Iraqi Letters

[Another long post I'm afraid, but it may be worthwhile. It is a little debate I have had over the past few days with an American gentleman and thought it might be useful to publish in the hope that it may trigger a constructive debate.]

Eric Chen wrote:

… I agree with you on the one the key point: it matters greatly to both our nations that a democratic, globalised Iraq, succeeds. And that's a big common ground for us.

I agree that mistakes have been made. But I don't think there has been any sinister or anti-Iraq intent in them. Like the saying goes, 'it's not you (Iraq), it's us (US)'.

The 'experts' can criticize Bush Jr all they want, but the fact is, our nation didn't have the right tools for the post-major combat peace-building phase. That's not Bush Jr's fault; it's the American people's fault. After the disaster of the Vietnam War in the 60s/70s, our people and our civil-military leadership wouldn't even consider nation-building. For example...

... Our Vietnam War phobia is an inside problem America needs to fix in order to be a better partner to Iraq.

So, at this point, after our mistakes, how can we still help you, and why should Iraqis still trust us? One, we're still your best hope. Two, the US is committed to Iraq's future. Three, history: Germany, Japan, South Korea. Four, read the article.

Read the post-WW2 histories of Germany, Japan and South Korea, and you'll see their ascendancies to healthy democratic, globalised natoins were difficult, too. It took many years for each of them. In fact, much of your criticisms echo what Germans, Japanese and Koreans said early in their nation-building relationship about the US - including your complaint about distrusted appointed leaders. But what they complained about turned out to be a necessary part of the building process towards functional, contiguous democracies. Why? Democracy isn't just hope and noble beliefs; it's a working system built with mechanisms in an infrastructure. It's a machine that takes time to make. For us, it took America years to build our system, and it was hard. Today, look at Germany, Korea and Japan and see where they are because of America's aid. Their present success is the same hope Americans have for Iraq, but again, it'll take time, hard work and faith. Together, we'll need to earn it.

Back to my previous point about our lack of capability to nation-build when we started Operation Iraqi Freedom. The ONLY way the US was going to build up the right capability was by, I hate to say it, failing in Iraq - at least initially. From that real-world slap in the face, we could wake up from our Vietnam fears and finally build the right capabilities. President Bush Jr has, in fact, invested many billions of our tax dollars into this mission, not only for Iraq directly but also for the US to develop the right tools for the job. Like everything else, it'll take time, smarts and hard work, but it's happening. In the past, we also had to adjust and learn in Germany, in Japan and in South Korea. I believe we can and we will adjust and learn for the good of Iraq.

Abu, here is the link best explaining the American strategy for Iraq:

Much evidence says George W. Bush is following this strategic vision. (How well is he following this strategy? Debateable.) Dr. Barnett's strategy is based on Thomas Friedman and Francis Fukuyama, two 'liberals' who believe that people (the Iraqi people, in this case) are good and can flourish in the right system. You complain about the appointed politicians you don't trust, and that's fair. My response: MORE important than the persons in power is building the system that will sustain a nation for generations, through good and not-so-good leaders.

Iraq doesn't just matter to the US. It's the UN, and it's the world paying close attention to Iraq's democratic development, watching for Dr. Barnett's projected future. In fact, I believe the direction of the world's future is being played out in Iraq right now. The US has too much at stake to play a trick on you, but again, it will take time to get the job done right.

As far as our soldiers, cut them some slack and give them some help. I would guess that your help would be appreciated. They are in Iraq trying to help the Iraqi people; that's their mission. They don't have a simple, pretty nor popular job. You know what? In my Army career, when I served in Korea, I broke local traffic laws, too, including u-turns on highways. I did those things because I had a job to do, and compared to my job in the Army, those 'frightened kids' in Iraq are being tasked to do the impossible. You don't hear about American troops shooting women and children in Korea or Germany or Japan with rifle fire, do you? It took time, but it's a future worth creating. This will also take time, Abu. It will be hard, but remember, we're on your side.




Abu Khaleel wrote:

… It is also gratifying that you have seen beyond the many criticisms into the message I was trying to get across in that blog… and that you agree to the main issue: the need for democracy to succeed.

I fully agree with you on the effect the Vietnamese experience has had on America. I think you would agree further that 9/11 has also had an equally strong and probably opposite effect!

I don't think it is right for a nation in America's position in the world to be driven by such "reflexive" impulses. I understand that it is only natural for people to have such feelings following such traumatic experiences. On the other hand, governments and strategy builders should look beyond while taking these into account. In practice, I find that the opposite is taking place: numerous politicians and strategists on all sides are playing on these different fears!

It is ironic that the present quagmire is looking more and more like another Vietnam and the likelihood of another 9/11 is definitely not much less! In Iraq, as you may well know, we are having an assorted variety of our own 9/11's!

This is what I feel Dr. Barnett has tried to do – to look beyond immediate reflexes. I can understand his thesis about Core and Gap – and I find myself agreeing with the descriptive part of it. However, his analysis of the present situation strikes me as one "wishing" what the administration policy should be and not necessarily the actual strategy being implemented.

In either case, I feel that I must differ with you on one important point: with politicians and governments, we cannot rely on declared intentions; they are simply not enough, and such practice can in fact be rather dangerous. We have a better yardstick: performance. And frankly, based on the performance of the administration so far, I feel that the noble intentions you mention (and, I hope, we both desire) cannot be achieved in the foreseeable future following the present course.

I agree that there are several parallels with the cases of Japan and Germany. But there are also many significant differences. To borrow Dr. Barnett's terminology, Iraq is already strongly "connected" to several important external forces: Arab nationalism, Islam (both fundamental and "regular"), neighboring countries, Israel, "old Europe", Russia… Iraq is extremely important to all these forces and they have different vested interests in its future.

This actually brings us back a full circle; the only solution that I see through this chaos is via "localized" democracy. If the "democratic base" is sufficiently large, we have less danger of some of these various forces tampering with it! And it has to be done fast!

Much of my resentment of the political leaders that you have noticed stems from the fact that those regional and international forces are, and will be, having considerable influence in shaping Iraqi politics for a long time to come. Many of the major political parties now gearing themselves for the coming power struggle are supported by external forces!

This is why I think we should by-pass them and go straight to the people. On this point, you can see that I agree with you that the system is more important than who is in power. What we ultimately need is a truly democratic system of government that the people trust and that can last.

With most people distrustful of US intentions, I cannot see conventional democracy built from the top down (as is now being done) succeeding in the present environment. To add insult to injury, the very people designing the nuts and bolts of this "democracy" have some severe shortcomings and are mistrusted by most people in Iraq. When I look around and talk to people, I don't see anyone excited about the coming elections. All people expect is a continuation of the charade of the IGC, the Transitional Administrative Law, the Interim Government and the Interim National Assembly.

The main problem with this solution (i.e. building democracy from the bottom up) and because of the strong popular resentment of America now felt by many Iraqis due to all those mistakes, I am afraid that neither you nor I would like the result!

However, I firmly believe that most ordinary people are decent, moderate and peace-loving and the end result in the longer-term will be good. Meanwhile, I think we both have to accept the taste of the bitter medicine!

[This issue is of such importance that I hope I will be able to address it in greater detail in future posts]

# posted by Abu Khaleel @ 1:43 PM