You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Bush in bazaar
2003-11-30
This is an interesting developement, which gives me some confidence. The first bit, in a long time, I might add. Hopefully, Bush’s no-nonsense approach will break a lot of impassses, and carry the day.
President Bush’s drop-in to Baghdad for American Thanksgiving has been rightly reported as a propaganda stunt — a good one, building morale among beleaguered and homesick U.S. forces, and giving America itself a self-confident boost. But his principal accomplishment during the two-and-a-half hours he was on the ground has gone mostly below radar. In a brief meeting with four senior and representative members of the provisional Iraqi Governing Council, he seems to have broken a logjam. The problem for the U.S. is to be able to hand over full sovereign power to an elected Iraqi government by July 1st of next year, with a "status of forces" agreement guaranteeing the continuing presence of U.S. troops to provide background security.

Now, Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini al-Sistani, the authoritative spokesman for Iraq’s majority Shia population, had already laid down conditions for the vote which the U.S. State Department was too slow to comprehend. They should have been listening, some months ago, because Sistani’s prestige gives him a working veto over all plans. In this case, the U.S. had assumed an indirect election would decide the next government, conducted in 18 regional caucuses. But Sistani was insisting on a full, direct, popular ballot. That sounds nice until you realize it is physically impossible. Iraq’s last census was in 1998. It is unreliable. It will take about two years to do a new one; and a census is necessary as the basis of a legitimate voters’ roll.
Sounds like a nice contract for Lockheed. Look for the usual charges of Lockheed contributions to the Bush campaign.
But that’s thinking Western-style. As Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who is Sistani’s hand within the Governing Council, has since insisted, an emergency list can be created by using the old U.N. ration coupon records as a point of departure, for a knock-down census that gathers only what is needed to assemble those voters’ rolls. This, too, will be nearly impossible to complete by June, but hey.
Well, hey. Slapping something together's sometimes what you have to do...
Worse, the Americans feared, the rush could lead to "a mosque election", in which the clerics tell the faithful how to vote. But this is the same as saying that Iraq is not yet ready for democracy — and of course it’s not. No matter how you cut it, "a mosque election" is what you’re going to get. Sistani’s other requirements are easier to meet, but again, not as easy as they sound. The draft constitution must acknowledge the Islamic faith, and not be in conflict with it (same story as Afghanistan). And, U.S. troops should be withdrawn from all civil patrols before the government handover. (They would like nothing better.) Since the Americans are training Iraqi police as fast as they can, the question is once again only one of time.
Embedding Islam into the constitution's the real sticking point. For one thing, it wasn't there before...
Naturally, the Kurds are suspicious of Shia posturing, and the Sunni representatives are suspicious of everyone. They tend to wait and see what the U.S. will do, before playing their own hands against Sistani’s. However, the current rotating President, Jalal Talabani, who leads one of the two large Kurdish factions, travelled to Najaf to confer directly with Sistani, immediately after the "night journey" encounter at Baghdad airport with President Bush. Nothing but good seemed to come of it, and the Governing Council would now seem to be bargaining again, with everything on the table.
Another Gordian knot cut untied...
So what did Mr. Bush do? It would seem that he personally delivered the rhetorical "Whatever!", to break an impasse. The principals had to hear from him directly that, in effect, Iraq is their problem to solve and not Mr. Bush’s; that the latter now accepts the new Iraqi democracy is not going to be very Western-looking, because it can’t be. It will instead resemble something hatched in an Iraqi bazaar; and the U.S. will remain to make sure that nothing worse happens.
Posted by:tipper.

#2  im not sure that whatever and moving on is adequate. We need a regime that is at least enough of an advance over the old one to begin to create conditions for sanity, and to show tangible results that will contrast with stagnation elsewhere in the region.

Now Dubya's 'whatever', if this is true, can still be a good negotiating tactic - against Sistani who is probably playing bazaar games himself. But we cant just move on.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-12-1 11:33:16 AM  

#1  Whatever indeed. It's Iraqs problem. Our problem was the end of saddam's government. And that should remain the mission until complete. If Iraq can hammer out a plan to put together a government, have at it. The WoT must move on.
Posted by: Lucky   2003-11-30 3:21:53 PM  

00:00