Friday, March 4, 2011

The Wonders Of Democracy In Iraq Or Have We A New Saddam Here?

Observers of Iraq since the end of American combat operations have focused correctly on the state of play in the new "democratic" government which is the legacy of the Great Adventure In Regime Change.  What has been evolving in Iraq shows all the dangers resident in celebrating "democracy" without proper regard to all the contextual factors which can allow democracy to be other than a portal to authoritarianism.

The most visible sign of something awry in Iraq was the seemingly never ending failure of the Maliki apparatus to form a functioning government following parliamentary elections.  The inability of the government to organize itself was illustrative of the deep fractures which characterize politics in post-Saddam Iraq.  Even leaving aside the many questions regarding the fairness and accuracy of the parliamentary vote, the deep ruptures running across Iraqi society and polity virtually make effective and responsive government impossible.

Maliki has already shown a propensity toward the authoritarian which far transcends his main rival.  Even though Mr Maliki has ambitions to near dictatorship, his government has proven itself inefficient and corrupt to a degree which has excited "days of rage" in many Iraqi cities.  The protests resulted in deaths as security forces opened fire with small arms.  As the deaths mounted so also have the protests.

The security forces have rounded up Baghdad intellectuals--lawyers, journalists, and academics--subjecting those arrested to beatings and intimidating interrogations before finally releasing them.  While this scarcely amounts to the sort of activity routinely engaged in by Saddam's internal security personnel, the arrests like the use of deadly force against peaceful albeit noisy demonstrators points in an alarming direction.

Even more alarming has been the steady accretion of power by Maliki.  In a move without equal in any parliamentary government elsewhere in the world, Maliki and his cabinet have been given unique authority by the Iraqi equivalent of the Supreme Court.  In a ruling which was stunning in both its breadth and lack of constitutional basis, the high court ruled that only Maliki and his cabinet could propose legislation to the parliament.  The legislators could not propose any legislation on their own initiative.  In effect this makes the Iraqi parliament something less than relevant.

The obliging court also gave Maliki control over the previously independent central bank.  It also made the formerly independent agencies responsible for investigating corruption and conducting elections mere tools in Maliki's ever grasping hands.

Additionally, human rights groups in Iraq have alleged credibly that Maliki's security forces have created secret detention centers in which dissidents are immured.  If this is not a symptom of creeping authoritarianism it would be hard to say what might be.

The record of Maliki's government is dismal at best.  As Iraqi citizens have complained in the street and elsewhere, the basic infrastructure is still a mess.  Electricity is still off nearly as much as it is on.  The economy is still in a shambles despite the ocean of oil a few thousand feet down.  Unemployment remains high.  And, inflation particularly in basics is on the up ramp.

Then, of course, the tensions between Shiite and Sunni remain.  So also do those between Arab and Kurd.  The purportedly secularist regime of Maliki;s State of Law party has shown a tilt toward the Shiite majority and most definitely against the Sunni minority.  This tendency emerged dramatically with the refusal of the Maliki government to honor commitments made to the Sons of Iraq and Awakening Councils which are Sunni and were key to the success of the American counterinsurgency effort.  Since then the government has marginalized the Sunni population even more.

The security situation has gone south over the entire period since the American combat forces withdrew.  The bombings have been directed against Shiites much of the time but there has been no evidence, not even credible rumors, pointing the finger at Sunnis.  The cynical killing of Shiites by Shiites is not unprecedented in Iraq and would fit the agenda of both Iran and its agents in Iraq.  It would also meet the agenda of a wannabe dictator, particularly one who happens to be a Shiite.  Maliki has control of specialist security units capable of undertaking spectacular operations whether the targets are government facilities, Shiite pilgrims, or Christian churches and homes.

It is more than simply interesting that persons suspected of involvement in bombings and assassinations are arrested in a blare of publicity but then simply fade away.  No trials.  No convictions.  No executions.  Nothing.  Considering that one of the fastest roads to total authority is creating a climate of disorder and lack of safety, that there is a loud demand for law'n'order, it is not implausible that Maliki and his cohorts have orchestrated at least some of the prevailing insecurity.

The schism between the Arabs of Baghdad and the Kurds in their semi-autonomous region has grown of late again at the behest of the central government.  The Kurds may be obstreperous but they have shown themselves to be rational negotiators.  The current talks over the status of Kirkuk and the oil fields surrounding it could come to a satisfactory conclusion, but the Maliki government keeps upping the ante as if looking for an excuse to turn the army loose in the region.

As the clock ticks down to the date certain when the last American forces withdraw, the influence of the US declines apace.  The loss of American influence is exacerbated by the Obama's administration which appears flatly indifferent to what is happening in Iraq in the wake of our unilaterally declared victory.  Unlike Vietnam the Obama administration has not even sought a "decent interval" before Iraq's "democracy" collapses into an authoritarian regime.

It is more than slightly ironic that as pro-democracy movements have spread across many Arab majority states, the tide is running in the opposite direction in Iraq.  Increasing the irony is the crowing of unreconstructed neo-cons over the flood of protests ranging from Tunisia to Yemen as having proved just how right, how prescient was George W. Bush when he ordered the invasion of Iraq.  It certainly looks like the American monument to democracy built with the blood of so many Americans and so much American money is at great risk of imploding into an imitation of the dictatorship it was intended to replace.

The lesson here is simple and brutal.  It is far easier to talk about nation-building than it is to do it.  It is easier to envision the creation of a Western style democracy than it is to realize the vision.  Or, most simply: Democracies can not be created; they can only create themselves.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

My husband is in the Army and is leaving for Iraq soon. It sounds like things are going terribly there. How safe is it now for American troops?

History Geek said...

Fortunately it is relatively safe for the majority of US forces deployed in Iraq now and into the near future. This is due to the nature of the mission and the remote basing of the greatest number of American troops.

Depending on what your husband's duty station is and the mission he will be tasked with he should be fairly safe at worst and quite safe at best.

The Geek wishes him the best of luck but would remind him that no matter how safe it looks, appearances are deceptive. As the Geek reminded his guys in another war long,long ago, "You're safe only inside your own wire--and not always even then."