Posted on 04/24/2006 12:56:05 PM PDT by neverdem
The selection of a compromise prime minister in Iraq is a major victory for that country’s fledgling political class, and for the Bush administration. Purveyors of doom on Iraq now have some explaining to do: If the country is in the midst of a full-scale civil war fatal to our project there, how is it that elected representatives of the major factions were able to sit down and hammer out an agreement on the top positions in a national unity government? Iraq pessimists act like they have a special immunity from ever having to recalibrate their view of the conflict, as they instead move on to the latest iteration of their metaphysical despair.
The deal on the prime minister brings within reach the Bush administration's longtime goal of creating a government that includes all Iraqi factions and gets Sunni parties into the political process once and for all. The theory is that this will reduce violence by dragging elements of the Sunni insurgency into legitimate politics as well. Nice theories don't always work out in Iraq, as we have learned over the last three years. But this one has a chance of success. Immediately after the war, the Sunnis didn't have the political leadership of the Kurds, who had governed themselves for ten years, and the Shia, who quickly rallied around Ayatollah Sistani. No one claiming to speak for the Sunnis had any real legitimacy. But the Sunnis made the strategic choice to participate in last December's elections, and now they have political leaders with real roots in their communities and sway over the men wielding guns and IEDs.
The negotiations over a prime minister were messy, dragged on too long, and represented a loss of momentum from the triumph of December 15 elections. But the final result is welcome. Former prime minister Ibrahim al-Jafaari, who two months ago had narrowly won the endorsement of the Shia parties to stay in office, is out of the job. The Bush administration viewed him as weak and incompetent, and so did the Kurds, the Sunnis, and even many Shia. It is a bit of a mystery how he managed to pull out his victory among the Shia parties in the first place. He was backed by the thug-cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who engaged in a power struggle with the U.S. over whether the prime minister would stay in power and — crucially — lost. The Shia coalition slowly realized that Jafaari was a non-starter given the opposition of the U.S. and Kurds and Sunnis, and picked another candidate, Jawad al-Maliki. This outcome is an important signal to the Sunnis: If they play in Iraqi politics, they can make a difference.
Maliki’s virtues shouldn’t be exaggerated. He comes from the same Islamist Dawa party as Jafaari, and has been cool to the U.S. But he is an Iraqi nationalist — an important quality given the dangerous Iranian influence in the country — and has a reputation as an experienced, skilled politician. He obviously has significant challenges ahead, foremost among them forming a government over the next 30 days in a very volatile political environment. It is crucial that clean and effective officials be put in charge of the ministries of defense and interior. If progress has been made in reconstituting an Iraqi army, the police are still in disarray, infiltrated by Shia thugs. Iraqis are much more comfortable opening their doors when the Americans come knocking than when the police do. That has to change. The Shia militias, who have contributed more than their share to the sectarian violence of late, will have to be put out of business eventually. This would have been easier to do a couple of years ago, but if militias can be defanged in Afghanistan, the same can happen in Iraq.
The political process is Iraq is the key to the country's political future, which is why the deadlock in recent months was so discouraging. But it now looks like the Iraqi politicians were employing their usual MO of teetering on the brink of catastrophe before pulling back. They have a real chance now of forming a government that is legitimate (some people set off fireworks in the streets of Baghdad to mark the breakthrough) and inclusive. But even if the national element of the insurgency weakens, the foreign jihadists aren't going away, and will continue their savage attempts to foment a civil war. The problems with Iraq's economy and infrastructure, exacerbated by the violence, will also endure. But as long as Iraqi leaders are willing to compromise, and — however haltingly — to point the country forward, the catastrophic collapse sought by the terrorists will not happen. And victory, in the form of the establishment of a decent, stable government capable of defending itself, will remain in sight.
Yes, that is why the LameStream Media has all but ignored that development.
Bringing Saddam down was prologue. Keeping Iraq from going the way of Afghanistan in the 90's and becoming a haven for terrorists is the real struggle. We just moved up the timetable so we could deal with it on our terms and not be caught by surprise after a palace coup, sudden death at the top or insurrection by Shiites that would depose Saddam when we weren't expecting it.
Sorry for asking a simple question. Go ahead and enjoy. I have actually been quite polite in my questions and yours is typical of the response.
I get it. I'll leave you to your good news. One last question before I go, do you get all happy everytime another "number two" to Zarqawi is taken out, and if so at what time do you begin to ask yourself, "How many number two's does this guy have?"
Bringing Saddam down was prologue. Keeping Iraq from going the way of Afghanistan in the 90's and becoming a haven for terrorists is the real struggle.
Notice that the "Iraq civil war" story now has disappeared, with no followup about how wrong the media was. They are utterly disgusting.
That won't happen for years, unless they are forced out early.
That said we don't need more then 30,000 troops for logistics and advising.
My apologies. It won't happen again. ;^)
That said we don't need more then 30,000 troops for logistics and advising.
LOL!
Depends on how often he eats.
(sorry, I couldn't resist)
ROFLMAO, hopefully not too many more meals.
Iraq will now have a government. While not the 'final' victory, it qualifies as a 'major' victory.
Iraq will now have a government. While not the 'final' victory, it qualifies as a 'major' victory.
Simple, if we leave Iraq too soon and it is conquered by a unfriendly regime, as Iran or Al Queda they could then take many small ME countries like Kuwait, and the UAE that are friendly to the US. These countries are very rich because of their oil reserves and we are dependent on some. We import more than 60% of our oil supply. A oil supply disruption world wide would probably start a world war. We have 3% of the worlds oil but use 25% of the worlds supply. How many countries do you think we should fight at one time.
"How many number two's does this guy have?"
Simple, if we leave Iraq too soon
Iraq has a parlimentary system of government. Getting a government is a 3-step process. First, the Iraqi people vote for their representatives for a slate of candidates put forth by the party. Second, the party that gets the most votes designates its leader as Prime Minister, but he must be able to form a coalition if that party does not have an absolute majority -- this was the sticking point in Iraq. The Shia party that got the most votes failed to form a coalition, and the Prime Minister designate would not step aside. Now he has. Once the cabinet is formed, Parliment can meet (Step 3).
2- Every time one of these guys that are not Bin Laden or Zarqawi gets taken out
and then we should dump our garbage there for 1000 years. The "good people" of Iran have had enough time to enter the civilized world. They have the government they deserve.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.