Iraq struggles with legitimacy

To Talk of Many Things

In recent months, the effort to rebuild and secure Iraq has experienced erratic turns of events on the military front. Establishing law and order being a foremost priority, the interim government headed by Prime Minister Ayad Allawi authorized U.S. forces to assault resistance militiamen who have threatened the reconstruction of Iraq. For weeks, the militiamen have shifted their stances between conciliatory and belligerent, making it difficult to know whether a truce or a firefight is eminent.

Recently, as The Washington Post reported on Aug. 28, the militiamen have surrendered control of a sacred shrine, ending that precarious military operation.

This is a fortunate development, but the bigger picture still is highly dangerous and with no single definitive solution. The reconstruction of Iraq and consolidation of its fledgling political system only will be successful if the new regime can provide the most basic necessity that governments owe the governed — common defense. The reconstruction has improved the economic and social infrastructure of the country, but this is threatened when national security cannot be ensured. The Iraqi defense force still is insufficiently trained to perform that task alone. Much more time and resources need to be invested into preparing the Iraqi army to do exactly that.

Iraq’s new political system will not be able to bestow security on the country unless the government is widely recognized as legitimate. The jury still is out on this point; national elections are not scheduled to be held until January. But when one considers the long, anfractuous process that led to our country’s founding, there is reason to wonder if Iraq can surmount a similar hurdle. The American republic as we know it was born only after a war for independence, insidious disputes among the states, the emergence of party politics, a major rebellion, and the drafting of two national documents, the first of which — the Articles of Confederation — failed.

The chances of Iraq firming up its pluralist government would be strengthened if several visible, wise leaders could stand out as an inspiration to the Iraqi people in much the same way that our founding fathers did for America. So far, no one has yet been identified to fulfill those roles. However, it is conceivable that Allawi could play such a role if he completes the transition successfully. Also, if the national elections put other people in power to replace him, Allawi could inspire the Iraqi populace by relinquishing power peacefully, as George Washington did in 1797 after completing two terms as president.

Washington’s example set the precedent that America would be ruled through its people rather than by one man clinging to office. It was a historic event in 1797 that saw a leader willingly give up power. It is easy to imagine the inspirational effect that could be created if that took place in Iraq, where transitions of power have been decided for years by coups and assassinations.

The Bush administration did not plan for how the reconstruction and political transition would take place and because of it, much time has been lost. The new government needs to convince the population of its legitimacy and the United States needs to equip Iraqis with the means to defend the citizenry and the nation’s economic infrastructure from the insurgents. Only when these conditions are met will there be a chance of shoring up Iraq’s security and its government. It is wise to recall John Locke’s point that "no political society can be, nor subsist, without having in itself the power to preserve the property and, in order thereunto, punish the offences of all those of that society."

Jonathan Kelly is a senior political science major.