[ UPDATE: Neo-neocon's thinking the same way I am. We even went surfing through the same comment threads at Iraq the Model. ]
This is an update from this post.
Somebody's got to be an optimist, and I guess that's me. But even an optimist can get angry, and it's no secret that I'm a bit of a hothead. So I just blew up at Jim Henley. I don't have a problem with sober thoughtful pessimism, based on the facts. I have a problem with gleefully pouncing on bad news if it buttresses your agenda, and ruthlessly ignoring any good news that doesn't. If you really think the grand experiment in Iraqi democracy is already a failure, at least have the decency to be sad about it.
When "progressives" do this (and here I am not so much talking about Jim as "social activists" I know, but they share some traits), there is the added insult of hypocrisy; anyone has the right to be a curmudgeonly isolationist reactionary, but then don't tell me you care about the fate of the planet and oppressed peoples and rainforests and bunny rabbits. And these same "progressives" will give the Palestinians endless chances to stop acting like thugs, on very little evidence, and yet are indecently hasty to write off the Iraqis (and with smug satisfaction!) on the basis of one election, even though the Iraqis have in three short years demonstrated more desire and effort to create a lawful society than the Palestinians have since Arafat came back from Tunis.
Anyway, regardless of the outcome of this election, unless the new government attempts to shut down the proliferation of news and opinion and global communication that Iraq has grown accustomed to, there's no reason this shouldn't continue to be true:This relentless progress of democracy is causing quite a commotion throughout the Arab world. While it is fashionable to denounce the American presence in Iraq, and what the Americans were doing, the Arab language buzz on the net is going in unexpected directions. Because of al Jazeera and the Internet, young Arabs everywhere are not only able to observe what it happening in Iraq, but to discuss it with young Iraqis.I'm sure the Arab pessimists are out in force this week, along with their Western fellow travelers. But if Iraq continues to have a relatively free press, if the structure of the Parliament allows for minority representation, and most importantly if the judiciary retains its independence, then Iraq will continue to act as a model for democracy in the Arab world, regardless of the platform of the party in power.These discussions are not noted much in the West, because they generally take place in Arabic, and often via email and listservs. The non-Iraqi Arabs are impressed at the proliferation of media in Iraq, and the eagerness of Iraqis to vote, and make democracy work. The economic growth in Iraq is admired, and is already attracting entrepreneurs from other Arab countries. The more cynical non-Iraqis believe that it will all come to nothing, and that another Saddam will eventually emerge and shut down all this democratic nonsense, as is the case in most of the Arab world.
But the pessimists appear to be in the minority. Arabs are tired of dictators, economic stagnation, the corruption and living in a police state. Moreover, there’s a nimble quality in Arab thinking that allows them to simultaneously blame the Americans for going into Iraq, and praising the result.
Those are big "ifs." As specialists in nation-building say, it's easy to hold one election, the real test is if the second election results in a peaceful transfer of power. But we simply don't know yet.
From everything I have read and heard, including repeated polls over the last three years, I am confident that this is true: Most Iraqis, even fundamentalist Shiites, really really don't want their country to be a client state of Iran. Many of those who voted for the Shiite list out of insecurity still have a stake in economic growth and interaction with the Western world. Even those who claim to want a strongman like Saddam aren't going to give up their new cellphones and modems without a struggle. And now their whole region is not only watching, but chatting with them about the process as it unfolds.
Pandora's box has been opened.
I enjoy your intellect every day I thank you.
I enjoy your intellect every day I thank you.
EXACTLY!
Jim should have given it a week or so before explaining that he warned you of this all along.
And mentioning "progressives" over and over in a post retorting (it couldn't really be called a reply could it) the writing of an obvious libertarian is a bit silly.
The incessant harping on liberals, on their errors and hypocracies, is getting old.
A challenge to you and other Winds writers; for a week focus on what is really going on and your constructive ideas. Ignore your temptation to bemoan others wrong thoughts.
I'll give it some focus.
Anybody notice that giant explosions have been missing since Sunday?
