By: Hari Sud
harisud@hotmail.com
May 30, 2004

US have forced Saddam Hussein out of Power. Good riddance! Dictators like him in the Muslim world are disrupting life of the people in Middle East and elsewhere. Gulf region has undergone traumatic changes in last 25 years. First the Ayatollah Khomeini held the US and the world hostage with the capture of US Embassy in Iran in 1978. Then Iraqi dictator took advantage of the turmoil in Iran and decided to invade Iran unsuccessfully. Then he invaded Kuwait in 1989 and brought the UN and US on the Kuwaiti side. Gulf War I resulted in complete destruction of Iraqi prosperity and its infrastructure.  Later years resulted in huge amount of misery on Iraqi people brought on by Saddam Hussein’s refusal to either give up power or come clean on Weapons of Mass Destruction. Had he given up power, Gulf War II would not have happened. Had he given full access to the UN inspectors, it would have saved Iraq from destruction second time over, in 12 years. 

So why can the Muslim world not find way and means to remove such dictators from power, peacefully. This is a major weakness in the prevailing governing system there. Not only it allows dictators to come power but it allows them to stay in power for a long time. 

To me, it seems that the Muslim world lacks the instruments, which will transfer power from one leader to the next in an orderly manner. In addition legitimacy of the current leaders is also doubtful. Most of them owe their present role to the British mapmakers, who created these countries and leaders to rule after WW I. 

Muslim world has to adopt means to better govern themselves. Democracy has proven time and again as an instrument of good governance and consulting people’s will. They should learn this process and thank the West for helping them become democratic. The latter will make transfer of power from one ruler to the other, orderly and prevent emergence of dictators in the future. 

Will the American experiment succeed in Iraq? 

I believe it will. Once people get to know the advantages of the people’s mandate, they will prefer it over dictatorship. Ignore the sudden surge of violence in Fallujah and Najaf in Iraq in last three weeks. This is the work of diehard Saddam loyalists. They are having difficulty adjusting to the new reality. US have the power to defeat them. Sooner it happens, better it is for the Iraqi people. Then they can get on with the task of governing themselves. First step in this process is transfer power to the Iraqis on June 30^th. Afterwards the minority Sunnis will learn to live with majority Shiites and Kurds. They all will learn to make compromises and govern not by an ancient medieval decry of the Holy Book, but realities of today. At this moment road to peace appears to be checkered, as violence continues, but soon the US power will breakdown any resistance. Then, US together with UN or any other world body’s assistance, establish a path to peace and prosperity in Iraq. This is not going to come easy, especially with Saddam loyalists, Al Qaeda and Shiite clerics vying for power in Iraq. But in the eyes of the Iraqi people, this will be a welcome change. This change is only possible with US staying in Iraq with enough muscle to thwart any attempts to overthrow the nascent democratic experiment.  

Why is Such a Hue and Cry about Costs and US casualties in Iraq? 

These are election year agreements and disagreements on basically the same issue. Both the presidential hopefuls for November 2004 Elections, agreed that Saddam had to be removed from power. The disagreement is on how they should have proceeded to achieve it.  The incumbent presidential candidate went ahead and finished the job quickly in April of 2003. His opponent wished to involve the UN and other European powers before proceeding. Also, questions on how to hand over power back to the Iraqis are subject of present day debate in America. But that is part of the process of elections and debates on the issues. 

President Bush’s $87 Billion expenditure for the Iraqi operation has met the Congress and Senate approval. His opponent John Kerry voted for these expenses too. Hence both have the same objective but somewhat different roadmap to achieve it. Overall there is hardly any difference between the two contestants. Each is trying to prove that he is the right man for the job. 

What upsets the US public most is the daily presentation of casualty counts by the media.  It is a throw back to the Vietnam War era, where casualty count was used to scare the American public into withdrawal. Vietnam war lasted 12 years. It is only one year, since the Americans reached Baghdad; hence Vietnam War comparison is quite fruitless. In one year US has already proceeded to hand over power back to the civilian authority to run the country and has restored crude oil flow back to the prewar level. Hence economy will be soon on the mend. If things go right, new Iraqi elections may be held in 2005 and prosperity may return to Iraq in next two to three years. 

Casualty is part of any military operation, whether it is a peacekeeping operation in Bosnia or offensive operation in Iraq. Lives are lost. If history is taken as a guide, then long-term peace is achieved after making sacrifices. Look at the peace achieved in Europe and Japan after WW II. It happened only after Americans shed blood to defeat a monster. Today the world sympathizes with the families of war deceased in Iraq. Their sacrifices will not be forgotten. The war-dead are about to write the greatest chapter in the history of Middle East i.e. take power away from the dictators and hand it back to the people. 

Are the Other Gulf States Watching these Developments? 

