Meanwhile, I stumbled over something in yet another NYT story, though. One thing many critics of war have always emphasised was that the Bush government had no realistic plans for post-war Iraq worked out. Yet
this critical article verges on gloating when it notes that
Quote:Long before President Bush ordered the attack against Iraq, the White House and the Pentagon drew up a plan for rebuilding and running the country after the war that was nearly as meticulous as the battle plan.
But over the past two to three weeks, the wheels have threatened to come off their vehicle for establishing the peace.
Of course I know that each of us war critics is an individual with separate arguments so its not like any of us needs to be consistent with any other, but still, its either one or the other: the Bush gvt went into war without elaborating a proper realistic post-war plan, or it had one all meticulously lined out, and its now falling apart ...
On the whole interim authority vs interim government thing, finally, this latter article notes
Quote:The message that reached the White House from two recent meetings with potential Iraqi leaders, officials say, was that it would be foolish to start experimenting with democracy without making people feel secure enough to go back to work or school, and without giving them back at least the basic services they received during Saddam Hussein's brutal rule.
You
can, in sympathising with the frustrated Iraqi opposition, reject this as part of a devious plan to rob the Iraqis of their self-determination; you can also refer to the UN and OSCE having followed pretty much the exact same logic in Bosnia and Kosovo. First the basic service back in place; only then elections. In fact, there's been several consecutive elections (every two years) in Bosnia and still Ashdown is there as well, with authority superceding the government's, and a right to impose new legal arrangements that he uses often. Critics of the UN say this has made Bosnia de facto a UN protectorate, and has fostered a spirit of dependence and resignation. Defenders of the UN will point out that the elections at first (and now, again) returned the 'parties of war' as victors, and that without international oversight the country could have well slipped into narchy or ethnic violence again. All the same dilemmas hold in Iraq.
c.i.
