I think the thing that bothers me the most about Iraq right now is not the violence (which is inevitable and likely unavoidable) - but the fact that I can discern no real "plan" for the future of Iraq. OK, so Chalabi gets to be figurehead on July 1st, but that certainly doesn't qualify as a plan. People complain that the admin's critics have no "plan" - so I'd liek to open this thread up for anyone to contribute what they think would be the road to a bright and rosy future in Iraq. I'll start. I see much of the anger in Iraq right now comes from the folowing reasons; a) unemployment (those 500,000 soldiers went home with their AK's) b) feeling that their future is out of their hands c) no idea of what the heck will happen next d) american occupation troops e) strife between sunni/shiite/kurd So to fix Iraq, why not do the following? 1) Create a 1930's depression style CCC - Iraqis need to get physically involved in rebuilding their own country. Basically, jobs jobs jobs, in reconstruction, teaching, whatever. Idle hands are the devil's playground or whatever. 2) Clearly state what the immediate future of the Iraqi executive/legislature will be. For 2 years, Iraq will be ruled by a group of 2 or 3 people; a) An american, preferably a noble-minded politician (they have charisma, and experience in getting people to work towards a common goal, even if it is reelection) b) A UN representative, personally chosen by Kofi Annan. Who he chooses is a clear statement of how relevant he wants the UN to be, so he better choose well. c) If one exists, an Iraqi who can speak for most of the country. Chalabi - take the next plane for who cares where, just not here. There will be no legislature. Iraqi groups can petition the rulers, but nothing is binding. 3) Political parties will be formed over the next 2 years, leading to legislative elections. 4) To qualify to stand for election - you must have worked at least 18 months in the Iraqi CCC on reconstruction efforts. No exceptions. This forces general participation in the CCC, and generally would eliminate clerics who don't want to get their hands dirty rebuilding Iraq. 5) The management of the CCC and reconstruction will be run by ??? at the top (please not Halliburton, but perhaps it would work). they get the money from the US government and the Iraqi rulers, then dole it out to contactor and companies below them. But most key management below the top level needs to be run by moderate arab companies, such as Oman, Yemen, Jordan, whatever. Saudis maybe. These then pay the Iraqis on the CCC or whatever. 6) After 18 months in the CCC, Iraqis can qualify for loans, help etc in starting their own companies, like landscaping, surveying, construction, etc etc etc. This provides incentive for being in the CCC for those not interested in politics - and eventually leads to a large group of qualified people inspired to run their own little businesses. 7) American troops will have bases in Iraq for a defined period, like 20 years. Similar to the phillipne or Cuba model. We need bases in the Middle East, and this will guarantee it. We "freed" Iraq, we're taking responsibility for its international defense for a long time. There will be no possibility of all our soldiers coming home. 8) and for god's sake, get some effort dumped into re-establishing media in the country, even if its Fox news. I bet our major problem now is that we're not getting our message across (well, if we had a clear message). This is a huge priority so that Iraqis don't get their news from distorted sources outside Iraq. Well, thats the general overall plan. Comments? I'm sure someone will say its the stupidest plan they ever heard of. I'll accept that - but only because its blindingly obvious that the White House has absolutely no plan, which disqualifies them.
I think you may be onto something. Whatever the flaws, it's better than whatever the Bush Administration is trying to convince itself it's 'working toward.' Details aside, this has more of a timetable than "out before the election." Also, it puts the urban lower class-where this Sadr guy gets his followers--to work, and maybe gives them a stake in the new order.
excellent post. Goods idea to boot. One of my biggest problems with people on these boards is that they are so quick to criticize (this administration especially), but offer no realistic solutions. My main concern with Iraq is the same as yours. All the time we have heard about democracy and stability being the goal, the roadmap to get there has been a little vague.. I can buy the "it is a learn as you go process" for the most part, but I get the impression, we have enough contigency plans in place. This is being exposed now..
Good plan. I would just add more at the local levels. It's easiest to manage this type of evolution in the smallest increments. Start with UN management of the big picture with meaningful city and town governments. let them manage the government works programs. That will create natural leaders who are able to spend money wisely balanced against the need to keep constiuents happy. You can also mete out self governance in small does to those who are ready for it. Then towns like tikrit and fallujah can suck the pipe until reasonable people step to the front. If that doesn't work, I would send over Rush Limbaugh with boat loads of Hillbilly Heroin for everyone!!! (Hey, I had to get this back on an unreasonable partisan track.)
Dude, arab CIA operatives in Iraqi cities should be leaving behind crates of OxyContin, er I mean Asprin. It turned Rush from a loudmouthed bully advocating rebellion into a windless wussy.
I really like the idea of the CCC similar to ours. If you want people to stop shooting give them something to do. I think we need to establish working bureacracies again in Iraq. I know that Bureacracy can be a dirty word to some but a huge part of democracy is the institutionalization of services and goods that are provided by the state. We can do it well or they can wait in line for 5 hours just to get an i.d. and then get more pissed off. It may sound funny but we need to get a bunch of career diplomats, burecratic wonks etc over there who now how to make government FUNCTION. Solidiers are good for fighting but really suck at governing. C'mon the US Military has got to be the most bloated and inefficient bureacracy around.
