In moving to topple Saddam Hussein's regime, the Bush administration stakes its case on two critical arguments. First, President Bush and his senior aides insist that the coming Iraq war is an extension of the military campaign against terrorism. It would spare America and the world, in the words of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "the danger that Iraq's weapons of mass terror could fall into the hands of terrorists."
Second, the Bush team is pledging to bring democracy to Iraq, a transformation that - it is hoped - will spur democratization across the region. A peaceful, democratic dawn in Iraq, they assert, would soon break over other authoritarian Arab states as well. By transforming the political landscape of the Middle East, American officials hope to strike at the root causes of Islamic extremism.
Messrs. Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz like to pose as realists, but just how realistic is such thinking? Is it based on a sober assessment of the complex realities in Iraq and the region? Or is it driven by ideology and wishful thinking? Will a war against Iraq help the US in its fight against terrorists, or will it make Americans more vulnerable?
Despair and alienation have taken hold of the younger generation of Arabs, who represent over 50% of the region's population. Political repression and the silence of Arab public opinion should worry America and its Arab allies, not reassure them, because it means that there is no way for the public to channel its interests, demands, and frustrations peacefully.
A US invasion of Iraq, with large numbers of civilian casualties, would deepen the sense of victimization and defeat felt by Arab youths and make them inclined to join Al Qaeda-style holy war cells. Far from undermining militancy and combatting terror, a war will likely play into the hands of Al Qaeda, giving it a new lease on life.
Indeed, militant Islamists, hoping to recover from the devastating blows they have absorbed since the war on terror began, are already positioning themselves to capitalize on the coming war with Iraq. In the last few weeks, Al Qaeda's propaganda messages have pointed increasingly at the Iraqi crisis. The organization seeks to reinvent itself as a defender of the Iraqi people.
At a time when democracy is under threat, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided. Subscribe now and save $50 on a new subscription.
Subscribe Now
In this, Al Qaeda finds a receptive audience. The dominant Arab-Muslim narrative stresses that the coming war has nothing to do with fighting terror. Rather, it is intended to settle old scores and make Washington the arbiter of Arab destiny and resources, particularly oil. By attacking Iraq, the US could win the armed confrontation with Hussein, but probably lose the broader - and more vital - political struggle for the future of the country.
American officials do not seem to recognize how difficult, costly, and prolonged the task of creating a peaceful order and a viable democracy in Iraq will be. There is a lack of appreciation of how deeply entrenched are Iraq's sectarian, tribal, and ethnic loyalties. A sense of humility and skepticism is missing.
The building blocks and institutions necessary for a functioning polity, let alone a democracy, do not exist. Since the advent of army rule in 1958, successive regimes have terrorized Iraqis into submission and bled the country white through their military misadventures. Monitored and oppressed for 45 years, Iraqis have lost faith in the political system and turned inward, to tribalism and religious/ethnic factionalism. Civil society has been crushed and the middle class decimated--thanks in no small part to the UN-led economic sanctions that have been enforced since 1991.
Of course, reforming and democratizing the Iraqi political system is not impossible. On the contrary, the Iraqis have suffered more than most and have learned the hard way the perils of authoritarianism and oppression. They recognize their vested interest in overcoming their divisions and rebuilding their political community. Iraq also possesses human and material resources that should work in favor of democracy in the long term.
But democracy cannot be delivered to Iraq by an outside power. Only Iraqis, with international assistance, can transform their country. This task requires time, patience, hard work, and luck. It will likely take one or two decades, not just a year or two, the proposed time frame of American military presence in Iraq after the expected ouster of Hussein.
Unless America is willing to police the new order for many years and invest vast political and economic resources in assisting, not imposing, the reconstruction of state and society, Iraq will fracture and descend into chaos. Its neighbors will be destabilized. New jihadi groups will arise. Not only will there be no peace and democracy in Iraq, but the West's security interests will be endangered further. Sadly, this worst case scenario is hardly entertained by American officials, who now seem to be prisoners of their own rhetoric.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
At the end of a year of domestic and international upheaval, Project Syndicate commentators share their favorite books from the past 12 months. Covering a wide array of genres and disciplines, this year’s picks provide fresh perspectives on the defining challenges of our time and how to confront them.
ask Project Syndicate contributors to select the books that resonated with them the most over the past year.
