Its all the fault of the al-Maliki government:
It’s a little bit of American arrogance, mixed in with a little sheer ignorance. Ignorance of history, the Middle East, and of geopolitics.
Republicans and a lot of Democrats are grasping onto the talking point, that it’s all Al-Maliki’s fault. It’s his fault that the Iraqi government taking zero steps at political reconciliation. It’s his fault that Bush’s War ultimately has become a failure. He’s the one to blame, let’s not blame American ignorance, or an American strategy that was flawed from the outset.
We Americans seem to tend to assume that we can have control and influence over any set of events: There's nothing we can't control or fix, with the proper application of money, arms, and resources We assume the Al-Maliki government basically wants the same thing we do; and we assume that at least 75% of the time, his government will be working towards the same goals that Bush outlined in his January surge speech.
Why we assume that an Iraqi leader will have similar goals to a Bush administration is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps Neocons and other Americans simply assume, consciously or subconsciously, that Al-Malaki is to some degree, our puppet. Perhaps we think if we give the Maliki government enough money, and if we shed enough blood for him, he’ll feel obligated to be on our side, and implement the Bush administration’s benchmarks for the Iraqi government.
To be sure, Malaki will issue public statements that appear to conform to the benchmarks and wishes of the Bush administration. But, in the Byzantine world of Middle Eastern geopolitics, words don’t speak as loud as actions. Words are often a cover or smokescreen, for some other agenda.
This is the truth of it: Despite all the happy talk two years ago about purple-fingered Iraqis, free elections, and a “Unity” Iraqi government, those elections were a farce and a disaster. Simply casting a vote, does not a Democracy make. Democracy is a value, and ideology, that does not necessarily spring into existence because someone casts a vote. Elections are just the mechanics and tools of democracy: it is not necessarily a reflection of any underlying values and commitment to justice, the rule of law, and equality.
The Iraqi election, in effect, simply put Shia militia and shia power brokers in charge of Iraq. These people (mostly) weren’t George Washington’s committed to planting the seeds of a Jeffersonian democracy. They are bent on power, and revenge against their sunni oppressors. The elections were simply a tool to empower themselves. Our army and our money were simply the tools; the henchmen, that enabled them to seize power.
Democracy is an idea that takes many, many decades, if not centuries to grow and flourish. I can still hear Bush fans lecturing me that installing Democracy in Iraq should be no different than the Democracies that took hold in post-world war two Japan and Germany. As Neocons are prone to do, this is a complete misreading of history. Japan and Germany both had deep and profound experience with democratic institutions prior to world war two. In addition, Germany and Japan are homogenous countries, with a wide set of shared values. There were and are no sectarian and religious fault lines dividing society in Germany or Japan.
In short, when I hear Hillary, Carl Levin, or a host of republican pundits blame the Al-Malaki government for our fiasco in Iraq, it makes me want to puke.
It’s a little bit of American arrogance, mixed in with a little sheer ignorance. Ignorance of history, the Middle East, and of geopolitics.
Republicans and a lot of Democrats are grasping onto the talking point, that it’s all Al-Maliki’s fault. It’s his fault that the Iraqi government taking zero steps at political reconciliation. It’s his fault that Bush’s War ultimately has become a failure. He’s the one to blame, let’s not blame American ignorance, or an American strategy that was flawed from the outset.
We Americans seem to tend to assume that we can have control and influence over any set of events: There's nothing we can't control or fix, with the proper application of money, arms, and resources We assume the Al-Maliki government basically wants the same thing we do; and we assume that at least 75% of the time, his government will be working towards the same goals that Bush outlined in his January surge speech.
Why we assume that an Iraqi leader will have similar goals to a Bush administration is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps Neocons and other Americans simply assume, consciously or subconsciously, that Al-Malaki is to some degree, our puppet. Perhaps we think if we give the Maliki government enough money, and if we shed enough blood for him, he’ll feel obligated to be on our side, and implement the Bush administration’s benchmarks for the Iraqi government.
To be sure, Malaki will issue public statements that appear to conform to the benchmarks and wishes of the Bush administration. But, in the Byzantine world of Middle Eastern geopolitics, words don’t speak as loud as actions. Words are often a cover or smokescreen, for some other agenda.
This is the truth of it: Despite all the happy talk two years ago about purple-fingered Iraqis, free elections, and a “Unity” Iraqi government, those elections were a farce and a disaster. Simply casting a vote, does not a Democracy make. Democracy is a value, and ideology, that does not necessarily spring into existence because someone casts a vote. Elections are just the mechanics and tools of democracy: it is not necessarily a reflection of any underlying values and commitment to justice, the rule of law, and equality.
The Iraqi election, in effect, simply put Shia militia and shia power brokers in charge of Iraq. These people (mostly) weren’t George Washington’s committed to planting the seeds of a Jeffersonian democracy. They are bent on power, and revenge against their sunni oppressors. The elections were simply a tool to empower themselves. Our army and our money were simply the tools; the henchmen, that enabled them to seize power.
Democracy is an idea that takes many, many decades, if not centuries to grow and flourish. I can still hear Bush fans lecturing me that installing Democracy in Iraq should be no different than the Democracies that took hold in post-world war two Japan and Germany. As Neocons are prone to do, this is a complete misreading of history. Japan and Germany both had deep and profound experience with democratic institutions prior to world war two. In addition, Germany and Japan are homogenous countries, with a wide set of shared values. There were and are no sectarian and religious fault lines dividing society in Germany or Japan.
In short, when I hear Hillary, Carl Levin, or a host of republican pundits blame the Al-Malaki government for our fiasco in Iraq, it makes me want to puke.
