Opinion-editorials decyphered - 30 June 2005
Iraq: Who still believes in rebuilding?

Voltaire Network

30 June 2005

Tools

Print
Send

All the versions of this article:

français
Español

Authors and Sources of Op-Eds Decyphered

“There is no longer an order in the world”

Author George Soros

George Soros is the president of the Open Society Institute and Soros Fund Management. He is the author of The Bubble of American Supremacy.

Source Der Standard (Austria)
Reference “ Weltordnung existiert nicht mehr”, by George Soros, Der Standard, June 21, 2005. Text adapted from an interview.

Summary I think Europe is closer to chaos than the United States. I do not make long term statements; I am Keynesian. In the long run, we will die, that was what he used to say. Anyway, in a short run, the United States has built a strong State. A group of radicals or extremists have taken control of the country. They did it first with the Republican Party, thus hampering the American democracy. The extremists confiscated the Congress and presidency, and now they are confiscating justice, thus dealing a harsh blow to the separation of powers which is the foundation of the American constitution. America is jeopardized as an open society; it is not a chaos but it means a strong and authoritarian State.
The military and economic hegemony is a bubble. A false ideology can only be imposed through violence and such hypocrisy can only be hidden sometime before the regime falls. The mistakes of Bush’s regime have become something almost evident, starting with the invasion of Iraq. Long time has been necessary and it has not been fully considered since it is still said that the elections were successful. All the things that Bush has tried to do during his second term have failed, his popularity is the lowest. What worries me is that we have not learned the lessons from Bush’s mistakes. The most repulsive has been the “war on terror” as a concept. This has not been questioned, but if you do, you would be considered an anti-patriot. Therefore, the politicians express their doubts in private. The masters who built America are disappearing.
I think that Paul Wolfowitz is rather an intellectual compared to the rest of the neoconservatives. He is aware that the invasion of Iraq was a big mistake. I guess he wants to fix that by doing a good job in the World Bank.
I think Europe is going through a very severe crisis; the creation of the European Union was the result of the social engineering with the spirit of the “open society” of Popper, with rehearsals and failures, in which every step forward was a new challenge. The expansion means greater sovereignty and that was what led to the failure of the referendum about the Constitution. Europe is under a dynamic inequality and if it does not move forward, then it would go backwards. I think that is the point in the discussions about the budget. It is all because of the lack of unity regarding the issue of significance and importance of Europe.
I think that globalization is not irreversible. It already existed before the First World War and ended later with the exclusion of great areas like the Soviet Union. Today, globalization has expanded a great deal, but it can be interrupted. It is not a prediction, but it is more than an eventuality. There we have what happens with the financial markets: we are always on the brink of collapse, but it hardly takes place. We have more serious problems which do not have anything to do with globalization, like global warming. Scientists are unanimous. It is a process that will continue even if drastic measures are taken and the Bush administration totally denies this problem.
Today there are much more people who take Bush government as it is and are willing to support the opposition. Rob Stein (Democratic Party) has already established a group that I will support. I think there is a major problem in the American society: I totally disapprove Bush but was elected by 52% of the voters and I wonder how it was possible. There is no doubt about the return of the Democrats, but I do not know if they would be able to correct the mistakes made and channel America through a less dangerous path. The neoconservatives claim that the international institutions do not allow to defend the U.S. interests properly, and they are right. The rest of the world is very much against America; it is obvious in the public opinion and various governments. The international community has split. It is an outburst of the West.
The world order does not exist since the United States is the one who decides the agenda and the other countries just follow. America has become a nationalist superpower and the rest of the world should be happy about that. The Chinese are increasingly more nationalists and militarists, the Japanese also, Russia and even Turkey due to the problems with the European Union. This does not bode well for the rest of the world.
I have made tactical mistakes, and allowed my adversaries to introduce me as an extremist. You know that anyone who have Putin and Bush among its enemies, has little space for maneuver. When acting by principles, a position must be kept. That is the difference between a life of a financial speculator and a commitment based on principles.
I have committed myself to a reform of the laws on narcotics in the United States; the war on drugs has failed as the “war on terror”. Such war cannot be the center of the policy. Hence, there are more terrorists emerging than eliminated, and that is counterproductive; thus giving up the values which are our foundations. There is a base in Uzbekistan that is used to train special forces to massacre innocent civilians. It is terrible and there are many other examples.

