| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Iraqi opposition slams plan for military governor |
| 2003-02-16 |
| A leading figure in Iraq's opposition last night rounded on American plans to install a US military governor in Baghdad to rule post-war Iraq, describing the plans as an 'unmitigated disaster', 'deeply stupid' and a 'mess'. In an interview with The Observer, Kanan Makiya, an adviser to Iraq's main opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, said America now appeared to have dumped its commitment to bring Western-style democracy to Iraq. Instead, under pressure from Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states, Washington was preparing to leave Iraq under the control of President Saddam Hussein's Baath Party. Who told him that? That would be the result of the Sammy-leaving-town-in-the-dead-of-night scenario, but not of any other that I've seen... 'This would be an unmitigated disaster for the long-term relationship between the US and the Iraqi people,' he said. 'The Iraqi opposition is going to become anti-American the day after liberation. It is a great irony.' That wouldn't surprise me in the least. Not in the least. Iraq's democratic opposition parties are meeting this week in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq to finalise plans for a transitional government. But their vision of a post-Saddam administration is deeply at odds with proposals set out last week by President George Bush's special envoy to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad - and apparently endorsed by the Foreign Office. Under the plan a US military governor would rule post-war Iraq for up to a year. The infrastructure of Saddam's ruling Baath party would remain largely intact, with the top two officials in each Iraqi ministry replaced by US military officers. 'The plan is bizarre. It is Baathism with an American face,' said Makiya, an Iraqi author and professor at Brandeis University in Massachusetts. The alternative is to dismantle the government entirely. My personal preference would be to see all the Ba'athists summarily shot, but that's probably not practical — or desirable. As with most governments, most are simply hacks. The Bad Guys can be weeded out and disposed of, but most will discover that they never really supported the party, indeed worked for change from within. I don't think the model they're looking at is post WWII Germany, but post-Commie Germany, when the East German party hacks discovered they'd always been Social Democrats at heart. I don't think the results have been good for Germany, and I don't think the results will be good for Iraq, but it's still not the same thing as leaving the Ba'ath in power. If they don't disband the Ba'ath it'll be a mistake. |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #2 difference was that East Germany didnt have a powerful surviving commie state next door trying to pull strings, and one with good ties in the West, no less. Makiya is, wisely, looking past the war to the post-war maneuvaring - he is quite aware that their is still a large pro-Saudi lobby in the US, and he is very concerned about Saudi/baath influence. Now obvioulsy you dont fire the low level flunkies, but what we're looking at the old guard all the way up to almost the top of every ministyk, and then US military above them. Where do the Iraqi democrats fit into all this???? No where. This is NOT what we did in Afghan. It seems DESIGNED to create disaffected Iraqis, violence and instability, which will then be used to "prove" that arabs are incapable of democracy, and the Wolfowitz plan will be shelved. House of Ibn-Saud, game, set, match. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-02-19 09:41:37 |
| #1 Given the significant number of |
| Posted by: Chuck 2003-02-16 09:22:49 |