Latest Column:
From “Crossing the Bar” to Crossing a Line
The Netherlands’ Groningen Protocols Are a Grisly Human Nightmare
..........

CaliforniaRepublic.org
opinon in
Reagan country
..........

Michael Ramirez
editorial cartoon
@LA Times
..........

tOR Talk Radio
Contributor Sites
Laura Ingraham
Hugh Hewitt
Eric Hogue
Sharon Hughes
[Radio Home]
..........

Wounded Warrior
Please Help Today
..........

Current Headlines
..........

Contributors
J.F. Kelly, Jr. - Contributor

J.F. Kelly, Jr. is a retired Navy Captain and bank executive who writes on current events and military subjects. He is a resident of Coronado, California. [go to Kelly index]

Iraqi Elections Must Not Be Postponed
Democracy must prevail…
[J. F. Kelly, Jr.] 12/10/04

As the entire world must surely recognize, the terrorists and insurgents remaining in Iraq have been intensifying attacks on coalition forces, foreign workers and Iraqis seen as cooperating with Americans. These actions, which were anticipated and predicted well in advance by our intelligence, are part of a desperate effort to derail or postpone the scheduled January elections. They must not be allowed to succeed for several reasons.

First and foremost, postponing the elections would represent a huge victory for the insurgents, mostly pro-Saddam Sunnis in central Iraq, and a defeat for the Americans who have consistently promised free elections held on schedule as a precursor to American disengagement. Secondly, it would be a setback to the rest of Iraq, including the Shiites and Kurds who constitute about three-fourths of the population. Finally, it would delay the beginning of American military disengagement.

Iraq must not be allowed to remain an American theatre of military operations indefinitely. While understandably apprehensive about a premature withdrawal and a collapse of security, the majority of Iraqis don’t want us there any longer than necessary and our numerically-constrained military forces have other serious threats to be concerned about.

The argument for postponing the elections until greater security can be established has been sounded by many critics of the war and lately by the United Nations, whose secretary-general earlier branded the U.S.-led action against Saddam Hussein’s treacherous government as illegal. That argument holds that fair elections are impossible as long as violence continues because of its intimidating effect upon potential voters in the mostly Sunni areas where the violence is occurring.

The argument is specious at best. The violence is primarily the fault of Sunni insurgents in the first place. They fear free elections because free elections would favor the majority Shiites and solidify the end of Sunni rule in Iraq. If they were interested in free elections, they could have facilitated them by ceasing the violence.

The United States has increased troop levels in Iraq in advance of the elections in a rather tardy attempt to increase security. But no amount of increased security will totally preclude terrorist attacks aimed at disrupting the elections now or in the future. There is no way to establish perfect security in Iraq and a certain amount of disruption and voter intimidation is bound to occur. It happens even in places like Spain. The elections won’t be pristine, but then elections seldom are anywhere. Voters in Afghanistan, nevertheless, turned out in record numbers, refusing to be intimidated and security was far from perfect there.

Free societies are characterized by free elections and majority rule. The Sunni minority enjoyed privileged status as a ruling class in Saddam’s Iraq. Now they have to deal with a large Shiite majority and a formerly oppressed Kurdish minority and earn a place in the governing structure if Iraq. That is admittedly difficult in a land where religion dominates political discourse but that is something for the Iraqis to work out, not us. Unfortunately, violence, terrorism and other forms of intimidation aimed at derailing the election do not signal much of a willingness on the part of some Sunnis to cooperate peacefully in a democratic government and such tactics must not be allowed to succeed.

Americans, other coalition forces and the Iraqis themselves have paid a dear price in blood and treasure to get this far. The next critical step is the election. There is nothing to be gained by us in delaying it but there is much to be gained by the insurgents, notably a large moral victory and time to regroup.

What will happen after the election? Will Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds live happily ever after? Will things fall apart after we finally leave? Will another hostile dictatorship emerge? Time will tell. The flawed partition that produced Iraq was not of our doing. We had a mission in Iraq, though, and it’s important to keep in mind that our original mission had to do with killing the alligators, not draining the swamp. Saddam and his sons are gone. We are investing heavily in restoring order. The elections must be held on schedule, for better or for worse, and we must then start the disengagement process. Iraq’s future must depend on the Iraqis, not on America. tOR

copyright 2004 J. F. Kelly, Jr.

§