America is doing it right in Iraq

“The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.” George W. Bush, Inauguration Speech 2005.

The US policy of pre-emptive action against countries that pose a threat to national security has raised a few eyebrows. But this is not the only facet of the "Bush Doctrine". Over the last four years George W. Bush not only lay out the foundations for his assault on Iraq but also addressed the second aspect of his doctrine: installing democracy in war ravaged countries. He has tried to do this in both Iraq and Afghanistan but also other countries such as Ukraine and Pakistan

President Bush warned America and his allies at the start of the war that it would be tiresome, complicated and expensive. This has certainly proved to be the case.

It seems every day more and more insurgents are willing to throw away their lives with suicide bombings, killing over 1,300 American soldiers and countless innocent civilians. Recently General Mohamed Abdullah Shahwan (Iyad Allawi's intelligence chief) said, “I think the resistance is bigger than the US military in Iraq. I think the resistance is more than 200,000 people”. He also noted that the problem was not going away. Operating out of Syria, Saddam's half-brother Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan and former aide Mohammed Yunis al-Ahmed are providing funding and tapping connections to old army divisions, particularly in Mosul, Samarra, Baquba, Kirkuk and Tikrit.

The question that arises from this is: Was the notion of a pre-emptive strike on Afghanistan and Iraq in order to disarm them, arrest their leaders and install democracy in their nation better than taking no action and letting the sleeping wolf lie? With latest estimates showing the civilian death toll could be as high as 100,000 the question must be asked, is it really worth it?

The "left" think not. They have pointed out on many occasions that these "insurgents" are living examples of why we should leave sovereign nations alone and get on with securing our own borders. But they also have to accept that we knew all along that this war, like any other war that has been fought, would be costly and chaotic.

For countless years after World War II many Germans expressed fury at the Allies. Stig Dagerman, a Swedish journalist, described people in Berlin in 1946 as “bitter, disillusioned and hopeless” and argued that people believed they were living under worse conditions than those before the occupation that removed Hitler from power. This was the case right up to the early 1950's when finally true democracy took hold and became fully established. It was then the Germans realised the full potential of their nation after the regime change.

A similar scenario happened in the former Soviet Union when more than 10 years after the fall of communism there was no electricity or drinking water or properly functioning sewerage system. People again expressed their disappointment both violently and with peaceful protests.

Similar situations are happening right before our eyes in Baghdad and surrounding cities in Iraq. But over time these issues can be solved with the installation of a democratic government. Just recently, the US has initiated a project to rehabilitate 13 existing electricity stations and construct 24 new substations in Baghdad. These will improve the distribution and reliability of electricity for more than two million Baghdad residents. Iraqi hospitals are now being constantly maintained and are available to all Iraqis, not just the elite. Drugs are being supplied by the US, and doctors - oppressed under Suddam - are now back working in the hospital system.

The faster the US and its allies can raise living standards for the people of Iraq the faster the people of Iraq will realise the true virtues of freedom after experiencing over 30 years of authoritarian rule. It will only be after they have accomplished this that the US troops will have the support of the Iraqi people.

Democracy can work in countries like Iraq. This has been shown with shining examples in the Soviet Union, Germany and Japan. Much of Iraq is already enjoying free democracy and speech, something ruthlessly prohibited under the reign of Suddam Hussein. The allied forces have about 300 troops patrolling the entire Kurdish area. Local councils are operating around many parts of Iraq. People are experiencing a freedom they probably have not seen in their entire life.

Iraqis are also helping run United Nations operations in Iraq. Many Iraqi engineers, technical experts, and managers are running the UN Development Programs despite heightened fears for their safety. The 25-member National Government council includes 3 women and representatives of all major religions in Iraq, something that would be forbidden under the reign of Suddam Hussein.

Exporting democracy, by invading countries and arresting their leaders can work, as long as it has the long term support of the people and for this, the people have to want democracy. In the end it is their country.

What the US has failed to do in both Iraq and Afghanistan is gain that support by failing to respect the one fundamental aspect of democracy: government for the people, by the people. For nearly two years Iraq has been ruled by a predominately US led government, coupled with bad media coverage implying the transitional government were puppets acting in the US's interests.

