The Jerusalem Post produces a
must-read on the past few days in Iraq. It's got some great point about the role this is going to play in the internal politics of state-building post-CPA. Check it out.
Cross-posted from
Primary Colors 2004.
In an
excellent piece of opinion writing, the
Jerusalem Post (which I try to read carefully) deconstructs the past few days of fighting in Iraq, and really contributes to some of the questions I have about U.S. statecraft in and around Iraq. The key points:
1. This is all about the
Coalition Provisional Authority-this is power politics at its most crude. Sadr isn't hiding behind anything; he's holding press conferences, and publicly identifying not only himself, but his connections to Hezbollah and Iran. It's a high-stakes gamble to establish himself as a serious player in the new Iraq. This is a serious threat to the establishment of a secular liberal democracy in Iraq, and he may risk entirely undoing the CPA in the process.
2. Even if coalition forces succeed in restoring peace, there credibility is going to be seriously, seriously damaged-the
saddening destruction of coalition-spurred improvements in infrastructure creates the perception that coalition forces are only a stop-gap, a body that steps in when things inevitably dissolve, and then with overwhelming and alienating force. They are being stripped of their moral authority as bringers of peace and stability, and that was our only hope in the aftermath of the invasion.
3. Sadr's not alone, and Iraq is not united-there are lots of other little groups who are making their own power plays and winning their own converts. And somehow, we're going to have to deal with all of them. That's going to require leadership a lot more impressive than anything we're floating right now. Iraq needs its George Washington, its Thomas Jefferson, its Benjamin Franklin, women and men who dare to imagine hope and peace, who are brave enough to advocate an entirely different future than any that's been imagined for their country before.