|
Can Iraq's leaders stop attacks? | |||||||||
Iraqi politicians have reached a deal to fill crucial cabinet positions, ending three months of deadlock. The deal comes after dozens of people have died in a series of suicide attacks and shootings in and around the Iraqi capital, Baghdad. The deaths are the latest round of intense violence since a new Iraqi government was announced in late April. More than 250 people have died. Can the Iraqi government stem the violence? Do the attacks increase pressure on the country's politicians? Send us your comments and experiences.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
As an Iraqi, I don't believe the US government wants to see democracy in Iraq. They themselves have installed or supported dictators who are friendly to the US in Cuba, Bolivia, Uganda, Vietnam, Brunei, Argentina, Indonesia, Iran - the list goes on and on... All the US cares about is controlling the oil (often repeated because it's true) keeping US bases in Iraq, handing out rebuilding contracts to US companies, and installing a regime friendly to Israel. After the collapse of the former regime, the Coalition Provisional Administration started wrong and committed some deadly mistakes for which the Iraqis are paying a big price. The successive Iraqi transitional governments were and are still weak and lack decisiveness. The country emerged from a dictator regime that was ruling with a fist of iron for about 35 years and was all of a sudden given a very high dose of democracy that could not be digested.
Martin, Singapore The unrest not only harms the new Iraqi government, it also makes a mockery of American claims to have made that area of the world safe. I'd hate to think what an "unsafe" Iraq would be like if today's Iraq is regarded as safe. The insurgents are harming Iraq and themselves, not the government. As they butcher Iraqi men women and children they clearly demonstrate the utter depravity, degeneracy and futility of their aims. They are simply extending the occupation, hindering Iraq's reconstruction and holding back economic development and job opportunities. The war must continue relentlessly to eradicate the killers and their supporters before they can blight the emerging democracy with their efforts to return Iraq to the killing fields of another evil dictatorship. My heart goes out to all the Iraqi people who wish for a normal day to day life and I sincerely hope that the new government will secure this. Unfortunately, as it seems, there was no plan to be put in place "After Saddam" and the war and the capture of Saddam has opened up an "old can of worms" that the New Government and the Coalition cannot control.
John Farmer, Henley-on-Thames, UK
I am happy to see that the Iraqi people are slowly building a democratic government. Everything points to the fact that this is what the majority of Iraqis want. Insurgent attacks show that not only are they against US occupation, but against the Iraqi people. Now, for both the US and the insurgents the end game is the same: Power. While I am genuinely happy for the opportunity given to the Iraqi people, I am saddened that Americans and Iraqi insurgents are alike in their inability or unwillingness to acknowledge their errors and misdeeds. Everyone should encourage and support the Iraqi people, and remind the US and the insurgents exactly how terrible their actions are. I'm pessimistic about the whole Iraq situation. When the US leaves, it seems likely the US-sponsored government will be driven out at the first chance. I hope the Iraqis will build a better life than they've had under tyranny of both Saddam and Bush. Finally some semblance of a democratically elected government, but let's not get carried away, Iraq is still under occupation and tremendous influence and this is still a toothless government. If somebody contended that Jaafari has more power than Rumsfeld in Iraq, he is living a dream. Well the formation of this new government is a first step towards a stable Iraq. The only problem is that only the US is really helping while all the Arab countries are watching Iraq burn. We need help from all the countries. In 5 years time, Iraq will have the best economy and all the surrounding population will come to Iraq and try to get jobs, so they better start being nice or else we will never employ them. After spending 12 months with a reserve unit in Iraq the situation has become more dangerous and mostly unstable. When KBR and Halliburton stop working for Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, then a "New Iraq Government" can shop on a global market bringing in foreign investments and an international flavour of trade. Subsidizing American big business was bothersome for me, a soldier 'drafted' to help fend security in a wobbly world of crazy zealots. Interesting! The difference between most of the American commentators and the European commentators is quite striking! American commentators tend to see positive developments and success on the horizon in Iraq. Europeans tend to see more bloodshed and a failure of democracy. Why? I think it is because the Europeans are getting uncensored news whereas Americans are getting only news that is filtered through the Pentagon. I have nothing but pity for the new G=government. The insurgency is escalating and the Allies can barely keep it in check. It implies that the interim government has little legitimacy. Given the circumstances of the election and the war that is hardly surprising. In the ideal world, Iraq will form a democracy that will be on a par with that of any Western nation. It will bring an end to the insurgency, bring peace and prosperity to its people and the Americans will be proud of what they have achieved. Unfortunately, the reality will be some what different. US forces will prop up the government, as it becomes more desperate to deal with the terrorists it will create paramilitary unit who will engage in a "dirty war". Iraq will be a like Latin America was in 1970's/1980's - a democracy in name only, which will have the support of the US and the UK. Hmm...doesn't this sound like the Saddam regime in the mid-80's? Every democracy that has ever existed and flourished has done so out of a struggle. There is no such thing as a perfect government, but the democratic government offers the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The sooner the Iraqis get their government in place, the sooner the US can get out. The US wants their troops home, but not at the price of anarchy in Iraq. It boggles my mind that some people still think this is a puppet government. If it was a puppet government the US would