Be careful what you wish for…

“It still takes twenty or more years to reach full democracy.”
Daniel Pipes (1)

If Daniel Pipes is correct then U.S. and Coalition forces will be in Iraq for at least two decades. A sign of this permanent democratic force is seen in the half dozen new military bases in Iraq.(2) Notwithstanding the domestic struggles this presents in America and other nations, is the more pressing problem of Iraqi perception. Iraqis need solace in this transitional stage of governmental development. Foreign forces must secure the nation and then help Iraqis with a federal form of government. As Fareed Zakaria states, “until a legitimate government has been formed … the United States will play the role of honest broker among the various factions.”(3) However, many challenges now face these democratic forces.

First, there is a power vacuum in Iraq. Even with the provisional authority and the appointed president, governmental structures are nonexistent. Military forces must continue to immobilize terrorist insurgents. This can only be adequately done by increased troops in Iraq. As Daniel Byman points out, “the size of forces (needs to) be approximately 100,000 troops until security is established.” (4)The troops can be a stabilizing factor as well. Byman details, “establishing democracy in occupied Iraq requires that U.S. and other occupying forces become involved in a host of local disputes as well as policy issues.”(5) In effect, the occupying forces must become an example of negotiations and deliberative action. If military forces can help with ground level disputes then it will help foster lasting democratic change.

Second, Iraq’s natural resources must be secured and held in a Public Trust. (6) This Trust will be used for health care and universal education. As Daniel Yergin interprets, “Iraq desperately needs billions of dollars for basic health and education.” (7) Moreover, these petrol-dollars can redistribute wealth in the short run; enabling the poor and the disenfranchised to become active citizens. However, Iraq must not become a petrol-state where the government ask for no taxes and grants no liberties. This has been the theme of Middle Eastern nations. In Iraq, however, revenue must come from the people in the form of taxation. This will keep the populous active and establish accountability in the democracy. Additionally, it will create viable lines of communication between ruled and rulers. This is not an easy proposition. However, low interest loans and compensation must be granted by foreign governments. In fact, loans without interest would be of greater value, for the citizenry will not see the monetary loans as financial wind falls for ‘conquering armies’. Perception in this matter is significant to stabilization and ultimately democratic success in the region.

Third, the Middle East region must play a significant role in the development of a federal republican form of democracy in Iraq. Natural antagonists such as Turkey and Iran must be kept at bay. This will be a struggle; however a salient point in this endeavor is the European Union and United Nations. For example, Turkey is vying for admission to the European Union and at the present moment on a watch list. If the U.S. and Coalition forces make the Iraq situation a matter of acceptance into the Union then Turkey will back down. The markets of Europe await an enduring and helpful Turkey. Iran must be thwarted by the United Nations. Moreover, Iran cannot view America as an occupying force and will not deal with America one on one. The United Nations must sweeten the deal for the Iranians. In fact, a bold move on the part of the United Nations may lie in ‘helping’ with a legitimate nuclear reactor, thus enabling inspectors back into the country and establishing clear intelligence on Iranian weapon capability. This process can be long and drawn out but the longer the negotiation process the better for Iraq.

Finally, democratic backsliding has been a phenomenon since the third wave of democratization discussed by Samuel Huntington. This process of falling back into old grooves of autocratic strongmen must not occur in post-Saddam Iraq. Critical to this forward progress is constant assistance to the most impoverished sectors of the country. The assistance must be in the form of benevolent help and tolerant considerations. The best and most efficient means of this type of caring is using international peace keeping forces. U.N., Red Cross and International Amnesty groups must reach out in the rural areas outside of the main urban centers. Again monetary incentives must be provided by foreign governments. These groups must literally build the infrastructure needed to bring lasting hope. So, “involvement of outsiders (is) seen as international assistance, not American occupation.” (8)

(1) Found in Dudley, William (ed.) Iraq: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven Press, Thompson/Gate, 130.

(2) Phone interview with Lt. Louis D’Avignon (medical physician) with the USAF in Iraq.

(3) Zakaria, Fareed. “Islam, Democracy, and Constitutional Liberalism.” Political Science Quarterly. v. 119 n. 1 (2004):4.

(4) Byman, Daniel. “Constructing a Democratic Iraq: Changes and Opportunities.” International Security. v. 28 (Summer 2003): 77.

(5) Ibid 76

(6) Zakaria, Fareed. “Islam, Democracy, and Constitutional Liberalism.” Political Science Quarterly. v. 119 n. 1 (2004):3.

(7) Dudley, William (ed.) Iraq: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven Press, Thompson/Gate.170.

(8) Zakaria, Fareed. “Islam, Democracy, and Constitutional Liberalism.” Political Science Quarterly. v. 119 n. 1 (2004): 5.