Amazingly, I would have thought that making Iraq "right" would have been something the white house could have done. I mean, solving the Iraq situation has always been a very high priority of Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Perle, Wolfie, etc, and these folks are known for getting results. Not knowing what to do in afghanistan - that I can understand. But if Saddam was evildoer #1 for years, you'd think they'd be a bit more on the ball once he's gone. For a long time, it seemed like Rummy and Powell wouldn't even talk to each other, much less keep the knifes from each others backs. You hear about Bush's "CEO mentality" of playing people off against each other, but sometimes you gotta sit em down and tell 'em to make nice or you're both fired (and character assassinated). If State and Defense still don't like each other, then we got our 2 hands in Iraq not working together, and that is a sure recipe for not doing a good job.
Just like when the $87B reconstruction package was announced, this would beg the question of why the Bushies are working harder to rebuild Iraq than to rebuild the US. I don't think Karl Rove wants to see the AFL-CIO's TV ads in Ohio and Indiana contrasting the Bushie proposals for unemployment in Iraq with the Bushie proposals for unemployment in the US. These free market fundamentalists could no more propose an Iraqi New Deal than flap their arms and fly. Think about it...even after 9/11 they remained obsessed with state actors, because that's how it was in the 80s. I don't mean to put down your proposal. There's alot of good stuff in it. But it's like asking, what if Owen, Beckham, Zidane, and Ronaldo signed with MLS, how should MLS handle it.
My proposal would not necessarily be targeted for republicans to push forward (like those currently in power would give money to anyone but their big business cronies), nor would the US necessarily be the majority spender (get some friendly, wealthy arab nations to be closely involved). You do bring up valid points about how to sell it to the american public. It would be a hard sell in tough times. Perhaps "if they are working, they ain't bombing" would be a good start. As full of holes as my plan is, compared to the current lack of one...
Something like that will be happening soon. One of the big unreported stories, the biggest I think, is the delay of reconstruction funds into Iraq. We talk about "the soldiers have educated 65,000 teachers, rebuilt 1000 new schools, etc." but the real rebuilding hasn’t begun yet because the funds have been tied up in Washington-land. Many Washington procurement people have been trying to ride that gravy train and have loaded up the caboose. In any event, we can expect general labor form the Iraqis and some of the more basic skilled trades but high end project controls work, survey work, materials acceptance work, etc. must be taught to them by someone from outside Iraq. We do have to teach them s we go but that will be hard. I know many good people are lacking language skills. Many companies will be involved including KBR but I know Bectel and Fluor will also be involved. The Engineering companies are hurting for work right now and the Iraq work is something they are all chasing. They know how to sub-contract to the local companies. Bid-Laden used to be an Arab contractor. Maybe we'll find him in a project meeting somewhere. No there will be no possibility of them all coming home anytime soon. The analogy to Okinawa is a good one. You know what the hottest selling item in Iraq is right now? Cell phones. They have no reliable land based system and cell phones are just the thing they need. I agree they also need TVs and a few TV stations. How that all could run, I'm not sure but I think you have a good idea here. I saw this thread before I left my computer this afternoon and I was thinking about it off and on. I was trying to figure out how we could avoid the mistakes of Vietnam. Then an idea struck me. Most of the people in charge, the Generals, have Vietnam experience. Most of their underlings have been educated more about our mistakes in Vietnam than any of us. We really do have some of our best people in Iraq and I am confident in them getting the job done. I think we are better off without a definite plan but more of a strategy. I have been hearing very good things about Bremmer from those in the know. He has handled Sistani very well. Exactly what our strategy is, I don’t know but I think we should know. Rumsfeld has an obligation to tell us rather than his "we are turning things over to Iraqis and things are getting better every day." Sure it leaves them open to criticism from the likes of Kennedy and Kerry but that's the way it is in a democracy.
You'd think the top of the list would be to get infrastructure (roads, electricity, phones) up and running, and the farm production in line to feed the population. If in May 2003, the coalition put in a water filtration and distribution system, folks in Iraq would be a little less anti-USA. Since we missed that obvious boat, now job #1 is to get the USA out of Iraq. A vacuum would be immoral, so the USA would need to be replaced with UN peacekeepers, trained in policing and distribution. After all the lies told by Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell, Chalabi, etc., the USA has no moral authority to be present in Iraq.
Indeed. They really thought that pro-Bush subcontractors could get the job done, even while not providing adequate security (enough troops). They have tragically underestimated the problem (or blithely ignored reality--take your pick) and it's time to admit it.
I'm gonna bump this back up in the hopes that some thoughtful people may weigh in on ideas a bit more detailed than (pull out our troops/let the UN handle it/shoot everybody). Who knows, maybe someone in the Whitehouse in an Adu fan and might see this...?
Iraq needs a dictator, period. Democracy can't hold Iraq together. Let's admit deposing Saddam was foolish, and put one back. That tough guy in Fallujah seemed to be one of the good candicates - he dared to fight the Marines from USA, that has got lots of credibility there inside Iraq. As long as he agrees to be pro-USA after taking over Iraq, give it a try. The governing counsil is a joke, and is powerless and useless in governing the new Iraq. USA's problem is that so far it hasn't had a clue as to who is the real man.