Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 2004, page 22

Special Report

 

It’s Time to Stand Back From the Iraqi Cliff

 

By Yasir Shallal

The current situation in Iraq is the result of policies that were ill conceived a year ago. After the fall of the Saddam statue six months ago in Baghdad’s Ferdous Park, the Iraqis were liberated from the tyrannical rule they had endured for 35 years. It was a moment of elation and great hope. The elation was short-lived, however, and quickly ended when the looting started. Iraqis’ hope erodes further with every misstep of the occupation force.

Six months after the “liberation,” occupied Iraq remains a very dangerous and dismal place in desperate need of security and the rule of law. Security is high on everyone’s list of priorities. To the Iraqis, security means that the troops and the police are there to protect them; for the Americans, it means keeping U.S. troops safe at any cost. These conflicting and contradicting priorities—a direct result of L. Paul Bremer’s disbanding of the Iraqi army and police force as decided by the Pentagon a year ago—have yet to be resolved.

Thanks to the Pentagon’s other misguided concept—the disqualification of local Iraqis from direct involvement in the political process because they have lived under tyrannical rule, and therefore are unable to govern themselves—Iraq’s newborn freedom has been transformed into a demeaning babysitting duty by the occupation force.

When members of the Iraqi Governing Council act on behalf of the people, they need to be reminded that they were not elected, but appointed, and that their ideas are suggestions, not legal decrees. The decisions being made about the country’s future—whether about the size of the new army, the type of economy or other permanent matters—have infuriated the local population. These decisions are being interpreted as the hijacking of issues best left to the future elected government. Further encouragement of these actions contributes to Iraqis’ resentment and the council’s loss of credibility. Washington’s pre-emption of a national discussion of Iraq’s goals results in resentment of the U.S. and its appointed council, and causes America to lose other arguments as well.

What can the U.S. do? First, U.S. advisers need to rethink the Pentagon’s previous positions: the Iraqi army and the police should be brought back without the political Ba’athist elements, as is currently being considered. Decisions about privatization, ownership and other issues seen to be attacking the core of Iraqi society should be left to the future elected government.

Secondly, Washington should create an environment conducive to the return to their liberated country of Iraq’s three million exiles. These Iraqis who left over the past 30 years for political, religious, or economic reasons have experienced the freedom of the modern world after the tyranny of Saddam. It is they who are best suited to demonstrate to the local population the benefits of democracy and of a market economy, and who can ensure that social justice and the welfare of their people will not be mortgaged to short-term corporate interest.

Iraqis have the vision and the knowledge to do what needs to be done, but they lack experience in collective democratic management. The U.S. role should be to show them how to get there, not to decide where they must go.

Yasir Shallal is an Iraqi-American businessman in the Washington, DC area.

< Prev		Next >