| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Atish" |
| Date: |
13 Mar 2006 12:35:06 AM |
| Object: |
In Iraq, threats will not work |
In Iraq, threats will not work
By H.D.S. Greenway
http://www.deccan.com/Columnists/Columnists.asp?#In%20Iraq,%20threats%20wil=
l%20not%20work
Boston, US: Much of the Bush administration's hopes for Iraq, and the
transformative powers of democracy in the Middle East, lie in the ruins
of the Askariya mosque's golden dome in the city of Samarra. For the
bombing of the mosque exposed clearly what America wants so much to
deny: that in the present climate of lawlessness there are ethnic and
religious tensions in Iraq that are simply not going to allow for the
kind of democracy the administration na=EFvely envisioned.
A degree of hypocrisy was also exposed after elections in both Iraq and
the West Bank and Gaza. Despite President George W. Bush's rhetoric
about freedom on the march, the first thing the administration did
after Hamas won its victory was to search about for ways to undermine
the will of the Palestinian people as expressed in a free and fair
election.
Plots were reportedly hatched with Israel to make life so miserable for
the Palestinians that they would go back to the polls in another
election and throw the recently victorious Hamas out. Secretary of
state Condoleezza Rice got on her plane and flew off to drum up support
for denying the Palestinians money.
Both tactics are extremely short-sighted, for the Palestinians have
shown time and time again that they put their pride and their national
aspirations ahead of their comfort.If this policy is continued, the US
will lose its leverage to help shape events in the West Bank and Gaza,
relinquishing the field to Iran and the more radical elements in the
Sunni Arab world. And then Hamas will be even further away from
recognising Israel or forswearing violence.
And no sooner did the Iraqis make their choices in an acceptably fair
election than the Americans started to tell them what America wanted in
the way of an Iraqi government.
US' capable and hard-working ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, was not
wrong in stressing that a government of national unity was the best way
for Iraq to proceed. But to go public with the impotent threat that the
United States would withdraw its support from the new government if it
didn't accede to US wishes was simply a crude exercise in imperial
manipulation and humiliation that, in the end, will do more harm than
good.
Even if he gets his way, Khalilzad's tantrum will simply
de-legitimise the results in the eyes of the Iraqi people as the work
of American puppets. Khalilzad is not wrong in his assessment that
sectarian militias will lead to "warlordism," but the chance to
talk the Iraqis out of maintaining militias went by the board with
Donald Rumsfeld's catastrophic failure to secure the country after
the US invasion.
For the classic pattern when a state falls apart, and when people lack
security, is for them to fall back and rely upon what political
psychologists call the "survival group."
It is well known that when a group feels threatened it defines itself
in the narrowest of terms to distinguish friend from foe. It is only
when the group feels less threatened that it can reach out to others to
form a broader definition of national purpose.
American ambassadors can threaten the Iraqis all they want, but without
security Iraqis are simply not going to give up the means of protecting
their particular survival group, their militias. And a broader
definition of national purpose won't be possible as long as there is
no security.Nothing could have made that point more strongly than the
aftermath of the golden dome bombing.
Bush : Miserable Failure
.
|
|
| User: "Polish Prince \Szynka" |
|
| Title: Re: In Iraq, threats will not work |
13 Mar 2006 03:31:41 AM |
|
|
Action is the next alternative.
"Atish" <atishparus@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142231706.493709.180840@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
In Iraq, threats will not work
By H.D.S. Greenway
http://www.deccan.com/Columnists/Columnists.asp?#In%20Iraq,%20threats%20will%20not%20work
Boston, US: Much of the Bush administration's hopes for Iraq, and the
transformative powers of democracy in the Middle East, lie in the ruins
of the Askariya mosque's golden dome in the city of Samarra. For the
bombing of the mosque exposed clearly what America wants so much to
deny: that in the present climate of lawlessness there are ethnic and
religious tensions in Iraq that are simply not going to allow for the
kind of democracy the administration naïvely envisioned.
A degree of hypocrisy was also exposed after elections in both Iraq and
the West Bank and Gaza. Despite President George W. Bush's rhetoric
about freedom on the march, the first thing the administration did
after Hamas won its victory was to search about for ways to undermine
the will of the Palestinian people as expressed in a free and fair
election.
Plots were reportedly hatched with Israel to make life so miserable for
the Palestinians that they would go back to the polls in another
election and throw the recently victorious Hamas out. Secretary of
state Condoleezza Rice got on her plane and flew off to drum up support
for denying the Palestinians money.
Both tactics are extremely short-sighted, for the Palestinians have
shown time and time again that they put their pride and their national
aspirations ahead of their comfort.If this policy is continued, the US
will lose its leverage to help shape events in the West Bank and Gaza,
relinquishing the field to Iran and the more radical elements in the
Sunni Arab world. And then Hamas will be even further away from
recognising Israel or forswearing violence.
And no sooner did the Iraqis make their choices in an acceptably fair
election than the Americans started to tell them what America wanted in
the way of an Iraqi government.
US' capable and hard-working ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, was not
wrong in stressing that a government of national unity was the best way
for Iraq to proceed. But to go public with the impotent threat that the
United States would withdraw its support from the new government if it
didn't accede to US wishes was simply a crude exercise in imperial
manipulation and humiliation that, in the end, will do more harm than
good.
Even if he gets his way, Khalilzad's tantrum will simply
de-legitimise the results in the eyes of the Iraqi people as the work
of American puppets. Khalilzad is not wrong in his assessment that
sectarian militias will lead to "warlordism," but the chance to
talk the Iraqis out of maintaining militias went by the board with
Donald Rumsfeld's catastrophic failure to secure the country after
the US invasion.
For the classic pattern when a state falls apart, and when people lack
security, is for them to fall back and rely upon what political
psychologists call the "survival group."
It is well known that when a group feels threatened it defines itself
in the narrowest of terms to distinguish friend from foe. It is only
when the group feels less threatened that it can reach out to others to
form a broader definition of national purpose.
American ambassadors can threaten the Iraqis all they want, but without
security Iraqis are simply not going to give up the means of protecting
their particular survival group, their militias. And a broader
definition of national purpose won't be possible as long as there is
no security.Nothing could have made that point more strongly than the
aftermath of the golden dome bombing.
Bush : Miserable Failure
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
