M
metanoia2k
Guest
To my colleagues on this Board. This column appeared today in the NYT. Before you roll your eyes, remember the Friedman was an early supporter of the Iraq War (of course--he is a member of the Pro-Anything-Isreal- Does-Is-Okay Establishment) and a friendly to the NeoCon realpolitik in the Middle East. He basically says that the GOP faithful are not doing their president or their country any good by just cheering on the post-war coalition. Disaster looms around the corner if tough questions and serious changes do not occur on the ground NOW!
*************************************************
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Republicans seem to think they don't have to think when it
comes to Iraq. They only have to applaud the president and
whack the press for not reporting more good news from
Baghdad - and everything will be fine. Well, think again.
I've often pointed out the good we have done in Iraq and
unabashedly hoped for more. No regrets. But some recent
trends leave me worried. Unfortunately, there are few
Democrats to press my worries on the administration. Most
Democrats either opposed the war (a perfectly legitimate
position) or supported it and are now trying to disown it.
That means the only serious opposition can come from
Republicans, so they'd better get focused - because there
is nothing about the Bush team's performance in Iraq up to
now that justifies a free pass. If Republicans don't get
serious on Iraq, they will wake up a year from now and find
all their candidates facing the same question: "How did
your party lose Iraq?"
If I were a Republican senator, here's what I'd tell the
Bush team:
. What in God's name are you doing forcing Iraqis to accept
Turkish peacekeeping troops? Are you nuts? Not only will
Turkish troops in Iraq alienate the Kurds, our best
friends, but they will rile the Shiites and Sunnis as well.
Honor is hugely important in Iraqi society, and bringing in
Turkish soldiers - Iraq's former colonizers - to order
around Iraqis would be a disaster. "If we bring in the
Turks, it will bring back bad memories," notes Yitzhak
Nakash, a Brandeis University professor and author of one
of the best Iraq books, "The Shi'is of Iraq." "Worse, a
Turkish presence in Iraq will only prompt the Iranians,
Syrians and Saudis to try to increase their influence. That
is no recipe for a stable country."
It's time for the Bush team to admit it made a grievous
error in disbanding Iraq's Army - which didn't even fight
us - and declare: "We thank all the nations who offered
troops, but we think the Iraqi people can and must secure
their own country. So we're inviting all former Iraqi Army
soldiers (not Republican Guards) to report back to duty.
For every two Iraqi battalions that return to duty (they
can weed out their own bad apples), we will withdraw an
American one. So Iraqis can liberate themselves. Our motto
is Iraq for the Iraqis."
. Attacks on our forces are getting more deadly, not less.
Besides those killed, we've had 900 wounded or maimed. We
need to take this much more seriously. We're not facing
some ragtag insurrection. We're facing an enemy with a
command and control center who is cleverly picking off our
troops and those Iraqi leaders and foreigners cooperating
with us. Either we put in the troops needed to finish the
war, and project our authority, or we get the Iraqi Army to
do the job - but pretending that we're just "mopping up" is
a dangerous illusion.
. The neocons need a neo-Baath. I'm glad we banned the
Baath Party, but the ban was not done right. It needed to
be accompanied by a clear process for people who simply
joined the Baath to secure government jobs, like school
directors, to recant and be rehabilitated. Just tossing
these people out has purged thousands of technocrats,
weakened the secular middle class and left a power vacuum
filled by religious groups. Also, Iraq needs a party that
can express the aspirations of Iraq's Sunni minority and
give them a stake in the new state. Right now, the Sunni
mainstream in Iraq isn't sure how it fits into any new
order, so the worst elements are opposing us and the best
are apprehensively sitting on the fence.
. "There is now a struggle for power emerging within the
Shiite community," says Mr. Nakash, "between those clerics
and secular leaders who are ready to give the Americans a
chance and a grass-roots leadership that wants to challenge
both the Americans and the traditional Shia hierarchy. This
grass-roots leadership is seeking control of mosques,
followers, religious authority and income from religious
taxes. Iraq is rapidly moving toward the politics of
militias and arms. This trend has to be stopped."
