<\body> Stories in America: Iraq's Successful Elections

Friday, December 23, 2005

Iraq's Successful Elections

Other than video of purple fingers, the Iraq elections have become yesterday's news. News about spying didn't help...
Here's a report worth reading from CounterPunch writerPatrick Cockburn, who is in Baghdad:
The first results from the parliamentary election last week show that the country is dividing up between Shia, Sunni and Kurdish regions. The secular and nationalist candidate backed by the US and Britain was humiliatingly defeated.

The Shia religious coalition has won a total victory in Baghdad and the south of Iraq. The Sunni Arab parties who openly or covertly support armed resistance to the US are likely to win large majorities in Sunni provinces.

The election marks the final shipwreck of American and British hopes of establishing a pro-western secular democracy in a united Iraq. Islamic fundamentalist movements are ever more powerful in both the Sunni and Shia communities. "In two-and-a-half years Bush has succeeded in creating two new Talibans in Iraq," said Ghassan Attiyah, an Iraqi commentator.

The election was portrayed by President George W. Bush as a sign of success for US policies in Iraq, but in fact means the triumph of America's enemies inside and outside the country. Iran will be pleased that the Shia religious parties whom it has supported, often for decades, have become the strongest political force.

"People underestimate how religious Iraq has become," said one Iraqi observer. He added: "Iran is really a secular society with a religious leadership, but Iraq will be a religious society with a religious leadership." Already most girls leaving schools in Baghdad wear headscarves. Women's rights in cases of divorce and inheritance are being eroded.


At 12/23/2005 11:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are only two countries in the Middle East where thousands fight each day against Islamic terrorists who threaten their newly-won freedom.

As Victor Davis Hanson pointed out -- "So here we have this most amazing paradox of pushing democracy: a policy that is distrusted by almost every entrenched special interest and at odds with every –ism — and yet one that alone can erode Islamic fascism and make the United States more secure. Odder still, the Democratic party at home is the least enthusiastic about the democratic parties in Iraq."

And if you know of a system outside of democracy where women' rights women's rights might flourish in the Middle East....please, do tell.

Quite frankly, I am completely baffled as to why feminists aren't singing hosannas to the highest upon hearing the slightest speck of good news from the Middle East that might suggest democracy has a fighting chance of succeeding over there.

At 12/23/2005 11:45 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They would if the goal was truly about democracy. But it's not. Do you really believe Bush give a rat's ass about Iraqi women? He doesn't care about American women, let alone Iraqi women.

Look at Afghanistan. Warlords have seats on the parliament!

Please don't use that "aren't you glad Saddam is out?"

Of course, Bush I should have taken him out in the 80s. Instead, he screwed the Iraqi people and left them to live in hell.

At 12/23/2005 12:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I could give a rat's ass whether or not Bush cares about Iraqi women, or not. Because frankly, it doesn't matter. If women's rights are going to have a fighting chance of succeeding over there it's going to be because of the Iraqi people...and sans democracy, it ain't gonna happen.

Yeah, it's too bad there are warlords in the parliament. And yeah, I wish it only took 5 minutes for the world to get perfect. Besides, to hear you guys tell it, we got all kinds of democratically elected warlords right here right now. And how long have we been tweeking this democracy thing?

As for your last statement....I couldn't agree more.


Post a Comment

<< Home