“There is progress in Iraq”

Author Kofi Annan

Kofi Annan is the Secretary General of the United Nations (UN).

Sources Gulf News, Washington Post (United States), Le Figaro (France), Korea Herald (South Korea)
Reference “There’s Progress in Iraq”, by Kofi Annan, Washington Post, June 20, 2005.
“L’ONU en Irak: beaucoup de travail, peu de bruit”, Le Figaro, June 22, 2005.
“Progress made in Iraq transition”, Korea Herald, June 23, 2005.
“There’s progress in Iraq, but the road ahead is tough”, Gulf News, June 23, 2005.

Summary I am in Brussels to join the representatives of more than 80 governments and institutions meeting to send a loud and clear message of support for the political transition in Iraq. A year ago, Resolution 1546 of the Security Council set out the time table that Iraq was expected to fulfill. Today, the Brussels conference aims at recalling that the international community supports Iraq and is aware of its advances, in spite of all the difficulties faced.
As scheduled, elections were held in January and, three months later, the Transitional National Assembly endorsed the transitional government. The dominant parties began their debates without excluding anyone and opened themselves to the Sunni parties. Currently, those parties are engaged in the process of drafting of a Constitution that should be approved in a referendum. The UN works so that all Iraqis are represented in the drafting process and so that the August 15 deadline is respected. Certainly, there will be delays and setbacks, but we must not forget that the Iraqis are debating all the aspects of their political future. The UN can help them do it.
The United Nations has responded promptly and with resolution to the call of the Iraqis and there are currently 800 UN personnel working in Iraq. But our efforts and victories take place away from the cameras. The success or failure of the UN work to help the Iraqis will depend largely on the Iraqis themselves. Only they can write a Constitution that is fair and inclusive. The commitment of the different groups of the Iraqi population that will serve as a foundation for the Constitution will be as important as the text itself. The United Nations, through my special representative, Ashraf Qazi, is facilitating the delicate task of opening the political process to all Iraqi groups.
Of course, there are those who want to exacerbate tensions among ethnic groups and prevent the emergence of a democratic, pluralist and stable Iraq. Those people seek to capitalize on the serious difficulties faced by the Iraqi population and to exploit popular anger and resentment to promote hatred and violence. It is not enough to strengthen security measures. It is necessary to create an institutional framework that allows all Iraqis understand that they will all win in the new Iraq.
It is also important that Iraq assumes its tortuous past and to re-organize its infrastructure and public services. The UN can also be useful in that respect. The Iraqi people continue to endure a painful and difficult transition and they still have a long way to go. The United Nations is privileged and determined to walk it with them. Thus, it is not only helping the Iraqi people but all those who hope that the heart of the Middle East be built in a democratic, peaceful and stable Iraq.

“Help the Iraqis, in a concrete way!”

Author Hoshyar Zebari

Former spokesman of the Democratic Party of Kurdistan in the United Kingdom and the United States. Hoshyar Zebari is the Iraqi Minister of Foreign Affairs in the transition government, a post he already held in the Council of the Iraqi Government.

Source Le Monde (France)
Reference “Aider les Irakiens, concrètement !”, by Hoshyar Zebari, Le Monde, June 22, 2005.