Bottom line: We still haven't established a moderate
political center in Iraq ready to openly embrace the
progressive U.S. agenda for Iraq and openly defend it. That
center is potentially there, but because, so far, we have
failed to provide a secure enough environment, or a
framework for Iraqis to have the national dialogue they
need to build a better Iraq, it has not emerged. We need to
fix this situation fast. Instead of applauding without
thinking, Republicans should be telling that to the
president.
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
*************************************************
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Republicans seem to think they don't have to think when it
comes to Iraq. They only have to applaud the president and
whack the press for not reporting more good news from
Baghdad - and everything will be fine. Well, think again.
I've often pointed out the good we have done in Iraq and
unabashedly hoped for more. No regrets. But some recent
trends leave me worried. Unfortunately, there are few
Democrats to press my worries on the administration. Most
Democrats either opposed the war (a perfectly legitimate
position) or supported it and are now trying to disown it.
That means the only serious opposition can come from
Republicans, so they'd better get focused - because there
is nothing about the Bush team's performance in Iraq up to
now that justifies a free pass. If Republicans don't get
serious on Iraq, they will wake up a year from now and find
all their candidates facing the same question: "How did
your party lose Iraq?"
If I were a Republican senator, here's what I'd tell the
Bush team:
. What in God's name are you doing forcing Iraqis to accept
Turkish peacekeeping troops? Are you nuts? Not only will
Turkish troops in Iraq alienate the Kurds, our best
friends, but they will rile the Shiites and Sunnis as well.
Honor is hugely important in Iraqi society, and bringing in
Turkish soldiers - Iraq's former colonizers - to order
around Iraqis would be a disaster. "If we bring in the
Turks, it will bring back bad memories," notes Yitzhak
Nakash, a Brandeis University professor and author of one
of the best Iraq books, "The Shi'is of Iraq." "Worse, a
Turkish presence in Iraq will only prompt the Iranians,
Syrians and Saudis to try to increase their influence. That
is no recipe for a stable country."
It's time for the Bush team to admit it made a grievous
error in disbanding Iraq's Army - which didn't even fight
us - and declare: "We thank all the nations who offered
troops, but we think the Iraqi people can and must secure
their own country. So we're inviting all former Iraqi Army
soldiers (not Republican Guards) to report back to duty.
For every two Iraqi battalions that return to duty (they
can weed out their own bad apples), we will withdraw an
American one. So Iraqis can liberate themselves. Our motto
is Iraq for the Iraqis."
. Attacks on our forces are getting more deadly, not less.
Besides those killed, we've had 900 wounded or maimed. We
need to take this much more seriously. We're not facing
some ragtag insurrection. We're facing an enemy with a
command and control center who is cleverly picking off our
troops and those Iraqi leaders and foreigners cooperating
with us. Either we put in the troops needed to finish the
war, and project our authority, or we get the Iraqi Army to
do the job - but pretending that we're just "mopping up" is
a dangerous illusion.
. The neocons need a neo-Baath. I'm glad we banned the
Baath Party, but the ban was not done right. It needed to
be accompanied by a clear process for people who simply
joined the Baath to secure government jobs, like school
directors, to recant and be rehabilitated. Just tossing
these people out has purged thousands of technocrats,
weakened the secular middle class and left a power vacuum
filled by religious groups. Also, Iraq needs a party that
can express the aspirations of Iraq's Sunni minority and
give them a stake in the new state. Right now, the Sunni
mainstream in Iraq isn't sure how it fits into any new
order, so the worst elements are opposing us and the best
are apprehensively sitting on the fence.
. "There is now a struggle for power emerging within the
Shiite community," says Mr. Nakash, "between those clerics
and secular leaders who are ready to give the Americans a
chance and a grass-roots leadership that wants to challenge
both the Americans and the traditional Shia hierarchy. This
grass-roots leadership is seeking control of mosques,
followers, religious authority and income from religious
taxes. Iraq is rapidly moving toward the politics of
militias and arms. This trend has to be stopped."
Bottom line: We still haven't established a moderate
political center in Iraq ready to openly embrace the
progressive U.S. agenda for Iraq and openly defend it. That
center is potentially there, but because, so far, we have
failed to provide a secure enough environment, or a
framework for Iraqis to have the national dialogue they
need to build a better Iraq, it has not emerged. We need to
fix this situation fast. Instead of applauding without
thinking, Republicans should be telling that to the
president.
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
