[Peace-discuss] (no subject)

[Paul Patton]

 * In Iraq, A Rush Toward Democracy Could Trigger Civil War *
 *by Helena Cobban*

In Iraq, the lead-up to Saturday's referendum on the draft constitution
looks very troubling indeed. The country continues to be plagued by
widespread fighting, sectarian killings, insecurity, economic disaster, and
the breakdown of basic services. There is little chance that even the
successful holding of the referendum can help improve things. What can the
US do to lessen the scale of the disaster?

Under better circumstances, what is happening in Iraq today could have been
similar to what happened in South Africa in 1994: a transition from minority
rule to majority rule using the ballot box and embracing a newly democratic
constitution. But it's not turning out that way - for several reasons.

In South Africa, the leaders of the formerly ruling (white) minority
community were fully engaged in the negotiation over the political
transition, and were well able to protect their own core interests. Not so
in Iraq. In South Africa, too, the leaders of the newly emergent majority
community in 1990-94 showed political sensitivity and well-honed political
smarts. Not so in today's Iraq. The majority Shiites and their Kurdish
allies tried to go for broke with the present draft constitution, paying
little heed to objections raised by the newly vulnerable Sunnis.

The most controversial provisions of Iraq's draft constitution are those
that allow the devolution of significant governing powers to small,
sub-national bodies that would be linked together only loosely through a
federation. This radical devolution of power is viewed with great distrust
by most Sunnis. Indeed, it could pave the way for a Bosnia-style breakup
along contested interzone borders, accompanied by widespread ethnic and
sectarian "cleansing." Many political analysts have now warned that the
Shiite and Kurdish (and American) insistence on ramming through this
constitution has itself pushed Iraq closer to civil war.

In addition, the failure to win an Iraq-wide atmosphere of calm in the
run-up to the vote has several very negative consequences. It means there
has been nothing like a reasoned national debate over the pros and cons of
the constitution. It also means no outside election monitors have been able
to watch the vote. So whichever way Saturday's vote is declared to go, the
side that loses has little intrinsic reason to trust the legitimacy of the
process. If the Sunnis "lose" in their bid to block the constitution they -
and their many powerful supporters in other Arab countries - may well
contest that result and redouble their support for the present insurgency.
If the Kurds and Shiites "lose" in their attempt to push the constitution
through, the Kurds (and perhaps many Shiites) may well react by moving even
faster toward establishing the de facto independence of their regions, and
thus the country's breakup.

In either way lies a real danger of escalation into outright civil war. And
if a full-blown civil war erupts in Iraq there's a significant risk it might
destabilize, or even engulf, several other countries in the region.

What can the US do to avert such a disaster? Some people say the US should
stay in Iraq to prevent the outbreak of a civil war. But this misreads the
record of the 30-month period the US has already spent as the occupying
power there. During those 30 months, ethnic and sectarian tensions have
worsened considerably. There is no reason to expect that another 12 or 30
months of US presence would be any different.

If the US stays, the intra-Iraqi civil strife is very likely indeed to
continue, or even escalate. But if the US announces a speedy departure, and
then leaves in good order - who knows? The Iraqis may fall into civil war
afterward, or they may not. But at least the US troops will not be caught in
the middle, and the US will not be as morally responsible for the strife.
Also, if the US troops are clearly on their way out, then no Iraqi community
will find it as easy to overreach politically as the Kurds and Shiites have
done recently (while protected by the imperfect shield of the US troop
presence). And all sincere Iraqis will realize - as South Africans did some
dozen years ago - that if they want to save their country they will need to
find a way to deal with each other.

Will that happen? It still might. Who would have thought back in 1990 that
black and white South Africans could find a way to work together? And if
Iraqis should lack confidence in negotiating their future among themselves
and feel they still need a reassuring outside presence - well, there are
many candidates for the job more qualified than the US military.

Despite many good intentions, US policies have thus far brought Iraq to the
brink of internal breakdown. This week's referendum won't stop that process.
Within the next six to eight months, the best thing that could persuade
Iraqis to hold their country together is a speedy and total exit of US
troops.

*Helena Cobban is writing a book on violence and its legacies.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20051013/bd32ad72/attachment.html