Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Iraq

Now WaPo Criticizes Bush's "Timetable" for Elections

2005-12-11

Timeline Yields Constitutional Order, Not Peace
By Peter Baker and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 11, 2005; Page A01

above the fold, EFL
"The one single worst mistake was the rigid, shortsighted adherence to the August 15 deadline," said Jonathan Morrow of the U.S. Institute of Peace, who advised constitutional drafters. That "had consequences for Sunnis buying into the constitutional text. . . . It's a hopeless situation and it's progressively more difficult to remedy."

The idea at the time was to enforce to deadline to prevent it from being extended and re-extended until eventually the Crack of Doom would have arrived and one side would still have been yapping and the other side obstructing and exploding. The Bad Guyz' intent was to drag it out forever.

Fareed Yaseen, an Iraqi official, disagreed: "I used to think that a slight delay might have been useful. But it turned out what was the most important thing was the political process and adhering to it. . . . To get things done in Iraq, you have to have a deadline. If you push it forward, then nothing gets done."

That's what I just said...

Former undersecretary of defense Douglas J. Feith, a key architect of the war, said the political process has not been perfect but that Bush was right to stick rigorously to the timetable. "That was a calculation," he said. "It involved some risk. It turned out not only not to be a disaster but a great success."

Yet the vote that was supposed to end Iraq's transition will not be the last. The consequence of sticking to the schedule without Sunni agreement will be another year of haggling. The issues that most divide Iraq's factions have been put off until the new government opens a four-month debate on constitutional amendments. If there is agreement, then Iraqis will go to polls again -- part of a compromise that was not part of the Bremer script -- to vote on a revised constitution. "It remains to be seen whether it works," cautioned Morrow. "We can't assume there will be enthusiasm by the Shiites and Kurdish parties for far-reaching amendments." Without compromise, the danger of civil war deepens.

That assumes the onus for compromise lies exclusively with the Kurds and the Shiites. The Sunnis have the same requirement to compromise.

For all that, some of the administration's toughest critics still see a chance for success. "Despite all the mistakes in our myopic clinging to arbitrary deadlines and our vision of what the political transition and pace should be, and our succession of lost opportunities to broaden the arena, I think we're finally beginning to get it right," said Diamond. "There are some tantalizing signs of a political breakthrough."

Posted by:Bobby

#1 The first thing we did with our constitution was to propose a set of amendments.

Posted by: Ptah 2005-12-11 18:50

00:00