America’s Four Catastrophic Mistakes in Iraq
The USA’s ambition to create a democratic model state of Iraq should have been a good example to other nations in the area to take after. Instead, Iraq’s democratic model has become a cautionary example for the new regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, writes sociologist, Jamila Hussein.
Following the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Usama al-Nujayf, commented on Jan. 2 in a televised speech that Iraq has suffered serious human right violations through excessive violence and attacks against innocent people and their property, and through arbitrary arrests. He stressed that the political parties in Iraq were now in constant conflict with one another due to the great insecurity in the country with problems such as unemployment, large scale corruption and shortage of functioning public services, such as water and electricity supply.
How did this come about after nine years of the U.S. controlling development in the country?
America’s ambition from the beginning was to create a democratic model state in the Middle East which would serve as a good example for other states in the region to follow. Instead, Iraq’s “model democracy” has become a cautionary example for the new regimes in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya, who will do anything to avoid ending up in the same situation.
If one analyzes the U.S.’s effect on Iraq, one can point out a number of fundamental mistakes that the U.S. made. The U.S. has probably acted in good faith based on the limited and biased information available. However, the actual outcome of the U.S.’s nine years in the country has been negative in several ways. In my opinion one can highlight four key mistakes:
Mistake Number One
The first mistake occurred when Paul Bremer (the U.S. administration’s head for Iraq’s civil transformation to a democracy), on May 23, 2003, gave the order to immediately dismantle the entire Iraqi army and dismiss all its officers and soldiers. Orders were also given to fire all police. Iraqis had long been accustomed to having their lives watched over and being controlled by a dictatorial regime. Suddenly all oversight disappeared and the field was left free for all and any to help themselves to the new freedom.
Some individuals took the opportunity to steal valuable items and money from official institutions like banks, offices, museums, etc. as well as clear out and burn important documents from various government offices. Even al Qaida and other terrorist groups used the general disorder to advance their positions in Iraq, carry out acts of terror, and take revenge on the U.S. This weakened state was also exploited by neighboring countries, chiefly Iran, which procured influence in Iraq through bribes and support of Shiite Muslim groups.
Mistake Number Two
The second mistake was to divide the population into different ethnic and religious groups and allocate seats in parliament according to the groups’ size and influence. The U.S. intention was that all groups in Iraq would be able to have a say, even minority groups, but the result was a relentless struggle over power and supremacy, in which different groups attempted to increase their authority at the expense of other groups.
The fight was waged with murder and kidnappings. Worst affected were the two largest religious groups, Shiite and Sunni Muslims, and within these groups, self-proclaimed “minor despots” acquired their own positions of power. Ultimately, an all-out war ensued.
The Kurds, who have since 1991 achieved a certain degree of autonomy in northern Iraq, still have problems with the central regime in Baghdad over contentious cities such as Kirkuk, Khanaqin and others. Problems have arisen because the population is a mix of Kurds, Arabs and Turks. These cities are particularly important because of oil extraction and the oil industry.
During Saddam’s reign, the regime suppressed all forms of separatism and opposition in society. However, after the arrival of U.S. forces, antagonism has flared up and the Iraqi Parliament has also become a combat zone where the war of all against all is waged instead of being a place for discussion and constructive compromise.
In a functioning democracy, one must have respect for opinions which differ from one’s own. This is not a reality in Iraq today. Everyone blames and accuses opponents for the most ridiculous things to thereby increase their own power.
The largest conflict is currently being fought between Sunnis and Shiites. Shiite Muslim al Maliki (Prime Minister), accuses Sunni Muslim al Hashimi (Vice President), of involvement in terrorist acts and other acts of violence. In this way, the current parliament in Iraq has created a situation where almost no decisions can be made because every moment is spent loudly and aggressively accusing opponents of lies and deception.