Summary June 22 will be a milestone in the Iraqi evolution process towards democracy and its re-integration in the world system. After the creation of the first Iraqi democratic government in 51 years, the Conference of Brussels is an additional sign of or determination to turn Iraq into a responsible member of the international community. In the conference, 85 participants will discuss about the measures that should be taken to create a stable Iraq, with a government elected upon a permanent Constitution that responds to the people’s interests. We want to revitalize public institutions and to have a booming civil society. We want Iraq to be in peace with itself and with its neighbors, all integrated within the community of civilized nations.
The first stage is achieving stability. This is an essential goal for the region and the anti-democratic forces test the resistance capacity of the democracies that insist on helping the Iraqi democrats. Many foresee a failure that would represent a setback for all democratic movements of the region. Iraq is a test in which the democratic forces and the world can not fail. In spite of the difficulties, there is progress, as it was proved with the success of the elections in spite of terrorist attacks. Although some groups boycotted the vote, later, the have made attempts to re-integrate themselves to the political process. In spite of terrorism, the Iraqi people want us to conclude the transformation process of the country. The Conference of Brussels should back this effort.
The first step in that reconstruction is the Constitution project that takes into account the problems of all Iraqi communities. The Iraqi people should be in charge of its writing. We should also consider the ratification of the Constitution in the fall and the elections that will take place later in the year. For that, we should use the experience of countries that went from a tyranny to a democracy and create a quality public service that may serve as a foundation for the new Iraqi democratic institutions. Likewise, we should guarantee the economic reconstruction of a potentially rich country, devastated by bad management and years of economic sanctions. In that sense, we need technical and financial assistance. We have to train our future technicians and to encourage the taste for initiative in Iraq. Finally, it is necessary to organize a legal reform to build a truly impartial legal apparatus so that justice is well served. Similarly, the norms of human behavior should be included in the basic rules of training of security agents, police and prison guards.
Due to the lack of space, I do not mention a long list of fields in which Iraq needs high technical knowledge. But, we need to have the commitment and the cooperation of the international community. As concrete proposals emerge to achieve the already mentioned goals, the Conference of Brussels will be a success.

“A new Marshall Plan for Iraq”

Author Ibrahim Al-Jaafari

Former opponent of Sadam Husein who took refuge in Iran. Ibrahim Al-Jaafari is the candidate to the post of Prime Minister of the Shiite coalition that won the elections in Iraq. He is the president of the Dawa Party.

Source The Times (United Kingdom)
Reference “A new Marshall plan for Iraq”, by Ibrahim al-Jaafari, Times, June 27, 2005.

Summary Last week I went to Washington and visited the place where George Marshall signed in 1947 the plan named after him. At that time, the plan was controversial but today nobody questions its interest. It would be enough to compare the current situation in Germany with that of 1945. Nowadays, the Middle East has the same strategic interest as Europe in 1945.
Last week I went to Brussels with an Iraqi delegation to help in the construction of my country. I met with George W. Bush and Tony Blair, and they both chose to back democracy and freedom in Iraq. For them, it is not only a matter of principle. It is also a matter of security for their countries in their war on terrorism. Fighting terrorism is a complex policy against indoctrination. In order to succeed, it is necessary to develop a democratic society and free press.
I am not only the first democratically elected leader of the Arab world. I am also the first prime minister of the Middle East to come from an Islamic opposition group at the head of a coalition that includes diverse ethnic and political groups. With this coalition, I will get rid of Saddam Hussein’s legacy. In order to achieve this, we need a new Marshall Plan. We have to erase 40 years of a Fascist regime and, for that, we need the assistance of the western democracies.

"There Won’t Be a Second Cold War"

Author Serguei V. Lavrov

Sergey V. Lavrov is Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation.

Source Trud (Russian Federation)
Reference "ВТОРОГО ИЗДАНИЯ ’ХОЛОДНОЙ ВОЙНЫ’ НЕ БУДЕТ", by Serguei Lavrov, Trud, June 24, 2005. Text adapted from an interview. We have only taken the extracts concerning Iraq.

Summary Russia’s position toward the events that prompted this war, toward the opportunity to resort to force and toward the role that the UN could have played, as it was its duty to, is clear: it hasn’t changed. However, we should look into the future and help Iraq build a democratic state. We must bring all the necessary conditions together to reach an economic recovery and strengthen security. All participants in the Brussels Conference share these same interests. Russia also helped to prepare this conference, which proves its deep engagement in the process.
I think that the most important thing now is to avoid the Iraqi internal conflicts that generate the terrorist war. Dialogue must be widened and all ethnic and religious factions as well as all political parties should participate in it. It would be advisable to stipulate a deadline for the military presence in the country. Russia is already playing a significant role in the reconstruction of Iraq, as we have already cancelled nearly $8000 million dollars of the Iraqi debt. Russia’s potential allows it to play an important role in that reconstruction, and its experience in the Iraq’s oil and energy spheres has awakened Lukoil’s interest. Nevertheless, we’ll have to wait until the security conditions allow to get the projects started.