Last casualty report or KIA from Centcom confirms one dead Dec 19 from small arms fire. That is now three days of quiet (seeing as it is now at least 9:12 PM in Iraq, the day is done and no giant explosions).
I'd love to see this as a trend with ever decreasing violence and it may just be so. Looks like the "insurgents" are waiting to see what the real results are before letting of any anger.
Of course, recent reports, after all the "we will seek redress for this fraudulent voting and it won't be nice" indicate that the parties are in deep negotiations already discussing possible coalition government, including the dreaded "Sunni" contingent.
All in all, I find no reason for pessimism at this moment. As a matter of fact, it seems that the constant moaning and groaning is filling in the gaps for the obviously lacking explosions (gotta keep that "all is doomed" pitch at an even keel while we wait for the next giant explosion).
I think this also means that the "Sunni insurgents" have had a lot more power over the AQ folks. Not to mention continuing pushes into the Al Anbar area seems to have convinced these characters to join the democracy program.
Although, in my own pessimistic thoughts, I think that it is almost eerily quiet.
"The incessant harping on liberals, on their errors and hypocracies, is getting old.
A challenge to you and other Winds writers; for a week focus on what is really going on and your constructive ideas. Ignore your temptation to bemoan others wrong thoughts. "
Wish I could, but its hard to get your ideas out when your leader is constantly being accused of everything from warcrimes to making himself a dictator. Its simply difficult to weigh your own ideas against literally nothing but attacks, negativity, and accusations. At some point you have to respond.
Mark, welcome to the world of the ruling party.
Truly. Galts law exists for a reason.
One is reminded of these lines from a classic sketch:
A: Yes it is!
M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A: No it isn't.
Some of the ruling party, or at least that would like it kept responsible, would welcome principled counterproposals as opposed to simple nay-saying. We could have Tom Barnett, instead we get Nancy Pelosi and the Deaniacs. Feh!
These assertions would have more weight if Muslims had protested the butchery of non-Muslims by other Muslims. But I don't, which vitiates the argument. Pesky things, facts.
These assertions would have more weight were I to see Muslims protesting the butchery of non-Muslims by other Muslims. But I don't, which vitiates the argument. Pesky things, facts.
".... Ignore your temptation to bemoan others wrong thoughts. "
Well, at least they're agreeing with you about their thoughts being wrong....!
I fear the polity within Iraq though,even while I have been a big supporter of doing this.
The current electoral commission and alleged fraud sure stinks to me and this is the 1 thing that can defeat this experiment other than us in America.
At the end of the day,we cannot become the fighters of an Islamist Shiite bunch of thugs,our kids cannot die to assist these bastards and after the initial electoral results,I fear every death from here on out is for this purpose.
Either they count the ballots properly,or Bush should inform them we're out and they can do all the fighting at this point without us.
I stick by my e-mail to Glenn. It's early yet and this was always the point of our taking this strategy in the War On Terror. Give them a chance to be democrats and forgive them their imperfect attainment in the beginning. It won't turn out like the US Senate, but then again some days I wonder if that's a bad thing.
Frankly, I don't think there is any fraud going on (er..not too much that would make a difference in the long run).
I say this because my friends and I have been looking at preliminary results and it appears that the voting was split along ethnic lines and that the parties of the particular ethnicities performed above "good" in their individual provinces.
Here's an Example of how it broke down:
Ninewa (Mosul)
618 -- 37% -- 302,518 (sunni)
730 -- 19% -- 157,476
731 -- 11% -- 91,661
667 -- 10% -- 82,976
555 -- 7% -- 61,038 (Shia)
Mark from IBC said:
I totaled up the votes of top 10 parties from each of the governates. Here are the nationwide totals (so far):
555 - (Shia) UIA 46.4 pct
730 - Kurdistan Gathering 21.8 pct
618 - (Sunni) Iraqi Front 14.7 pct
731 - Iraqi National List 8.6 pct
667 - National Front 4.1 pct
561 - Islamic U of Kurdistan 1.4 pct
631 - Progressives 1.3 pct
516 - Liberation Gathering 1.0 pct
630 - Turkuman Front 0.7 pct
Let's start from the premise that 60 pct of the Iraqi voters in the December 15th elections were Shia. That would mean that (60 - 46.4) 13.6 pct of Iraqi voters were Shia voters who did not vote for List 555 (UIA). From this we could conclude that about one in five (22.7 pct) of the Shia voted against List 555.