Mistake Number Three
The third mistake was to dissolve the Ba’ath party, which was the only authorized party under Saddam’s regime and had many influential members. The U.S. appointed a parliamentary committee which decided to immediately break up the Ba’ath party and forbid all previous members from participating in any political activities in the new Iraq. Furthermore, it was decided to bring the party’s leading politicians before court. In practice, the decision was widened later to include all previous members and the decree was made that all these individuals would be sacked from their civilian jobs. The effect was that the American-supported regime created a large group of implacable foes who did everything they could to sabotage the new regime.
Mistake Number Four
The fourth mistake was that the U.S. appropriated Saddam’s former luxurious buildings and district in central Baghdad. The area, some 10 square kilometers, named the Green Zone, is surrounded by a high, impenetrable wall and is one of the most well-guarded military sites in Iraq. Here, the U.S. established its headquarters, and leading American officers and officials have lived here. Here, the new politicians were allowed to settle and live in security and luxury with functioning water and electricity. All this stands in stark contrast to the life that befell normal people, who were forced to face chaos, terrorist attacks, poverty, criminality, unemployment, and constant interruption to water and electricity supplies. This disparity in living conditions has led to the creation of a great cleft between politicians and the common people. Instead of representing the people, politicians have used the Iraqi parliament to unilaterally promote their own needs and interests. The few politicians who have really attempted to do some good for the nation and its people have been quickly marginalized by a large majority of politicians and have lost power and influence. The Iraqi people feel no affinity whatsoever with their politicians and consider them as alien privileged elements within their society.
Democracy has Developed Negative Connotations
In conclusion, it can be stated that U.S. actions in Iraq have created a great uncertainty as to what democracy is. The population has been witness to the yawning chasm between fine words like freedom, equality and democracy, and the base and insecure reality they are forced to live in. For the Iraqi people democracy has come to be associated with a raft of negative attributes like egoism, criminality, suspicion, murder, kidnapping, corruption, embezzlement, arbitrary imprisonment of innocents, and large scale flight from the country, which is hardly what the U.S. intended.
The U.S.’s monumental error was to naively try to apply westernized, democratic reasoning to a land with an entirely different cultural, historical and religious background, the result of which became a tragedy for both the U.S. and the Iraqi people.
Following the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Usama al-Nujayf, commented on Jan. 2 in a televised speech that Iraq has suffered serious human right violations through excessive violence and attacks against innocent people and their property, and through arbitrary arrests. He stressed that the political parties in Iraq were now in constant conflict with one another due to the great insecurity in the country with problems such as unemployment, large scale corruption and shortage of functioning public services, such as water and electricity supply.
How did this come about after nine years of the U.S. controlling development in the country?
America’s ambition from the beginning was to create a democratic model state in the Middle East which would serve as a good example for other states in the region to follow. Instead, Iraq’s “model democracy” has become a cautionary example for the new regimes in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya, who will do anything to avoid ending up in the same situation.
If one analyzes the U.S.’s effect on Iraq, one can point out a number of fundamental mistakes that the U.S. made. The U.S. has probably acted in good faith based on the limited and biased information available. However, the actual outcome of the U.S.’s nine years in the country has been negative in several ways. In my opinion one can highlight four key mistakes:
Mistake Number One
The first mistake occurred when Paul Bremer (the U.S. administration’s head for Iraq’s civil transformation to a democracy), on May 23, 2003, gave the order to immediately dismantle the entire Iraqi army and dismiss all its officers and soldiers. Orders were also given to fire all police. Iraqis had long been accustomed to having their lives watched over and being controlled by a dictatorial regime. Suddenly all oversight disappeared and the field was left free for all and any to help themselves to the new freedom.
Some individuals took the opportunity to steal valuable items and money from official institutions like banks, offices, museums, etc. as well as clear out and burn important documents from various government offices. Even al Qaida and other terrorist groups used the general disorder to advance their positions in Iraq, carry out acts of terror, and take revenge on the U.S. This weakened state was also exploited by neighboring countries, chiefly Iran, which procured influence in Iraq through bribes and support of Shiite Muslim groups.