“Business Can Only Be Developed Now in Kurd-Controlled Territories”

Author Vladimir Semago

Vladimir Semago is president of the Energoimport society and has worked in Iraq for 7 years.

Source Strana.ru (Russia)
Reference “ Сегодня бизнес может развиваться лишь на территории, контролируемой курдами”, by Vladimir Semago, Strana.ru, June 23, 2005. Text adapted from an interview.

Summary Contrary to what is said, work in Iraq today is possible, even though physical risks are too great. Some companies, such as Interenergoservis, are established in the country. Danger can mainly be found in the center of Iraq, mostly in Baghdad, in the Sunni triangle. As everybody wants to ensure his presence, negotiations don’t stop. Corruption is still there, as in Saddam’s days, but it was stronger then. Of course, people were afraid. I think that, as a state machine, Iraq will continue to manage its economy. Let’s take the energy sector for instance, nothing has been privatized in it. Currently, it’s only in the territories regulated by the Kurds where business can be developed. They have a vast population, there are no disagreements between religious groups, there is a solid national structure served by loyal, armed forces.
Terrorists don’t try to scare a certain structure but common citizens. It’s them who own power beyond the green line at dusk and for the night. The political power structure during Saddam’s regime was similar to that of the Soviet and German systems, the society being controlled by the baasists who are still present. Losses were minimum, the summit gave Iraq to the Americans to prevent economy from collapsing. Even the Americans turned to them to use their authority and restore order. Those who perpetrate terrorist acts are a three-headed Hydra: the old baasists interested in this lack of order, the Muslims religious groups that are members of terrorist organizations and the foreign terrorist groups who took advantage of the opening of the borders. Most Russian companies are skeptic in the face of this situation; even those that lost large sums in the country are hardly active.
The Iraqi energy system is almost gone and completely paralyzed. The announced U.S. departure won’t make a big difference. They didn’t take the right time to leave Iraq so that the country could recover. In my opinion, the only solution left at the moment is a strict control of the situation by the Arab League.
Iraqi leaders are secretly sabotaging the decisions concerning Russia. They come from the American world and rely on their own networks. Neither did the “Oil For Food” program play a positive role. A brigade came to see us to tell us that they were taking care of the contracts with the UN and that they were receiving 10% of the contract. A system had been created by virtue of which if the Russians needed a contract, they had to go see the Americans and make an agreement. And vice versa.
It is impossible to understand what is going on in Iraq, not to mention Jordan, whose position today is that of a second Lebanon, aiming to become the economic and financial center of the Arab world. The whole thing is running smoothly. Also at a security level. All contracts have to go through Jordan banks. No project can be worked out without first turning to them. We keep good relations with Jordan but where interesting contracts are concerned we will have to wait for the war to end. I myself lost 60 million dollars in Iraq. If ever I found out that another person is taking care of my contracts, I would take him to court. I have worked in Iraq for 7 years and before the war there was not the slightest conflict between Christians and Muslims.

“Blinded by the Light at the End of the Tunnel”

Author Sidney Blumenthal

Sidney Blumenthal was assistant and special advisor of former president Bill Clinton. He is the author of The Clinton Wars. He was an editorialist for the New Yorker, the Washington Post and the New Republic. Currently, he is an editorialist with the Guardian about matters related to US policies and correspondent in Washington for Salon.Com.

Source The Guardian (United Kingdom)
Reference “ Blinded by the light at the end of the tunnel”, by Sidney Blumenthal, The Guardian, June 23, 2005.

Summary On June 21, 2005, the information networks repeated the Pentagon’s declarations about the death of 47 enemies west of Iraq. Last month, it was 125 persons who had been murdered in the Syrian border. These two announced “victories” are only the last vicissitudes of the Bush administration’s whoops of joy in relation to Iraq. Such announcements are but new lies following those linking Iraq to the 9/11 terrorist attacks or about the triumphal welcome that our troops would receive. Today, every time that the Bush administration talks of a crucial moment in Iraq, it only reinforces skepticism a little more.
In fact, war is a real crucial moment, not only in Iraq but in the United States too. Each new lie undermines the credibility of the government. Right now, only 39% of the people supports the war in Iraq. Former responsible for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in the Middle East Pat Lang considers that the situation is worse than it was in Vietnam - a country where he served. The Bush administration’s lies are similar to those of Johnson’s during the Vietnam war. This will result in a similar syndrome. By dint of invoking the light at the end of the tunnel, George W. Bush is becoming counterproductive.

