April, 2003, regarding the
establishment of a constitutional democratic government in Iraq.
“I know my people. We are an ungovernable people. I’m sorry.”
He was not alone. Egyptian-born Sherine El-Abd, President of a Women’s Republican Club in Middlesex, New Jersey, had serious
doubts Iraq’s diverse population of 25 million people could make the transition to a unified nation.
“In addition to the fact that they don’t trust anything America stands for, people
who have lived under suppression don’t trust any figures in authority. A lot of
Arabs who have immigrated to the United States and lived here for 20 or 30 years
don’t even participate in the system here.”
Of course, we do have the evidence of the many Iraqis who came out and voted in the elections to begin the process toward
constitutional democracy. Some remain optimistic. Samer Shehata, an Egyptian-American assistant professor of Arab Politics at
Georgetown University, notes that constitutional democracy requires certain institutional structures, such as an independent
judiciary, a free press, and a culture of political participation. Wisely, he warns that emergence of the requisite institutional
structures in a country like Iraq is not a process that can occur in a few months.
Nor is progress toward constitutional democracy aided when neighboring nations, such as Syria and Iran, are totally opposed
to it and are funding and arming anyone who will fight to destroy a new, free Iraq. Add to that pit of vipers, the former Baath Party
members. They may never believe they have been or can be defeated. Though only about fifteen percent of the population, the
Sunnis are the backbone of the insurgency and, as Andrew Apostolou, director of the Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies, pointed out in December, 2003,
“The party’s ability to rise from the grave is legendary. The Baathists believe
that they never suffered true defeats.”
The situation is not helped by talk from local U.S. military commanders and out of Washington, D.C., about “timetables” to pull
our troops out of Iraq. That kind of thing only encourages those waging war on the barely birthed new Iraq and its constitution.
It reminds Shiites of promises made and abandoned that got thousands of them killed after Washington encouraged an uprising
against Saddam Hussein. It reminds Kurds of the losses they incurred in their long struggle to establish themselves as an
independent region and political entity.
Indeed, the most amazing thing about Iraq is the fact that its Interim President is a Kurd. Jalal Talabani, who along with his
sometime rival, Mas’ud Barzani, saw the vacuum of power in Baghdad after Saddam’s overthrow and left their strongholds to
establish a presence there. Some observers think that, if things don’t go well for the new government, the Kurds will decide it is
time to carve out a big chunk of Iraq and other nation-states in the area to declare a sovereign and independent nation of
Kurdistan. A sovereign and independent Kurdistan would include northern Iraq, plus parts of eastern Syria, southeastern Turkey,
and northwestern Iran. You can bet that’s what the leaders in those other nation-states are thinking too.
The Kurds, though, have enjoyed a decade of real autonomy in Iraq, and joining with other groups to establish a new Iraq may
appeal to them, if for no other reason than to hold onto the wealth generated by the oil reserves around Mosul and Kirkuk.
So, before we get to celebrating too long or too hard about Iraq’s new constitution, let’s remember we are dealing, for the most
part, with Arabs. They don’t like us. They don’t like each other. There isn’t a single Arab nation that is a constitutional
democracy. They have never really known anything but kings, despots, civil wars, or coups d’etat.
The job of the United States of America is to drag and push the Iraqis and the rest of the Middle East into the 2lst century.
Otherwise, this region is going to continue to produce bombers and other horrid people for a long time to come. We may well
have to invade a few other nations or at least send the occasional cruise missile to let them know that we are displeased.
Recent polls suggest Americans are losing interest in the war. One thing’s for sure. If we lose our nerve in Iraq, the Jihadists will
win.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
Page Two
Page One
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a
clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted
on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at
www.anxietycenter.com.
© Alan Caruba 2005
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VII, 2005
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues