Sen. Rockefeller: Iraq Democracy is "Pipe Dream" and Not Desirable; They Can't Handle It

Sunday News-Register (Wheeling, WV) | April 13, 2003 | Justin Anderson

[mountaineer]

As leaders from nations around the globe begin to ponder the type of government post-war Iraq will enjoy, in an interview with the Sunday News-Register, U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., expressed hesitation regarding the possibility of a viable form of a democratic political structure in postwar Iraq.

"The idea of democracy in Iraq is a pipe dream," he said. "Iraq has never been a democracy. One of America's problems is that we are focusing on Saddam and not what is the country of Iraq. We tend to focus on individuals."

To Rockefeller and others in the federal government, the goal of stabilization and normalization is more achievable and far more urgent to the welfare of the Iraqi people. Following regime change, the office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance will be responsible in the initial phases for helping Iraqis restore the delivery of essential services like water, basic medical care and electricity.

If a democracy succeeded in Iraq, it would be a 20-30 year process, Rockefeller said. "(Democracy) is not desirable at this point. The (Iraqi) people are not ready for a democracy."

It will be difficult to win the trust of the Iraqi people after the war. By and large, civilian Iraqis live a tribal existence, Rockefeller said. A mistrust, at least on the parts of the Shiite Muslims in the south of the country, began to flourish during the first Gulf War.

"The Shiites are very slow to respond," Rockefeller said. "(President George H.W.) Bush encouraged them to rebel against Saddam back in 1991 and we just walked away. They were slaughtered."

The Shiites and other tribal factions of the Iraqi civilian population are living in a "very competitive environment," Rockefeller said.

"Most of them are just trying to eke out an existence of poverty," he said. "That kind of existence doesn't breed well for democratic behavior."

President George W. Bush and Biritish Prime Minister Tony Blair had a 20-hour visit in Belfast, Northern Ireland, last week to discuss the future of an Iraq without Saddam. One of the objectives is the introduction of a democratic state.

"I really don't know how much (Bush) knows about the country," Rockefeller said. "I've read books on it and otherwise researched it. I think that's pretty much what youhave to do to begin to understand a culture. It's not just a question of where your tanks go."

[mountaineer]

when it comes it will have to be through a slow process (a la Qater) and will have to be made by the people directly concerned

I think I've said or at least implied that, and I'm puzzled as to why you're continuing to attempt to argue with me about things I haven't said. Go back to the top of this thread. I posted it because a U.S. senator said democracy is a pipedream and it's not desirable, which I considered a curious position for a U.S. senator to take.

[Captain Kirk]

First, you are wrong about your claim that Germany and Japan had "no history of democracy.". Hitler after all was democratically elected! The Weimer Republic was a fairly strong democracy (despite the Versailles treaty) but unfortunately was not strong enough to survive the depression.

Japan also had a recent democratic tradition including an elected parliament in the 1920s and free press. Neither country, of course, had the same degree of religious and ethnic division as Iraq. The UN had little with the interventions in Kosovo and Haiti though (at least in Kosovo) it was given authority by both Clinton and Bush. The UN has no role at all (that I know of) in Somalia.

BTW, I am equally against UN rule as I am against a MacArthur-regency. I support a third altenrative: allowing the Iraqis to set up an interim coalition govenrment asap and then turning over authority to it.

As to "loving" the UN, I support U.S. withdrawal from that organization.

[Captain Kirk]

Well...if he said desirable he is wrong. It is probably a pipedream, at least for the foreseable future. In any case, it is matter for the Iraqis to decide, not us.

[Tunehead54]

Are the Iraqis really nomadic these days, or is Rocky reading from his schoolboy books, when they still roamed the desert on camels? They seem pretty well established in urban areas, from what I've seen.

---

GMTA! All those 5 million people bumping into each other as they nomadically roam in Baghdad neighborhoods - what a maroon.

[Captain Kirk]

Well then...we agree on that!

[wardaddy]

I've lived in Haiti extensively for what that's worth.

Haiti has zero experience with anything since failure from it's inception as a colony thru the slave revolt to today.

That country needs to start over...which is impossible so I think they are best served by a strong central authority that could implement some sort of sustainable economy and eventually a pluralistic republic.

Man, that country is so shot out....hard to see any hope there. Clinton went there for 2 reasons. Stop the boat people waves and please the CBC that he was doing something for a "black nation".

Aristedes was no better than the scores that have come before him. A bloodthirsty ex-priest..scary.

[alrea]

It is not like most heavily democrat represented district enjoy anything like Democracy or competative elections to begin with

Socialism is all that works for dims. That way they can better control, deceive and manipulate voters. The Democrats don't think the U.S. can handle anything like capitalism. The Democrat Party wants to dramatically reduce the military.

Canadian or French Democracy is what they mean.

[Captain Kirk]

Thanks for the insight. Haiti is a mess. Of course, the leftists (like the CBC) who opposed regime change in Iraq were for regime change then.

[NovemberCharlie]

If a democracy succeeded in Iraq, it would be a 20-30 year process, Rockefeller said. "(Democracy) is not desirable at this point. The (Iraqi) people are not ready for a democracy." Then I guess we'd better start now, hadn't we?

"The Shiites are very slow to respond," Rockefeller said. "(President George H.W.) Bush encouraged them to rebel against Saddam back in 1991 and we just walked away. They were slaughtered." So naturally, the solution is to walk away again.

[Captain Kirk]

It would not be "walking away" now. Saddam's regime has been destroyed (or shortly will be). At that point, why not walk away and leave the future of Iraq to the Iraqis? BTW, Rockefeller is an idiot.

[wardaddy]

There are nations and their respective cultures where "democracy" is unattainable at the moment. Recognizing that makes no one a racist or a culture snob by default. It's simply the truth.

Representational governance works best in educated societies with working economies, a strong middle class and a culture disposed to reasonable compromise and pragmatism and a nice eye for personal freedoms.

Iraq has the first two more or less better than most candidates...so we shall see. I think Iraq has some scant experience in "democracy" from the post WWII years does it not?

[wardaddy]

Indeed.

I was a bit wrong btw. Haiti's slave revolt succeeded. They in fact killed nearly all the whites who could not escape but then it unfortunately morphed into a battle between shades of Mulattos and pure Africans which has ebbed and flowed as conflict thru today. The fact that baby Doc married a very light skinned mulatto (Michelle Bennet) is the main reason he lost his grip and the support of those who propped him up.

I found Haiti fascinating btw. It was rife with political violence and some banditry but even with all that, unless the Macoutes were on the move or some coup was going down, I felt safer in Port au Prince or Petionville than say Kingston where there is palpable hostility towards non-Africans or anyone percieved to have money.

[gitmogrunt]

Since he's a liberal democrat,so much smarter and richer than all the rest of us,it's understandable!

[Timesink]

No realism! By the way is your middle name "Al Sharpton."

Take your hate speech elsewhere. *plonk*

[Captain Kirk]

Hate speech? I am not the one (a la Al Sharpton) who uses the "r-word" whenever someone disagrees with me. Racism is a serious charge and should not be thrown around lightly. Hate speech? Physician heal thyself!

[CyberAnt]

Japan had never been a democracy either - but after a few years, they have turned out to be one of the most stable.

This is just more of the leftist whining - prompted by the DNC - McAwful - Hitlery - Daschle - etc. So what else is new.

[Captain Kirk]

In fairness to the Haitians, I believe that the wholesale massacre of whites only took place after Napoleon tried to recolonize the island and reimpose slavery. Few whites were killed in the initial successful revolt. Still....Haiti is a mess by any standard.

[Captain Kirk]

Japan *did* have a recent of democratic tradition of free elections and a free press in the 1920s. The Japan/Germany analogy simply will not work is wishful conservative (formely liberal) utopian wishful thinking.

[nightdriver]

You can't say enough bad about Jay Rockefeller to turn me off, but I'm afraid he has moslems figured out. I understand that there are "christians" in Iraq, but it's pretty sure that islam dominates.

Lawrence (of Arabia) pretty much summed up why the problem with establishing a civilized society in islamic cultures was nearly hopless. Their very religion demands that every man be at war with every other man.