Time for Iraqis to regain political sovereignty

Imam Cahyono, Researcher, Al Maun Center for, Islamic Transformation
Jakarta

One year ago, President Bush began the war in Iraq. On March 17, 2003, Bush promised to help "build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free." Secretary of State Colin L. Powell vowed days later, "We will show the Iraqi people a better life. We'll deal with those segments of the population who have been...absolutely brutally deprived for years, and they will start to see a better life very quickly."

Most Americans expected military victory to come quickly. Despite the administration's optimism about what would follow, it was also easy to predict that the period after the fall of Baghdad would be messy and dangerous.

In the short run, the invasion of Iraq and the toppling of its leader have done virtually nothing to stop terrorism. In Iraq, as in Spain, Turkey, Indonesia and other countries, terrorist attacks have continued since the capture of Hussein.

The terrorist attack in Madrid has added a new dimension to concerns about Iraq. If al-Qaeda was behind the attacks, the message may be that friends of America will be targeted. This interpretation has found credence in Australia, which has firmly aligned itself with Bush and has also been especially wary of terrorism since more than 100 of its citizens were killed in a Bali nightclub 18 months ago. Many Australians believe their country is at a higher risk of attack because it joined America in invading Iraq.

One year after President Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, Americans are sharply divided over whether the war was right or wrong. As violence mounts in Iraq against supporters of a new regime, U.S. troop deaths near 600, and the U.S. price tag for the war climbs to an estimated US$120 billion. Americans also disagree on the best way out.

A year after the invasion of Iraq, continuing violence and the failure to find weapons of mass destruction have prompted even America's allies to question the justification for war. There was, and is, no evidence that Hussein was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. There was no convincing link made between how toppling Saddam in an illegal invasion would help the fight against al-Qaeda.

Many things have improved in Iraq since Saddam's regime was removed, but the situation remains fragile and the danger of civil war real. Iraqis are rather more positive about the change in their lives than outsiders are, but attitudes vary around the country. The invasion itself, and the show of American strength that it entailed, has produced some promising changes in the surrounding region, too, in relations with Libya, Syria, Iran and Pakistan, and glimmerings of democratic reform in Saudi Arabia.

But, for many Iraqis, freedom has come at a high price. In Baghdad, civilians line up at offices where the American military doles out money to compensate them for relatives killed, limbs lost and eyes blinded in the war. The innocent Iraqi casualties of Bush's war are literally countless because the Pentagon refuses to estimate their number.

Unfortunately, it's been 11 months since the fall of Baghdad, and the U.S. still hasn't fulfilled Iraqis' expectations by providing basic security or services. At this point, Iraqis are beginning to think that, if those services have not been provided, it may be because the US is unable or unwilling to do so.

This lack of security has created widespread fear among Iraqis, inhibited growth of private sector economic activity, distorted the initial development of a robust and open civil society, and places important limitations on the normal routines of life for most Iraqis. Iraqis, who had high expectations that the U.S. could make them secure, have been disappointed.

Most Iraqis are poor and half are unemployed. Still, the nation has a fast-growing middle class that has benefited from Saddam Hussein's fall. Rebuilding should add jobs. Yet, even with recovery, Iraq will not be able to fully repay its massive debts, so they'll have to be forgiven. And it will need huge sums in aid from the U.S. and others.

But Iraqi democracy has proved messy in the making. Almost immediately, divisions within the Bush administration led to a temporary breakdown over the postwar plan for Iraq. The Pentagon abruptly jettisoned the State Department's plans for assembling a post-Hussein government and started from scratch -- a move from which analysts believe the U.S. has not recovered.

The challenges for U.S. policy in postwar Iraq, given the geopolitical stakes, the threat of ethnic conflict and armed resistance, and the political complexities of administering a legal occupation, were far more formidable than those that confronted U.S. officials in previous cases. The U.S., meanwhile, showed its lack of imperial ambitions by removing its troops from Saudi Arabia and the Saudis finally are cooperating in eliminating al-Qaeda-affiliated cells in their country. Destroying such cells is crucial to preventing the funding and training of terrorists who could mount new attacks on Americans.

Many appear to think pulling troops out of Iraq will make things better, taking the view it is the occupation that is the cause of terrorism. Yet that policy is irresponsible, because it increases the risk of civil war in Iraq. Even those who opposed the war should now want to help make Iraq secure enough for Iraqis themselves to take back their sovereignty.