Check the results at the IECI
Anbar list 618 (Sunni) got 73% and 667 (Sunni/secular) got 17%
Babil 555 (Shia) received 75%
Basrah 555 77%
If you look over the provinces, this is pretty typical with Baghdad having the 555 as 58% and the rest split among the other parties.
In other words, it's all looking pretty fair which is probably why you are now hearing less grumbling and a few more discussions about how the coalition will sort out.
Everybody is jockeying for position, that's all. Unfortunately, these guys still need to work on democracy that does not include threats of violence if they don't get their way.
Other than that, I would remind everyone that the assembly requires a majority vote to pass laws and the Shia are not going to hit 51% so it is going to be difficult for them to pass non-liberal laws unless one of the Sunni parties decides to buck their animosity and go ahead and support some sort of illiberal law that fits both of their perceived ideas on practicing law and preserving morality.
However, I wouldn't bet my house on it since it is likely these divides are going to stay opposed to each other for several years (at least at the ballot box) with the amount of distrust.
The only problem may lay in any wealth and power agreements that the Kurds and the Shia come together on (like Kirkuk and ceding it to the Kurdish state) that may anger the Sunni.
In short, its good representative democracy. Frankly, the Shia can't run the joint by themselves however they may try to guide it towards Iran.
As one Iraqi put it, these folks are still unsure of their situation and fearful of a return of certain groups so they have stuck to their comfort zone voting along sectarian lines.
Four years from now, I imagine this will split differently as well and that the number of participating parties will dwindle down to a few large ones by the next election.
Very happy for the Iraqi's. It is there country time to go home once they chose their parliment.
We need the troops to deal w/ the extremists at home.
Whoa, Nellie! Let's try to diffuse all that pessimism over the claim that "Democracy in Iraq will cure all ills"...Won't want that idea to settle in (even if its borne out by facts).
So let's slam the "progressives" and hope the ensuing kerfuffle hides the truth.
Nice try, Yehudit/Jutidth. Your political gamesmanship is showing.
Are you trying to be the Jewish Ann Coulter? You're off to a good start...it's a good career move. She rakes it in pitting one group against the other.
And lord knows we don't have enough involvement of Likudniks in our Middle East policy.
Not everyone hates Arabs as much as you do, you know. They're people too, with lives and children.
Patrick,
Allegations of fraud are par for the course these days in Democracies, it seems.
Weren't there plenty at the last US elections? And I seem to remember when Mr. G. W. Bush was first elected there was quite a bit of howling over Florida and Confusing Ballots and Pregnant Chads... and then there's the Chicago "vote early, vote often" tradition...
The problem with pessimists is the "it might not work so let's not try" attitude. If you don't try, you'll never find out. I'm not a risk taker myself but sometimes you find yourself between Iraq and a hard place. (Pun gleefully stolen from Hot Shots Part Deux.)
"Not everyone hates Arabs as much as you do, you know. They're people too, with lives and children."
Let's see. I post a passionate defense of the Iraqi attempt at democracy, begging for optimism and support for them. I support the training of their army and police so they can protect themselves against suicide bombers who kill their children.
But I hate Arabs.
I think someone needs a reading comprehension course.
And lord knows we don't have enough involvement of Likudniks in our Middle East policy.
I was just wondering if you could define the term "Likudnik". You seem to be using it to refer to people who are not registered members of the Likud party.
I usually see the term used to refer to 'anyone the author disagrees with on the subject of Israel', or to supporters of Israel, neo-cons, Jews, or to those the author suspects are part of the great neo-con/trotskyite/mason/illuminati conspiracy to take over the world (see Justin Raimondo)
http://www.angry-young-arabs.com