www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=44450&d=7&m=5&y=2004
This was the question with which I was bombarded during a recent visit to the United States. The first is that Iraq's is about to plunge into one of the nightmare scenarios discussed by self-styled experts on the box. The second is that there is some kind of magic wand that one could wave to transform Iraq into a paradise of freedom and prosperity. The nightmare scenarios are often peddled by those who had opposed the war because, for a variety of reasons, did not wish to see an American-led coalition bring down a Third World dictator. The initial prediction of the doomsayers was that, deprived of its oppressor, Iraq will plunge into civil war. Because that has not happened, the same doomsayers now warn of chaos, and predict a nationwide insurrection against the coalition. Anyone in contact with Iraqi realities would know that the answer is: No. There is no doubt that a variety of terrorist, insurgent, and ordinary criminals are active in Iraq. And some roads, especially in the desert area bordering Jordan and Syria, are prone to attacks by bandits. The is also some hostage-taking, as is the case in many other parts of the world where criminal gangs operate. But most of Iraq's estimated 18,000 villages and over 200 towns and cities remain as safe, if not safer, than their counterparts in some other Arab countries. The coalition faces a problem in Fallujah, a predominantly Sunni city west of Baghdad. But Fallujah accounts for no more than four percent of Iraq's Sunni Muslim community. Other major Sunni-majority cities such as Mosul, Ramadi and even Takrit, the hometown of Saddam Hussein, remain calm. It is at the heart of a region that has been the center of Sunni-Arab military elites since the creation of Iraq as a state in 1921. It is also the capital of several Sunni Arab tribes with branches in other nations, including Syria and Jordan. Saddam invested heavily in Fallujah, especially by building housing for army, police and secret service personnel working in Baghdad. The Baathist military and their families account for some 30 percent of the city's population. It is the one Iraqi city that most resents the fall of Saddam and the end of its privileges. But even in Fallujah there is no evidence that a majority of the people want Saddam back. There are, perhaps, some 2000 insurgents, including dozens of non-Iraqi fighters, in Fallujah. The fact that more than half of the city's inhabitants have left their homes shows that, although they may wish the occupation to end, they do not wish to side with the insurgents. Those who claim that Iraq is in chaos also point to Najaf where Moqtada Sadr, a 30-year old Shiite cleric, is hiding in a number of holy shrines and mosques along with his so-called Army of the Mahdi. But talk to anyone in Najaf and you will soon know that the overwhelming majority of the city's population want Sadr to get the hell out. After more than two weeks of contacts with Iraqi Shiite leaders and opinion-makers at various levels, this writer has not found anyone who supports Sadr and his shenanigans. Sadr is abusing the old Shiite practice of "bast" which consists of taking sanctuary in a holy shrine. The practice was developed to protect dissidents against despots. Because the shrines are inviolable, the despot could not send his forces inside them to arrest the dissidents. But Najaf is a city of half a million people while Sadr's followers number no more than two to three thousand at most. Even then, Sadr's quarrel with the coalition is personal rather than principled. He resents the fact that he was not given a share in the Governing Council last year. Worse still, he is unhappy about the fact that he and 18 of his close associates are wanted for murder and have arrest warrants hanging over their heads. He hopes to force the coalition out of Iraq, provoke chaos, and, if not actually secure a chunk of power for himself, avoid prosecution for murder. The coalition would do well not to force its way into either Fallujah or Najaf. In both cities, the coalition faces classical situations in which groups of armed men hold larger civilian populations hostage. In Fallujah, the insurgent Baathists are using Saddam's typical tactic of using human shields. In Najaf, Sadr and his gang use the Shiite holy shrines for the same purpose. Nor is Iraq suffering from a general breakdown in law and order. But the problems that it faces in terms of violence and insecurity are within the remit of normal in a postwar situation, and remain manageable. As things stand today the coalition does not need more troops in Iraq. In fact, the coalition should speed up withdrawing its troops from the dozen or so cities and towns where they are deployed for policing purposes, a task for which they are neither trained nor equipped. The disbanding of the Iraqi Army and national police was a major mistake of the coalition. What is now needed is a fast track program to train and deploy more units of the new Iraq army and police. Now to the second assumption of the pundits about Iraq: The existence of a magic wand that could turn that country into an Arab Switzerland overnight. And Iraq, while capable of moving toward pluralism, will need generations before it develops a stable democratic system. Bush announced the start of the war last year he promised to stay the course until the Iraqi people built a new democratic system. Implicit in that offer was that the Iraqi people should play their part in what is by far the greatest challenge they have faced since their state was created eight decades ago. They did not fight on Saddam's side, allowing the coalition to achieve victory with remarkable ease. Since the war, the people of Iraq have continued to do what is required of them not only by isolating insurgents and terrorists but also by beginning to rebuild their shattered country. As a string of recent polls, complemented by personal and anecdotal information, indicates, the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are still prepared to work with the coalition to achieve their dream of a new political system based on human rights and pluralism. The real question is: Will the US-led coalition keep its end of the bargain. Or will American and British leaders, for reasons of domestic politics, lose their nerves, throw Iraq to the United Nations or some other ineffectual custodian, and sacrifice the strategic goal of a democratic Middle East to tactical electoral considerations?
|
http://csua.com/feed/