Hanson: What The US Should And Shouldn’t Do About Maliki
An atypically short, but typically great, one from Victor Davis Hanson:
There are American officials who consider Iraq as if it were one of their villages, for example Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin,” Maliki told reporters.
Now, that is a touché—to imply that a liberal Democratic senator is acting in imperialistic and condescending fashion.
Maliki has a point, of course. If you believe in constitutional government, it is a case of the genie already out of the bottle. He was chosen through a representative process and has every right as the head of a sovereign government to do as he pleases. The United States does not have a good record in trying to remove supposed allied leaders— as we know from the early days of Vietnam with Kennedy’s 1963 ouster of Diem. Any good that comes from trying to find a more “reasonable” leader is vastly overshadowed by the hypocrisy of undermining an indigenous official, one in this case who is also a product of a new democracy.
The better response is, of course, to let the Iraqis decide who they want to lead them, and then make an adjustment on our part to what degree we wish to support them. Hamas is a good example. We let the Palestinians chose their government; they wanted Hamas. We chose not to subsidize it, and they can live with their anger and lack of cash aid. In the case of Iraq, however, three points need to be considered. One, the government in sectarian torn Iraq does not succeed or fail on the basis on one man, and it is unclear to what degree Maliki really is in control of all events.
Two, reform works both upward and downward; if local tribesmen are helping to take the community back in their own hands, then that in itself forms a powerful catalyst for change, perhaps as significant as reshuffling of personnel at the top. Gen. Petraeus, no doubt would like a broad strong government whose professionalism would restore basic services, and gain allegiance of the people and make his task far easier. But barring that, his own efforts at securing neighborhoods and protecting local councils might have a grassroots effect that is just as important.
Three, Iraqi Shiite leaders have gotten the message already; they know now they if they don’t start governing responsibly, U.S. public support for our blood and treasure spent there evaporates.
All that is unclear is the degree to which some in Iraq want to appear vexing to the Americans, so that we will leave—and Iran then fills the void. So it takes a deft touch to prod Maliki without humiliating a proud democratic leader to the point of joining Iranian theocrats. Our diplomats and officers in Iraq seem to know that and appear able to walk that tight rope.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Let the tribes decide for themselves who should or shouldn’t lead Iraq. It’s their country and their future…
The tribes and the shieks are the real power in Iraq anyways. It is they that are getting things done…and it is they who are helping to make the surge work.
Maliki might be an empty suit. But it is the Iraqis themselves that must decide his future.
Things will play out one way or the other. Give it enough time and the Iraqi government will either fall of its own weight or stand on it’s two feet and represent all of Iraq and not just one group.
The surge will give the Iraqis enough time to make their own choices.
And bear in mind, that Maliki is the person that the Iraqis voted for. So let the Iraqis decide things for themselves.
August 27th, 2007 at 8:36 pmI concur, look at that evil bitch pretending to understand what is happening right before her piggish eyes. The quest for power is the sign of an abandoned mind.
August 27th, 2007 at 8:43 pmI agree that Maliki should be able to serve out his term. I assume there will be another election soon, and this will disrupt the current coalition in Parliament, which will force whatever new coalition forms to pick a new prime minister. There is no way we are going to abandon the surge after the mid-September report proves we should follow-through on its positive impact. That means we will still be supporting Iraq long enough to allow for a new Nov/Dec election that will hopefully fix the political situation.
August 27th, 2007 at 8:52 pmVDH is one of those people that I can’t get enough of. Never heard of him before I came here. Pat sure gets some great articles. And now I’m a huge VDH fan…I’m telling you..He, Michael Yon and Matt Sanchez ought to start their own newswire. Great links, good reporting…And addicting as hell.
August 27th, 2007 at 9:10 pmVDH is about as good as it gets!
August 28th, 2007 at 7:45 amAgree about VDH.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:46 pmAs far as “voting for Maliki”, remember that in this or any parliamentary system, the majority/plurality party gets to select its leader who automatically becomes the PM. Remember Jafari et al.?? Anyhooo … the ruling coalition could have a leadership review and replace him at any time. I nominate Alusi.
VDH is a regular on the National Review. He has also written a few books.
www.victorhanson.com
September 11th, 2007 at 9:20 pm