Mistake Number Two
The second mistake was to divide the population into different ethnic and religious groups and allocate seats in parliament according to the groups’ size and influence. The U.S. intention was that all groups in Iraq would be able to have a say, even minority groups, but the result was a relentless struggle over power and supremacy, in which different groups attempted to increase their authority at the expense of other groups.
The fight was waged with murder and kidnappings. Worst affected were the two largest religious groups, Shiite and Sunni Muslims, and within these groups, self-proclaimed “minor despots” acquired their own positions of power. Ultimately, an all-out war ensued.
The Kurds, who have since 1991 achieved a certain degree of autonomy in northern Iraq, still have problems with the central regime in Baghdad over contentious cities such as Kirkuk, Khanaqin and others. Problems have arisen because the population is a mix of Kurds, Arabs and Turks. These cities are particularly important because of oil extraction and the oil industry.
During Saddam’s reign, the regime suppressed all forms of separatism and opposition in society. However, after the arrival of U.S. forces, antagonism has flared up and the Iraqi Parliament has also become a combat zone where the war of all against all is waged instead of being a place for discussion and constructive compromise.
In a functioning democracy, one must have respect for opinions which differ from one’s own. This is not a reality in Iraq today. Everyone blames and accuses opponents for the most ridiculous things to thereby increase their own power.
The largest conflict is currently being fought between Sunnis and Shiites. Shiite Muslim al Maliki (Prime Minister), accuses Sunni Muslim al Hashimi (Vice President), of involvement in terrorist acts and other acts of violence. In this way, the current parliament in Iraq has created a situation where almost no decisions can be made because every moment is spent loudly and aggressively accusing opponents of lies and deception.
Mistake Number Three
The third mistake was to dissolve the Ba’ath party, which was the only authorized party under Saddam’s regime and had many influential members. The U.S. appointed a parliamentary committee which decided to immediately break up the Ba’ath party and forbid all previous members from participating in any political activities in the new Iraq. Furthermore, it was decided to bring the party’s leading politicians before court. In practice, the decision was widened later to include all previous members and the decree was made that all these individuals would be sacked from their civilian jobs. The effect was that the American-supported regime created a large group of implacable foes who did everything they could to sabotage the new regime.
Mistake Number Four
The fourth mistake was that the U.S. appropriated Saddam’s former luxurious buildings and district in central Baghdad. The area, some 10 square kilometers, named the Green Zone, is surrounded by a high, impenetrable wall and is one of the most well-guarded military sites in Iraq. Here, the U.S. established its headquarters, and leading American officers and officials have lived here. Here, the new politicians were allowed to settle and live in security and luxury with functioning water and electricity. All this stands in stark contrast to the life that befell normal people, who were forced to face chaos, terrorist attacks, poverty, criminality, unemployment, and constant interruption to water and electricity supplies. This disparity in living conditions has led to the creation of a great cleft between politicians and the common people. Instead of representing the people, politicians have used the Iraqi parliament to unilaterally promote their own needs and interests. The few politicians who have really attempted to do some good for the nation and its people have been quickly marginalized by a large majority of politicians and have lost power and influence. The Iraqi people feel no affinity whatsoever with their politicians and consider them as alien privileged elements within their society.
Democracy has Developed Negative Connotations
In conclusion, it can be stated that U.S. actions in Iraq have created a great uncertainty as to what democracy is. The population has been witness to the yawning chasm between fine words like freedom, equality and democracy, and the base and insecure reality they are forced to live in. For the Iraqi people democracy has come to be associated with a raft of negative attributes like egoism, criminality, suspicion, murder, kidnapping, corruption, embezzlement, arbitrary imprisonment of innocents, and large scale flight from the country, which is hardly what the U.S. intended.
The U.S.’s monumental error was to naively try to apply westernized, democratic reasoning to a land with an entirely different cultural, historical and religious background, the result of which became a tragedy for both the U.S. and the Iraqi people.