| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
13 Apr 2004 04:21:09 AM |
| Object: |
OT: An uprising in support of democracy |
An uprising in support of democracy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1190645,00.html
By backing the US over elections, Kofi Annan inflamed the Iraq crisis
Salim Lone
Tuesday April 13, 2004
The Guardian
US policy makers and commentators have been left reeling by the
breadth and speed of Iraq's April rebellion. Particularly crushing
have been the absence of any public Iraqi support for the US during
these stunning setbacks, the decision by the country's security forces
to step aside or even join the insurgents, and the resignations from
the US-appointed governing council. Some US pundits have now accused
Iraqis of not having the stomach to fight for democracy, and US
spokesmen have condemned the "thugs" they claim are fighting to
prevent democracy taking root in Iraq.
Salim Lone
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=18510aff.0403220158.13fcd96a%40posting.google.com
.
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: An uprising in support of democracy |
13 Apr 2004 11:49:39 PM |
|
|
On 13 Apr 2004 02:21:09 -0700, (maff), Message ID:
<18510aff.0404130121.27c420bf@posting.google.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
An uprising in support of democracy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1190645,00.html
Comment
An uprising in support of democracy
By backing the US over elections, Kofi Annan inflamed the Iraq crisis
Salim Lone
Tuesday April 13, 2004
The Guardian
US policy makers and commentators have been left reeling by the breadth
and speed of Iraq's April rebellion. Particularly crushing have been the
absence of any public Iraqi support for the US during these stunning
setbacks, the decision by the country's security forces to step aside or
even join the insurgents, and the resignations from the US-appointed
governing council. Some US pundits have now accused Iraqis of not having
the stomach to fight for democracy, and US spokesmen have condemned the
"thugs" they claim are fighting to prevent democracy taking root in
Iraq.
The reality is in fact diametrically opposite. It is the US that has
refused to allow elections to choose a government after June 30 in order
to continue to exercise control over Iraq. Even before the latest
crisis, Paul Bremer, the American proconsul, had trouble enough with his
hand-picked governing council. Dealing with an elected body that would
demand a real say in running the country would be an endless battle.
So the coalition has put democracy on hold until it can be safely
managed. That must change, with a policy shift that embraces national
aspirations, since no Iraqis will countenance anything less than a full
political engagement after a war and occupation whose only acceptable
rationale for them was the promise of democracy.
In sticking to his anti-elections position, and manoeuvring to limit
Iraqis' freedom to adopt a democratically agreed constitution, Bremer
has wounded the credibility of both UN secretary general Kofi Annan and
Ali al-Sistani, the Grand Ayatollah who helped keep Iraqi Shia from
using force to challenge the occupation.
This is not to take away from the centrality of coalition blunders in
the upheaval - the results of which have undercut, once and for all, the
US mantra that only a few Iraqis oppose their presence. They show how
utterly out of touch the coalition has been with the anti-occupation
passions harboured by the vast majority of Iraqis. They were bound to be
ignited into a national firestorm by the decision to go after the Shia
cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, just as a terrible collective punishment was
being meted out to Falluja. The onslaught on that blockaded city, which
has killed between 600 and 1,000 mostly civilian Iraqis, has intensified
worldwide Muslim anger against the US.
It was in January and February, though, that the groundwork was laid for
the rebellion. The coalition then refused the repeated demand by Sistani
that a new Iraqi government must emerge through elections. The immediate
crisis was only resolved when the Ayatollah turned to Kofi Annan to
determine whether credible elections could be held by the June 30 date
the US had picked for the handover of sovereignty. With the help of UN
mediator Lakhdar Brahimi, Annan concluded that the June 30 date should
not be postponed and that therefore there was not enough time to hold
credible elections - which in turn meant that the new Iraqi government
would be picked by the Americans.
Sistani, and most of Iraq, was astounded at being so comprehensively
undercut by the UN. The man who had restrained the Shia revolt had been
made to look powerless to deliver for Iraqis. Thus was the basis laid
for the current Shia uprising, along with the increasingly public US
debate about the need to station US troops for years to come to ensure
Iraq stays on the "right" path. In a polarising environment of
impoverishment, insecurity, disenfranchisement and suspicion, it was
clear that it would not take much for Iraq to explode.
Sistani will no doubt recover the support he enjoyed if US policy shifts
in favour of a politically negotiated settlement to end occupation. But
the damage inflicted on the UN in Iraq is long-term and will seriously
hobble its ability to play the role of an honest broker.
It was astonishing that Mr Annan backed the US position on elections and
the June sovereignty date when it was so overwhelmingly opposed by
Sistani and the majority of Iraqis. There was a strong anti-UN outcry
within Iraq, even from the governing council, and Sistani, who rarely
departs from his cautious tone, made public his fury and threatened not
to meet Brahimi when he returned.
The UN ended up intensifying the crisis it needed to resolve, again
appearing pro-US, anti-Iraqi and anti-democratic to boot - a terrible
mistake if the UN is to return to Iraq with any measure of safety.
The UN image has fallen to abysmally low levels in the Arab and Muslim
worlds, and it must correct its excessive pro-US tilt if it is to
function there with the people's support. But doing this will only be
possible if the US itself recognises that the legitimacy it seeks from
UN imprimaturs is becoming less and less meaningful, and relieves the
excessive pressure it places on the secretary general.
· Salim Lone was director of communications for the UN in Iraq until
last autumn
salimlone@msn.com
(c) 2004 Guardian Newspapers
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