“Why the Rebels Will Lose”

Author Max Boot

Max Boot is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A renowned journalist in the economic world, he leads the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal. He published The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power. He is an expert at the Benador Associates public relations office.

Sources Los Angeles Times (United States), Christian Science Monitor (United States)
Reference “ Why the Rebels Will Lose”, by Max Boot, Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2005.
“ Iraqi insurgency lacks ingredients for success”, Christian Science Monitor, June 27, 2005.

Summary It is not worth asking why the public opinion’s backing of the Iraq war has not dwindled. All the papers’ front pages only talk of the rebels’ kingdom of terror. Instead of describing our enemies as terror giants, we’d better insist on their weaknesses. Iraqi insurgents lack many things to achieve what Algerian rebels did in the 1950’s and what the Afghans did in the 1980’s.
Iraqi rebels lack organization and a unified central leadership. They only have the support of a minority within the Sunni community, which is, in turn, a minority in the country. They don’t control large territorial zones; they only managed to control Faluya for six months. Neither can they launch a great offensive. But their greatest weakness is to have turned from the national liberation movement condition into that of a movement that fights a democratically elected government. Nationalist groups often win, like the movements that succeed in getting the masses mobilized against those regimes incapable of evolving, but this is not the case in a democratically elected government. However, this doesn’t mean that the insurgency can be quickly defeated but that as the Iraqi power grows stronger, the insurrection loses ground.
The only advantage of the insurgency is that it still receives regular assistance from combatants abroad. However, the United States will manage to beat them patiently.

“Iraqi Democracy Threatens Its Neighbors”

Author Bernard Lewis

Bernard Lewis is an emeritus professor in studies about the Middle East at the University of Princeton. He recently wrote What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response. He successively worked with the British and U.S. secret services. A reference member in the U.S. on Orientalism, he has endeavored to present the Islam not as a religion, not even as a culture but as a political system comparable to nazism or communism. He was also condemned by the French law for having denied the Armenian genocide.

Source Die Welt (Germany)
Reference “ Iraks Demokratie bedroht die Nachbarn”, by Bernard Lewis, Die Welt, June 23, 2005. Text adapted from an interview.

Summary Elections were successful but they are only a stage. No party was strong enough to make up a government - a good sign that has been recorded in the democratic process for reaching a compromise. The European dogma was that democracy had no place in Iraq. The Middle East was afraid that it worked. Neighboring tyrannies feel threatened by the Iraqi democracy. What is happening in Iraq has a great impact on Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf. There is also the example of Eastern Europe and the communication revolution. News and ideas have spread globally as quick as lightning.
In theory, the Turkish democracy has worked very well since the 1920’s, but the government lost elections for the first time in 1950. The opposition came to power, which meant a historical break in the region. The paradox is that democracy was saved three times by the military. The fourth time was harder. In Turkey they call it “our first postmodern coup”. The regime is currently an Islamist one. The official opinion is that as there were democrat-Christians in Germany, there can be a democrat-Muslim party. For others, it is an attempt to put an end to the secularization instituted by Atatürk. The army cannot intervene anymore. Otherwise, the opportunity to join the EU, if any, would be in danger. The women’s situation is the most critical issue for democracy in the Islamist countries. There are hopes concerning this matter in Iraq, where the women’s position, as in Tunisia, is better than in other states. In Turkey and Pakistan, there have been women prime ministers. Iraqi electors are wise enough to see danger, fundamentalists didn’t win. One reason was the presence of the Iraqi theocracy in their sight.
I’ve seen no significant changes in Israel since Abbas, came to power - the main problem is still there. Is it about Israel’s existence or its size? If Palestinians make up a State, will they do it next to Israel or in its place? In school manuals, in the maps, in speeches, Israel’s existence is denied. The best that we can hope is a ceasefire. Israel’s situation is controversial, some want to stop evacuation by all means. The greatest danger of this evacuation comes from the Palestinians, some resort to terror to oppose the evacuation. Many admit that the Israelis cannot live among Palestinians while the contrary is possible. The UN has admitted this since 1948-1949.