In moving to topple Saddam Hussein's regime, the Bush administration stakes its case on two critical arguments. First, President Bush and his senior aides insist that the coming Iraq war is an extension of the military campaign against terrorism. It would spare America and the world, in the words of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "the danger that Iraq's weapons of mass terror could fall into the hands of terrorists."
Second, the Bush team is pledging to bring democracy to Iraq, a transformation that - it is hoped - will spur democratization across the region. A peaceful, democratic dawn in Iraq, they assert, would soon break over other authoritarian Arab states as well. By transforming the political landscape of the Middle East, American officials hope to strike at the root causes of Islamic extremism.
Messrs. Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz like to pose as realists, but just how realistic is such thinking? Is it based on a sober assessment of the complex realities in Iraq and the region? Or is it driven by ideology and wishful thinking? Will a war against Iraq help the US in its fight against terrorists, or will it make Americans more vulnerable?
Despair and alienation have taken hold of the younger generation of Arabs, who represent over 50% of the region's population. Political repression and the silence of Arab public opinion should worry America and its Arab allies, not reassure them, because it means that there is no way for the public to channel its interests, demands, and frustrations peacefully.
A US invasion of Iraq, with large numbers of civilian casualties, would deepen the sense of victimization and defeat felt by Arab youths and make them inclined to join Al Qaeda-style holy war cells. Far from undermining militancy and combatting terror, a war will likely play into the hands of Al Qaeda, giving it a new lease on life.
Indeed, militant Islamists, hoping to recover from the devastating blows they have absorbed since the war on terror began, are already positioning themselves to capitalize on the coming war with Iraq. In the last few weeks, Al Qaeda's propaganda messages have pointed increasingly at the Iraqi crisis. The organization seeks to reinvent itself as a defender of the Iraqi people.
HOLIDAY SALE: PS for less than $0.7 per week
At a time when democracy is under threat, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided. Subscribe now and save $50 on a new subscription.
Subscribe Now
In this, Al Qaeda finds a receptive audience. The dominant Arab-Muslim narrative stresses that the coming war has nothing to do with fighting terror. Rather, it is intended to settle old scores and make Washington the arbiter of Arab destiny and resources, particularly oil. By attacking Iraq, the US could win the armed confrontation with Hussein, but probably lose the broader - and more vital - political struggle for the future of the country.
American officials do not seem to recognize how difficult, costly, and prolonged the task of creating a peaceful order and a viable democracy in Iraq will be. There is a lack of appreciation of how deeply entrenched are Iraq's sectarian, tribal, and ethnic loyalties. A sense of humility and skepticism is missing.
The building blocks and institutions necessary for a functioning polity, let alone a democracy, do not exist. Since the advent of army rule in 1958, successive regimes have terrorized Iraqis into submission and bled the country white through their military misadventures. Monitored and oppressed for 45 years, Iraqis have lost faith in the political system and turned inward, to tribalism and religious/ethnic factionalism. Civil society has been crushed and the middle class decimated--thanks in no small part to the UN-led economic sanctions that have been enforced since 1991.
Of course, reforming and democratizing the Iraqi political system is not impossible. On the contrary, the Iraqis have suffered more than most and have learned the hard way the perils of authoritarianism and oppression. They recognize their vested interest in overcoming their divisions and rebuilding their political community. Iraq also possesses human and material resources that should work in favor of democracy in the long term.
But democracy cannot be delivered to Iraq by an outside power. Only Iraqis, with international assistance, can transform their country. This task requires time, patience, hard work, and luck. It will likely take one or two decades, not just a year or two, the proposed time frame of American military presence in Iraq after the expected ouster of Hussein.
Unless America is willing to police the new order for many years and invest vast political and economic resources in assisting, not imposing, the reconstruction of state and society, Iraq will fracture and descend into chaos. Its neighbors will be destabilized. New jihadi groups will arise. Not only will there be no peace and democracy in Iraq, but the West's security interests will be endangered further. Sadly, this worst case scenario is hardly entertained by American officials, who now seem to be prisoners of their own rhetoric.