The insurgents fighting this war are predominately Sunni Muslims. A minority group, but with a controlling influence in Suddam's Government. Their leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has openly condemned the act of trying to implement democracy. In a video recently published he said, "We have declared a bitter war against democracy and all those who seek to enact it."

The next strategy the US is using to obtain the support of the Sunni minority is to give them an incentive to vote in the election. They are doing this by removing all power of the Sunni population if they don't vote. In other words by letting them abstain from voting it is not giving them an input into their own Government. Many pundits believe that this will trigger a thought in their minds that the only possible way to achieve an input into the running of the new government is to participate in it. But will this be enough to convince them to vote in something that their leader has denounced as "against the rule of God".

Surprisingly Sunni Muslims in other countries obviously want democracy. In Afghanistan Sunni Muslims, who make up about 84 per cent of the population, were involved in the phases of implementing democracy in their own country. If the Sunni ideology is able to co-exist with the notion of democracy in Afghanistan surely it is possible for it to exist in Iraq.

Algeria, another predominately Sunni country (99 per cent), has a large percentage of the population calling for democracy in the Middle East. Democracy is also being called for by the people of Kuwait whose population is about 70 per cent Sunni Muslim.

In spite of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's rhetoric the Iraqi Islamic Party, the major Sunni political organisation in the country, had Sunni candidates with the courage to run in the recent elections, which outlines the point that at least some Sunni Muslims are in search of a democratic Iraq.

Another commonly overlooked point is that the Sunni population fails to have their own religious clergy meaning that although religious power brokers in the movement might call for boycotts they do not represent the views of the whole movement.

The Iraqi economy is also steadily improving; the exchange price of the Iraqi Dinar has risen in the last 12 months. Iraq has vast oil reserves, the ability to have a booming agriculture industry and an intelligent population, all of which are valuable assets when it comes to building up an economy. Free countries are also kicking in to bolster the Iraq. Nearly 40 nations have offered debt relief to the troubled country and countries and organisations such as the US State Department have contributed nearly $18.4 billion to rebuilding Iraqi infrastructure.

The precedent set by America by invading Iraq has also rubbed off in the rest of the world. Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi not only abandoned his nuclear weapons program after the fall of Saddam, but has recently encouraged Iran and North Korea to do the same.

But there is a more serious side to the issue. Despite full scale assaults on Falluja there is no sign of the security in Iraq improving. Many people are blaming this on the US government and the failure to have a concrete plan when invading Iraq. The economic predictions by the US have also not come about. Paul Wolfowitz said in early 2003, “The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon”.

This has not even come close to happening. Six months later Paul Bremer said that current and future oil revenues would be insufficient for rebuilding Iraq. At no time during this war have we seen the US government come up with an estimate of when they will be pulling out of Iraq. As the security situation continues and Iraqi insurgents kill more and more troops everyday, the prediction of General Eric K. Shinseki of several hundred thousand troops is becoming more of a reality. The US needs to set a definitive casualty point at which they will pull troops out of Iraq and hand over to an international peace keeping force to oversee the process till a full government is established. It is only then after a long term plan has been established and been ratified by the United Nations that Iraqi people can enjoy the freedoms that come with democracy.

Only time will tell whether the notion of democracy will become viable in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the recent elections are a strong step in the right direction. Iraq, with careful guidance from the UN, has the distinct possibility to be a shining example of what democracy really is. After all the majority of the population have been striving for this right to free speech ever since Suddam took power all those years ago.

As David Pryce-Jones said in the National Review on November 24, 2003:

They [Iraqis] have never been so free and prosperous, and they expect things will get better still. There's been banking and currency reform, with lines of credit now readily available. Markets are thriving, property values are rising. Welcome novelties include free speech and almost 200 periodicals; Internet cafes, bloggers, and cellphones are everywhere.

About 90,000 Iraqis are policemen or soldiers, a number growing all the time … The Iraqi Provisional Government is gradually acquiring power and capabilities, and one day in the not so distant future will become independent.