Tuesday, April 06, 2004
What are the options for Iraq?
Looking beyond the eruptions among the Shiites perhaps we should consider what the hell happens to Iraq in the future.
1. Western Style Democracy
This may be a blog, but it doesn't mean that we're stupid enough to believe that this is even a starter.
The basic problem is the three disparate main communities in Iraq, each vying to be led by hucksters with an eye on the oil revenues and vowing no peaceful coexistence. What better way than to divide the whole thing up?
This won't work for three reasons. Firstly there are different factions within each ethnic group, as Kurdistan (which has already tried this route) with its two and a half governments can attest. Then you have the problem of smaller but still coherant and well armed groups such as the Turkomen and the Assyrian Christians who will want their own little bolt holes. Last but not least you have the fact that there's an awful lot of disputed territory with oil under neath it.
3. Bring in a strongman
This is quite a good option, only will a strongman take hold? Iraq may seem like a country made for the whack of strong government - after all it's hardly made for civic democracy - but even given its past record it is by no means certain that a there is an obvious strong man candidate.
The present candidate, Chalibi, may have the requisite career of large scale fraud and obsequiousness to America but he seems so damn unpopular. Besides he seems a bit too secular for the Shiites and a bit too Shiite for everyone else.
A strong man is probably what Iraq is destined for in the long run as long as it is a unitary state, but it is probably impossible to impose one while so many little-big men think that they have the chance of becoming big chief.
4. Shiite Theocracy
This is politely known as majority rule or one man one vote. There are very good reasons for it, in that we can say that not only have we demonstrably brought in democracy but we are comfortable with it coming up with different answers to those we wish. It also means that we have a stable regime to hand every over to as we make the quick retreat.
Of course the Kurds, Sunnis and Assyrians will hate this but as their areas are patrolled by Americans we can't really worry about them. Our colonised peoples will be pleased as punch that they can knock ten bells out of the Sunnis at last.
5. Don't go there in the first place
Alas the best option is not open to us.
- Ishtar Talking
- Korea Life Blog
- Academic Secret
- Genius Duck
- Hairstyles and Nails
- Home Tips
- Health Talk and You
- Beadle Beads
- Glass Beads Supplies
- Paquet Full of Glass
- Native American Jewelry
- Second String Swap
- Work at Home News
- Click Here
- Click Here
- Just Another Opinion Blog
- Dip Dot
- ► 2005 (84)
- Say something positive Giscard D'Estaing appear...
- Scratching My Head in Disbelief The temptation ...
- Not So Hot One of the recent reports, issued by...
- Chills the Blood One of the mysteries of the ag...
- Will Russia join OPEC? The Russian Federation i...
- Reinforcement or Withdrawal This may be the opt...
- Blair Assumes the Usual Position For once the G...
- Will Europe take the Truce? Osama (you know, th...
- What Crisis? An absolutely brilliant piece by F...
- Four More Years Although it is a rare day that ...
- The Curious Thoughts of Chairman Portillo In th...
- A Post-Modern Army? What is a post-modern army?...
- Disengagement and Withdrawal Over the long term...
- What are the options for Iraq? Looking beyond t...
- Feet to the Fire Don't be fooled by the idea th...
- Is this the Shia kick off? With the uprising of...
- Power comes out of the payload of a bomb If Geo...
- Official: Tories obtain sympathetic media The E...
- Two Cultures An article by Martin Wollacott in ...
- ▼ April (19)
- ► 2003 (696)
- ► 2002 (915)