have installed someone other than Ibrahim Jaafari. They would have preferred a secular leader not tied to the Shia clergy. People are so blinded by their anti-US bigotry they won't admit that the Iraqis now have a democratically elected government. A halt to the insurgent attacks may best be accomplished with the use of local militias, as the new president of Iraq has indicated. The US, however, has disallowed the use of these forces. Therefore, an independent Iraqi government, not bound by the United States, will be able to use these militias to end the insurgency and bring stability to Iraq. Sometimes a wrong decision is better than no decision. Leaving seven cabinet posts unfilled does little to inspire confidence in the Iraqi government. I'm a US Army Veteran. Since the end of the Cold War I've watched as our military has been converted into a force to defend USA corporate interests. USA citizens are being told that our troops are "fighting for freedom" at the same time our freedom at home is being taken away. Of course I support the troops, but that doesn't mean buying into the lies we are being told about why this war was started, why it has been mismanaged, or why our soldiers and the people of Iraq must continue to pay with their lives for USA corporate profits. This bogus war has been a boon for the defence industry and oil companies. What we are seeing in Iraq is precisely what was intended. Divide to conquer, however ugly it is, remains the surest way to dominate another people. I hope that the people of Iraq will be able to sort out their differences and expel the occupying forces with the least bloodshed possible, on any side. The swearing in of the new Iraqi government represents a new dawn of hope for the Iraqi people. The spaces left in the cabinet will be filled very soon, and with it tensions between the various sects will ease. Talking to my family in Iraq today, what is truly remarkable is the genuine optimism of the Iraqi people that, however huge the obstacles facing the new democracy in Iraq may be, with the will of the people, all can be overcome. In the battle between freedom and despotism, democracy and dictatorship, the swearing in of Jaafari and his cabinet is another blow for Zarqawi and al-Qaeda. We survived Saddam and his tyranny for 35 years, we remained united despite predictions of civil war in the aftermath of the collapse of the regime and we will remain united in the face of terrorist acts, confident in the belief that freedom and justice will prevail. As an Iraqi living in London, I was overjoyed to watch Dr Ibrahim Jaafari being sworn in as prime minister. More than 8.5 million, that's 65% of the electorate, went out in defiance of the terrorists and voted on polling day. While it is true that not all religious sects and ethnicities are represented fully, what is more important, is that all those who have taken posts have promised to serve as Iraqis first and foremost, and that what unites them is a national desire to build a better future for their children. Slowly, but surely, Iraqis are walking the path of freedom and democracy. Iraq needs a democratic government as opposed to an autocratic Islamic state. With Iraq we can see progress and although it will be difficult initially, Iraq will reap the benefits of such a government for years to come.
Daniel, Durham North Carolina, USA Progress! The same critics who were saying that elections would never be held, then that a government would never be formed are now pointing out the faults of the government that was elected. That's progress. The new elected government gives Iraq something the country desperately needs: legitimacy. It is good to see political progress being made under these difficult circumstances. This is a good news for all Iraqi people and the other states. However, we hope the other states must respect Iraqi new government's administration and its activities and don't intervene too much. The Iraq case is a new precedent in international law and politics. We must deal with it well. It's another positive step toward a functioning democracy in the Middle East. Against the desires of many for this process to fail, the Iraqis have now achieved sovereignty, free elections and sworn in a government. Iraqi security forces keep strengthening and services are improving. The left wing naysayers and the insurgents move another step closer to failure in having it play out to their liking. Congratulations to the people of Iraq. The new Iraqi government is a positive step in the long road to democracy. Jaafari seems like a pretty good guy; but his hands are somewhat tied. There are still people in the White House who pushed him to put Chalabi in his government. Jaafari should pick a Sunni technocrat with oil industry experience as oil minister. Whoever he picks, he'll get blamed if any fraud occurs, so he had better pick someone honest.
Sama' al Damshk, Damascus, Syria Chris (USA), it is perfectly apt to compare Germany and Japan to Iraq. All three countries were ruled by oppressive dictatorships which invaded their neighbours and terrorised their own population and threatened the world. All three were toppled by concerted allied action. And yes all three were liberated in the truest form as they became, in the process, democracies. The main difference is that in Iraq the process is taking far less time and far fewer lives. Why would the people of any country sit by and allow another regime to impose a way of life on them, that suited the invaders? I am a New Zealander and if the US tried to impose their views on NZ I would fight to the death to oppose them. The Irish, or some of them, have been fighting bitterly for decades to prevent the Brits imposing their views upon their part of the country. The Scots and the Welsh still have rumblings demanding independence. Iraq is merely a political construct. Perhaps it is time to leave them alone to settle their own affairs, probably a three way split. Iraq will never be a stable country, this is a political fantasy because Iraq is an artificial country. There will always be unrest as long as the current borders remain. First thing that needs to happen is full independence for Kurdistan. When will politician learn that forcing ethnic and religious groups together in a nation against their will does not work? Face it, this new "government" arose from obscene, murderous beginnings, so what can you expect? Unrest will continue for several years until the "coalition of the willing" beats the spirit out of the Iraqi people and they surrender to their puppet regime. | |||||||||
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
