Urban Rubble
21st June 2005, 03:01
Ever since George W. changed his reasoning for invading Iraq from "U.S. security" to calling it an effort to bring Democracy to the country I've given a lot of thought to the question of what form an independent Iraqi state would take. If the people of Iraq were legitimately given the chance to decide their own fates, elect their leaders and enact their own policies, what would these policies be? The more I consider it the more it seems clear that a truly sovreign and independent Iraq would be a nightmare from the perspective of the U.S. ruling class.
It is my opinion that the U.S. has no interest in a Democratic Iraq, it wants nothing more than a subservient client state that it can control from Washington (Nicaragua comes to mind). We have seen a lot of bragging about the success of the recent elections, but the fact is that the U.S. did everything it could to prevent them, it had to be dragged into accepting the vote. Why? Because they know the situation in Iraq, they know that if they give the Iraqi people the chance to vote that U.S. interests will take a beating. We see this in the fact that the U.S.'s catidate (Iyad Illawi) was crushed in the election despite having full state resources. We also saw that nearly every party that ran was pressured to include in it's platform a call for U.S. troops to withdraw. So it is clear that the average Iraqi citizen (not suicide bombers and Jordanian terrorists) wants the U.S. out, and from there it isn't hard to guess that the U.S. is going to try and oppose this prevailing attitiude. Thus Democracy in Iraq is the last thing U.S. leaders want.
So what actions would this state take?
First, it seems likely that an independent Iraq would attempt to re-claim it's historic position as leader of the Arab world. Iraq's history (or, the area we currently know as Iraq) of being the leading state in the region is nothing new, it's been the most educated and advanced area since Biblical times. This all sounds fine from the perspective of U.S. interests, until we consider what being the leading power in the region would entail: rearming. If Iraq wishes to recover it's former prestige it must rebuild it's military and rearm the country. Another aspect of this would be to confront the other leading power in the region, Israel. Not only would they need to bridge the missle gap in order to do this, but it seems likely they would seek to develop WMD as a deterent against Israeli pressure.
Those seem like fairly likely developments of a democractic Iraq, can anyone see the U.S. permitting Iraq to rearm and confront Israel?
Secondly, it's fairly obvious that a democratically elected Iraqi government will be Shiite dominated. With Iran being largely Shiite it seems likely that Iraq would seek to improve relations with them. Not necessarily out of a love for the Ayatollah, but it makes sense that they would rather be on friendly terms than hostile terms with their large, powerful Shiite neighbors.
So now they're armed and friendly with Iran. Again, does anyone see the U.S. allowing this kind of Democracy to take place?
Thirdly, a Democratic Iraq would serve as an influence across the border in Saudi Arabia. As I said at the top, the last thing the U.S. wants is Democracy in the region. Thus if Iraq begins deciding it's own fate, and that fate includes opposition to U.S. domination of the region, it makes sense that the Saudis may want the same thing. And if the Saudis begin opposing U.S. policy you know that the boys in Washington are scared shitless.
The fourth issue is quite a lot of speculation, but if it happened it would be of more importance than the other 3 combined. We have to pay attention to the issue of an autonomous Shiite alliance in the area. Most of Saudi Arabia's oil lies near the border of Iraq, an area that is mostly populated by Shiite Muslims. The same goes for Iran. What would happen if a Shiite dominated Iraq, with all it's oil, linked up with the Shiite areas of Saudi Arabia and the Shiite dominated state of Iran? Well, a majority of the world's oil would be under the lands of a powerful, autonomous Shiite alliance that would most likely be hostile to U.S. interests.
With all these possibilities fairly likely, does it make sense to anyone here that the U.S. wants to see the Iraqi people making their own choices, their own policies? Of course not. And that is why we see the U.S. doing everything in it's power to halt the Democratization of Iraq (kicking the independent media out, attempting to write their own constitution).
So what do the right wingers think? Do you see these as strong possibilities? If not, why? If so, do you really believe the U.S. is going to try and being Democracy to Iraq?
It is my opinion that the U.S. has no interest in a Democratic Iraq, it wants nothing more than a subservient client state that it can control from Washington (Nicaragua comes to mind). We have seen a lot of bragging about the success of the recent elections, but the fact is that the U.S. did everything it could to prevent them, it had to be dragged into accepting the vote. Why? Because they know the situation in Iraq, they know that if they give the Iraqi people the chance to vote that U.S. interests will take a beating. We see this in the fact that the U.S.'s catidate (Iyad Illawi) was crushed in the election despite having full state resources. We also saw that nearly every party that ran was pressured to include in it's platform a call for U.S. troops to withdraw. So it is clear that the average Iraqi citizen (not suicide bombers and Jordanian terrorists) wants the U.S. out, and from there it isn't hard to guess that the U.S. is going to try and oppose this prevailing attitiude. Thus Democracy in Iraq is the last thing U.S. leaders want.
So what actions would this state take?
First, it seems likely that an independent Iraq would attempt to re-claim it's historic position as leader of the Arab world. Iraq's history (or, the area we currently know as Iraq) of being the leading state in the region is nothing new, it's been the most educated and advanced area since Biblical times. This all sounds fine from the perspective of U.S. interests, until we consider what being the leading power in the region would entail: rearming. If Iraq wishes to recover it's former prestige it must rebuild it's military and rearm the country. Another aspect of this would be to confront the other leading power in the region, Israel. Not only would they need to bridge the missle gap in order to do this, but it seems likely they would seek to develop WMD as a deterent against Israeli pressure.
Those seem like fairly likely developments of a democractic Iraq, can anyone see the U.S. permitting Iraq to rearm and confront Israel?
Secondly, it's fairly obvious that a democratically elected Iraqi government will be Shiite dominated. With Iran being largely Shiite it seems likely that Iraq would seek to improve relations with them. Not necessarily out of a love for the Ayatollah, but it makes sense that they would rather be on friendly terms than hostile terms with their large, powerful Shiite neighbors.
So now they're armed and friendly with Iran. Again, does anyone see the U.S. allowing this kind of Democracy to take place?
Thirdly, a Democratic Iraq would serve as an influence across the border in Saudi Arabia. As I said at the top, the last thing the U.S. wants is Democracy in the region. Thus if Iraq begins deciding it's own fate, and that fate includes opposition to U.S. domination of the region, it makes sense that the Saudis may want the same thing. And if the Saudis begin opposing U.S. policy you know that the boys in Washington are scared shitless.
The fourth issue is quite a lot of speculation, but if it happened it would be of more importance than the other 3 combined. We have to pay attention to the issue of an autonomous Shiite alliance in the area. Most of Saudi Arabia's oil lies near the border of Iraq, an area that is mostly populated by Shiite Muslims. The same goes for Iran. What would happen if a Shiite dominated Iraq, with all it's oil, linked up with the Shiite areas of Saudi Arabia and the Shiite dominated state of Iran? Well, a majority of the world's oil would be under the lands of a powerful, autonomous Shiite alliance that would most likely be hostile to U.S. interests.
With all these possibilities fairly likely, does it make sense to anyone here that the U.S. wants to see the Iraqi people making their own choices, their own policies? Of course not. And that is why we see the U.S. doing everything in it's power to halt the Democratization of Iraq (kicking the independent media out, attempting to write their own constitution).
So what do the right wingers think? Do you see these as strong possibilities? If not, why? If so, do you really believe the U.S. is going to try and being Democracy to Iraq?