If the Americans succeed in this experiment of democracy in Iraq, the rest of the Sheikhs and dictators in the Muslim crescent from Pakistan to Morocco have something to learn. Soon, it will be their turn to loose power from the autocratic rule. All it needs a spark of success in Iraq.  Surprisingly none of these countries ever had any other form of government other than autocratic rule. This rule had been firmly kept in place with sword in one hand and Muslim Holy Book in other by the hereditary sheikhs and kings. They kept their people mesmerized through centuries with the teachings of Quran and desire for conquest and plunder. The situation today is different. Muslim ruler in Middle East cannot go for plunder. They have to do away with whatever they have in their own country. Lucky for them, nature has blessed them with natural resource i.e. oil, within their boundaries. World hunger for oil has been great in last 40 years. This has given them monies in large quantities to play with. Excess money requires smart management. It also requires people’s participation in its disposition. The latter does not exist. Instead the priest class i.e. Mullah’s have taken advantage and have used the wealth and power to start Muslim crusade to redress imaginary grievances all over the world. All countries with Muslim minorities are witnessing resurgence of warfare in form of civilian terrorism. Saudi Arabia is key to this problem. It has the most money and the greatest contribution to the resurgence of Muslim terrorism. On one hand they have squandered away most of the wealth in palaces, water fountains in the desert, military hardware etc. On the other hand huge sums of money are spent all over the world to support Madarssas and Mosques. These are used to recruit and train suicide bombers. This is happening because autocrats, who rule in Riyadh, have no better ideas. People have not been asked for their opinion. Ninety percent of the population has not even participated in any democratic process. It is the 10% elite, which elects the so-called advisory councils for the rulers. The situation is no better in Kuwait, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Pakistan and other Muslim countries in the Gulf and outside the Gulf. Only Iran held a halfhearted elections recently and so did Pakistan a year back. But, elections in both these countries were controlled to prevent people from exercising their opinions effectively.  

What Can US Contribute to the Middle East, Since they are already in Iraq? 

US have to succeed in Iraq. First the country has to be pacified and the militant elements ejected. This may take a few years. Then the democratic institutions have to be built, ground up, in the same way as US built them in Japan and Germany after WW II. During this period, the US Army has to stay in Iraq. Economic power which was previously concentrated in the hands of Saddam Hussein and his cronies has to be stripped away and handed back to the representatives of the people. Laws are to be enacted by the people’s representatives. These laws may take a cue from their Islamic heritage. In order for the democracy to function, the leader has to be directly elected by the people either in a presidential election or by a parliamentary process. The holy divide between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq has to be bridged. There has been a mistake on American part to use one community against the other so far. It has to be corrected. In addition regional Kurds are to be advised to find autonomy within the political system in Iraq. 

If this experiment succeeds, then Iraqis, twenty years from now will be better governed, more prosperous and become a role model for others in the region. 

Impact of Democratic Success in Iraq 

Once the Iraqis succeed, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Iran and smaller Gulf Sheikhdoms will envy them. They will try and copy them. Autocracy and concentration of power in a few hands, the root cause of all Mid-East problems, will see its last light.  

How Will the General Populace Respond to Changes? 

The ruling autocrats will not welcome democracy. The Mullahs will not welcome it as they loose the cushy state funds, which they have been receiving so far. But the general populace will welcome it. The women folk, if they get a chance to participate in democratic experiment, will welcome it. The populace including women voters may work together to turn things around for good. The law of sword may see its last days. Governments will do things what the popular will of the people wish them to do. The spendthrift Sheikhs and Kings will not build palaces in the desert. Unnecessary public expenditures on prestige projects will cease to exist. The country’s books will be balanced. They will produce their oil wealth as usual but spend it carefully. After centuries, general populace will get a chance to become owners and managers of the country’s wealth. Rule of law will prevail. Nobody will get beheaded because he or she did not obey a 7th century religious decry on marriage. Revenge killing will cease, as law will punish the guilty. Best of all, people like Osma Bin Laaden will be put out of business of terrorism. World-class cities will be built with their wealth and ingenuity of the people. Europeans and Americans will swarm their countries and undertake projects, which the country needs. All children will go to school, that includes girls too. In a short period of 50 years the oil wealth will transform the Middle East into another Europe or Japan. In short the general populace will support all the democratic reforms if the changes are in their favor. 

Impact of Democracy in Middle East on Europe, US and India 

US and Europe will benefit the most. The former will not have to pay $87 Billion bill every now and then to unseat a threatening dictator. Israelis will sleep in peace and not be threatened with extinction. Europe will benefit from civil trade in goods and services. Economic benefits to US will be the greatest as it is the largest market for the middle Eastern oil and clearing house for all financial and trade transactions. India will become Middle East’s warehouse for cheap goods and services.  

Security in world will improve, as democratically elected leaders will shun likes of Osma Bin Laaden. Europe, US, India and other countries currently in the gun sight of Al Qaeda will spend less on security and military, as threat which loom large today will be less pronounced. India and Pakistan may enjoy a peaceful co-existence.  

All this is possible, if the US stay put in Iraq for a while 

US have to let the Saddam loyalists, Iranian backed Shiites and Al Qaeda to throw whatever they got, at them. They are unlikely to succeed. US are too smart and too well organized today to be militarily defeated by these thugs. Parallel to Vietnam are not true as US is handing over power back to the locals on June 30th. After that, they acquire the role of a peace keeping garrison, overseeing the functioning of civilian administration. They intervene only to keep troublemakers out. Soon that role will also be passed on to the local police and security services, working directly under the civil administration. This may take a while. To succeed, US have to stay in strength for 5 to 10 years in Iraq.  

Should the US leave early as part of any political compulsion, then all the lives lost and monies spent will be a waste? History will judge US as no better troublemaker than Saddam or Osma or Khomeini. In addition US will hand over the Al Qaeda and the religious fanatics a strategic victory in Iraq. Recovering from it will be hard for next one hundred years. 

Conclusion 

US have to stay put in Iraq until the job of restoring order and democracy is done. The latter will be an important process for other Gulf countries to copy. Sheikhdoms, monarchy, military dictators are out of tune with the present time. Their banishment from Middle East should be the fringe benefit of the US operation in Iraq. Any operation of this magnitude will require sacrifices in money and blood. US are doing a great job today and they should continue. With this continued operation US can assure peace at Israeli border and in the Indo-Pak context. These fringe benefits are worth having.

Hari Sud