HOME  |  NEWS  |  SPORTS  |  BUSINESS  |  OPINION  |  ENTERTAINMENT  |  LIFE  |  JOBS  |  CARS  |  REAL ESTATE
MARKETPLACE
Jobs
Cars
Real Estate
Shopping
Place An Ad
Classifieds
SERVICES
Subscribe
Photo Reprints
RSS Feeds
Yellow Pages
MEMORIES
Submit Announcement
News
Top StoriesEditorial/OpinionHistoryLifeMost read storiesObituariesPet of the WeekProfessional sportsSaluting Our VeteransSpeak UpSportsTeen SceneWeather
Subscriptions
Our Newspaper
Classifieds
Photo Galleries
Place Classified Ads Online
How to Place a Print Ad
Other Publications
Personals
Business Directory
Fun and Games
Personal Finance
Lifestyles
News of Delaware County Jobs
Home : News : News : Editorial/Opinion
Editorial/Opinion
Democracy in Iraq means a loss of control for U.S.
04/07/2004
email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendly
Bringing Democracy to the oppressed.
We never get tired of that story.

Only problem is, these days, the oppressed don't seem too grateful. Maybe because sometimes we're doing the oppressing, even if it is all in the name of Democracy.

Take Iraq, for example. We liberated them from a tyrant, imposed strong military control to provide enough security so that Democracy could flourish, then watched as acts of terrorism flourished instead.

The Shiites, who comprise the majority of Iraqis, were supposed to be grateful.They were killed by the thousands during their failed uprising in 1991 against Saddam Hussein. With Hussein gone, these people have a chance, with U.S. guidance, of gaining political power that represents the majority they hold.

So why have they joined the ranks of terrorists and opponents who want to kill coalition soldiers?

Why are we, representatives of Democracy, closing their newspapers? Why are American helicopter gunships, the good guys, the peacekeepers, firing on the holy city of Najaf? Why do coalition soldiers and Shiites continue to be killed?

Maybe it's because we're frightened of what will happen if Democracy is unleashed in Iraq. Maybe the Shiites sense we won't leave because we're a little nervous about them. After all, they could use free elections to implement a theocratic government, shadows of Iran, that won't necessarily follow our ideas of what it means to be a free-trading, economically-friendly, people-oriented country.

We may export American-style Democracy, a neat little package of New England town meetings, peaceful protesters and ivy tower debates over someone's civil rights to Iraq, but that won't be what takes hold there. When we bring Democracy overseas, it can be messy and violent, and it often clashes with the existing culture and mindset of that nation.

The Democracy that may one day come to Iraq will be molded on their traditions, their beliefs. It may little resemble what we believe a Democracy should be. And maybe that's what scares us most. Once we let the majority of Iraq rule itself, we lose control.

Right now, violence is rife in Iraq, brought on mostly by radical groups and leaders who do not speak for most of the Shiites, creating civil unrest and anti-coalition feelings as a way to further their own agendas.

If we want to end the power of the radicals, if we really want to bring Democracy to Iraq, then we must give the majority of Iraqis the room they need to create a government of its people. That will mean sacrifice for us. We will lose control. We will have to trust that most of the Shiites want a peaceful transition, representation and protection for its people, and an equal partnership with the United States. Like any good Democracy.


©News of Delaware County 2010

Reader Comments
 Submit your own comment!
Added: Saturday April 10, 2004 at 11:36 PM EST
I am an American who agrees with the authors of the three previous posts. George Bush was wrong to lead us all into an unnecessary, unjust, and illegal war. Iraq had no WMD and no ties to Ossama bin Laden. And Democracy cannot be imposed upon a nation by outsiders. Its people must desire it and work together to achieve it. Finally, America has allowed its entire political process, thus its democracy, to be corrupted by corporations, special interests, and virtually anyone with enough money to buy influence and power. (Here in America, Bush is known as the "Fund Raiser In Chief." We also have a web site : WhiteHouseForSale.org)We would do well to stay out of other country's business and work on solving our problems right here in the "Good 'ol USA." But, don't hold your breath...
Mary-Margaret Miller
Added: Friday April 09, 2004 at 07:20 AM EST
You got the main points right (they don't seem very grateful; their idea of democracy may be different from what the USA had in mind) but you still seem to shy away from the possibility that the US is not just dealing with a bunch of malcontents here; through a combination of ignorance and arrogance in its conduct of the postwar occupation it has actually managed to provoke a national uprising in which the Shia and Sunni have joined together. So much for the notion of a civil war between these groups. Inadvertently, the USA may have brought forward the creation of the real new Iraqi nation by slipping into the role of a hated and totally foreign common enemy. Americans haven't got their heads around that possibility yet, and probably never will given the state of TV news in the country, but I wouldn't be surprised if ordinary Iraqis take a more nationalist approach to recent events and tend to cheer on their own side. What we have here is an Iraqi "intifada" in which US troops will be forced to take on the role and the tactics of the Israelis (tanks, helicopter gunships, missile strikes, lots of civilian casualties adding fuel to the local anger) and as the months roll by conditions will become worse instead of better. The US death toll so far is about 600 with another 3000 wounded. Iraqi deaths are estimated at around 11,000 since the war began, although we don't hear too much about that. This is a very unpopular war with the military already and will become increasingly so as casualties mount. If the occupation goes on for another year or more in the face of further resistance we will start to hear politicians talking about ways to extricate the troops without making it look as though the war was a mistake in the first place. That should sound familiar to anyone over 40.

Brendan Lyons (no relation to Adam in Oz)
Brendan Lyons
View All 7 Comments »

email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendlyTop
CONTACT US  •  OUR PUBLICATIONS  •  PRIVACY POLICY
© 2007 Journal Register Company. All Rights Reserved.