Global Policy Forum

By Salah Hemeid

Washington's promises of democracy in post-Saddam Iraq do not, as yet, permit for Iraqis to rule themselves.

The Bush administration's justification for going to war against Iraq was the imminent threat Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction posed to the safety and security of the Unites States and its allies. In Bush's own words: "If Saddam Hussein won't disarm, for the sake of peace, for the sake of a future for our children, we will lead a coalition of nations and disarm Saddam Hussein."

In building the case for war President Bush and his senior aides also suggested that failure to attack Iraq would facilitate access to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction by terrorist groups such as Al-Qa'eda. It is now evident that no such weapons existed and accusations are growing that Bush and his closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, deliberately misled the world in order to promote a war they had already planned to get rid of Saddam.

In a statement on Monday Bush insisted that Iraq had a weapons programme and that American troops would uncover it. He also insisted that Al-Qa'eda had a presence in Baghdad. "History will show, and history and time will prove, that the United States made the absolute right decision in freeing the people of Iraq from the clutches of Saddam Hussein," he said.

The strategy of deception, dressed in moralising garb, continues. The Iraqis were given no idea of what would happen once military victory was achieved. They still have no idea. On Friday the chief American administrator in Iraq, L Paul Bremer III, presented Iraqi political leaders with a revised plan for the governing of their country, its intention being to graft an Iraqi face on to a new American-led government. The revisions give the proposed Iraqi political council more power in proposing ministers for the interim administration under the occupation authority than earlier plans, which would only have allowed what the Americans call their "Iraqi partners" to make recommendations on currency issues, oil production, economic strategy and education reform. The new plan continues to rule out elections which the Americans believe might lead to further instability by opening the door to extremists.

Privately US officials are saying that Iraq is not yet ready for self-government. They suggest that the decision to back away from working with those returning exiles who prior to the war were close to the US administration is part of a broader restructuring of Washington's post-war occupation strategy that includes the deployment of more troops to stem looting and the replacement of the initial civil administrator, retired Lt Gen Jay M Garner, with Bremer.

Whatever the reasons for the decision not to hand over power to former opposition leaders through a hastily formed transitional government, it means the US will occupy Iraq for much longer than initially planned, and will act as the ultimate authority for governing the country until a new constitution is worked out, national elections held and a new government installed.

Bremer's decision to rely on a council of between 25 to 30 members instead of devolving power to a transitional government has riled many former opposition leaders who claim the Bush administration has reneged on commitments. Spokesmen for Ahmed Chalabi, the Kurdistan Democratic Party and for the Shi'ite-led Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, have announced that Iraq's seven major political parties still want a national conference to choose who will advise the occupation authorities. Hamid Al-Bayati, spokesman for the Council, told Al-Ahram Weekly that it has told Bremer it rejects any appointed council. "We cannot be part of an administration that is not elected," he said. "Iraqi leaders should be chosen by Iraqis."

While Washington vacillates over who should govern Iraq increasing numbers of US soldiers are being killed or injured in the spate of attacks across Iraq that have continued since the end of the war. The Bush administration's predicament has been made worse by its stubborn refusal to internationalise the nation-building effort, as was done in Kosovo, Bosnia and East Timor.

Brazilian diplomat Sergio Vieira de Mello was appointed as the new UN special representative in Iraq according to Resolution 1483 approved by the Security Council on 22 May, stepping into the scene as an international referee. Although de Mello has already met with some Iraqi political leaders there are already indications that Bremer is loathe to engage him actively in the political process. Such international involvement, after all, would be one channel by which the Iraqis might check Washington's power while allowing the international community a positive role in building a democratic and stable nation.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.