Why We Must Stay in Iraq By Ilana Freedman December 16, 2005 On Thursday morning, 6,000 polling places opened in Iraq, even as large explosions rocked the cities of Baghdad and Ramadi. If history is any indication, millions of Iraqis will once again defy the danger and come out to vote in record numbers. They will elect the 275 seat parliament that will rule them for the next four years. Meanwhile, the liberal left, championed by Democratic Congressman John Murtha, continues to support the notion that our mission in Iraq has failed and that our only sensible alternative is to leave as soon as possible. Murtha insists "we must begin discussions for an immediate re-deployment of US forces from Iraq" and suggests that it "be accomplished in as little as six months." Murtha is wrong. I have a colleague who is now working as a contractor in Iraq. He suggests that understanding what is happening in Iraq today reminds him of the story of the ten blind men trying to describe an elephant. Each man described only what he could feel. One man, feeling the animal's great leg, described the elephant as "like a large tree", another grasping its ear described it as "like a broad leaf", and so on. It is a good comparison. The news we get from Iraq is fragmented and contradictory. It gives us only simplistic snapshots of a very complex situation in a very large country, one whose culture is vastly different from our own. The recent rise in terrorist attacks throughout Iraq has led me to some interesting speculation. Rather than representing an elevation of organized terrorism and a strengthening of the terrorists' power, this surge of violence prior to the election may in fact reflect a growing fragmentation of what is called 'the insurgency' and a desperate attempt to sabotage Iraqi progress by small, disconnected cells whose leadership has been disrupted by US military efforts. When I suggested this possibility to my colleague, he responded, "I do think that your analysis is accurate. What we are seeing now appears to be desperation . . . the attacks are not directed toward strategic targets. Although it is true that the attacks are becoming more and more sophisticated, and we are seeing some advancement in their tactical responses to our advances, they are still only taking advantage of soft civilian targets of opportunity, which would suggest they are not under any sort of unified command." In the end, he suggested, "it may simply be that the reason the information is confusing to us all is that the people we are evaluating are themselves very confused." Many Iraqis have never lived in a free society and the experience is as bewildering as it is exhilarating. They are struggling with diverse new ideas that need to be tailored to their diverse and unique culture. In addition, there are those who are simply using this war as an opportunity to press their own personal agendas, complicating an already difficult situation. Which leads me to another point. Iraq is a Middle Eastern country, and the Iraqi people are very Middle Eastern indeed. This is not said as a criticism. It is a comment on the reality that Iraqis are not Americans. They do not think like Americans, their view of life is different, and the way in which they want to carry on their lives is not the same as ours. So when we expect them to embrace our American version of democracy and are disappointed when they don't, we are doing them and ourselves a great disservice. Iraq is quite capable of a democratic system that will guide them into the 21st century. But it will be their unique version of democratic process that takes into account the dramatic differences between Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish populations, and the parliamentary type of government by which they have chosen to be ruled. Pluralism in Iraq will be colored by their singularly Middle Eastern character and the long-observed traditions of their ancient country. In an early morning CNN interview at a polling station in Iraq, school teacher Buthana Mehdi spoke about the continuing terrorism. "I am sure it will end," she said, and added with a big smile, "I feel so happy. [This election] represents the beginning of our new life." But Iraqi's satisfaction with the new instruments of democracy does not mean they are ready to take hold of the reins of democracy without continued support - military and advisory. Because even though Iraqis welcome the changes that are occurring daily in their country, they still have a long learning road to travel before democracy will come easily and without costly mistakes. If more Americans understood this, our ongoing presence in Iraq might make much more sense. For example, a few weeks ago, two suicide bombers entered a large police academy in Baghdad and detonated themselves. They had to pass through four separate Iraqi police checkpoints to get to the lecture rooms. At two of these, they were supposed to have their identification checked and have been patted down. Yet somehow, this did not happen and they managed to get through these levels of supposedly tight protection and kill more than 40 police recruits, seriously injuring 70 more. The lesson learned here is that the Iraqi police still have not fully absorbed all the hard lessons that they need to keep them safe, and that considerably more training and support will be required before they will be truly able to stand on their own. New ideas are learned slowly in the Middle East. But given time, they will be learned well. The day will come when the withdrawal of US troops will be welcomed by Iraqis and Americans alike. But for the time being, our strong presence in Iraq keeps the democratization process moving forward. This week's elections will once again show that the Iraqi people have both the will and the courage to continue the fight for freedom in their homeland. My colleague was recently home for a well-earned holiday with his family, and I asked him what the attraction was that kept him returning again and again to Iraq. "This is the first time in my life that I have had the opportunity to see a country born," he answered, "and I don't want to miss it." Ilana Freedman is a specialist in counter-terrorism and CEO of Gerard Group International LLC. She welcomes your comments and questions at [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/g0CDCD/tzNLAA/cUmLAA/TySplB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
