If I understand his position correctly, it was morally obligatory for the US to invade Iraq on the basis of human rights violations. The ongoing war is necessary to hopefully plant the seeds of democracy that has the potential to spread through out the region in a stabilizing effect.
He asked whether I had actually read any Iraqi blogs. (My friend is an avid blog reader.) I admitted that I hadn't. So this post is about just that. And what have I begun to find?
First off, I am suspect of the bias of any blog that I am able to read. Of the Kurds, Shiia, Sunni and vast number of others, how many of them are able to communicate the thoughts of the average people in their communities?
Secondly, it is essential that I understand my own pre-judgements and level of awareness of those involved in Iraq.
- I believe those that we label as terrorists or act with violence against the western aggressors are islamic extremists and do not represent the majority or essence of islamic teachings.
- I believe that I war was improperly initiated. I also believe it is impractical to argue the premises of the war to a degree and focus on the immediate and future needs of those involved. I believe that it is right for Americans to fight a war in Iraq until they are able to build up enough internal security forces to protect themselves.
- I believe that there is a difference in democracy that is chosen by the people and one that is established for them on the basis of the readiness of the people. Like tragedies at high altitudes with climbers using guides to take them to places they could not go on their own is a situation fraught with potential disaster.
Upon the recommendation of my friend here is the breadcrub trail of my blog journey:
- Where is Raed ? I wanted to know first "who is Raed?"
- Iraq the Model begins with praise for the overthrow of Saddam. A blogger who honors the Americans fighting in Iraq and dislikes the protestors of the war. I was surprised by the optimism of the birth of the "New Model" in Iraq but found it difficult to assess credibility of the posts being unable to determine some basic information about the posters.
Here are some useful resources I've found along the way:
Establishing a Stable Democracy
Iraqi History
Democracy in Iraq?
Previously I thought it was overly optimistic to think that the democratic model that is forming in Iraq today is the key to peace in the region. There are too many parties involved in Iraq with so many deep scars from the many years of war and oppression. And yet, the Israelis have pulled out of Gaza and Zarqawi may be struggling to fight the elections... perhaps there is more to be optimistic for in the distant future of Iraq. Whether America can live up to its future as "non-occupational, non-exploitive" force of guidance still remains to be seen and in that I have little belief.
The present danger is excess of benevolence; we might undertake yet another selfless mission of mercy, failing to understand that "there are limits to what outsiders can do" and that "the armies we dispatch to foreign soil for humanitarian reasons" may not be able "to save people from others or from themselves." -Noam Chomsky, 1994
2 comments:
just a kernal to throw in which you might have already made into popped-corn...if the violation of human rights is the basis for going to war, than we have a lot more wars to start...china, north korea, sudan, saudi arabia along with most other middle east countries, cuba, and myanmar come to mind...my point is not that we should go to war with all of these countries as it's obvious we have our hands full with two wars, which according to bush are actually over, which begs the question of what exactly is going on over there right now, but that we need to find a more attainable way of dealing with these problems...applying the same standards to all countries regardless of how much oil or cheap trinkets they supply with would be a start, but alas, apparently things aren't that simple...i have ranted...good night
A very excellent point and there are many others as well: Indonesia, Nepal to name just two more. Thanks!
I have also been thinking... how many human rights do we trade in the "short-term" (perhaps up to 10, 20, 50 years) for the possibility of a democratic Iraq. There is no "one" democracy. What will their constitution prioritize? So far, it's (respectfully) a book of holy teachings that is itself being interpreted in many different ways.
How will we feel about a democracy which doesn't believe in "equal, indivisible, and inalienable rights"? Couldn't that in turn be a potential cause enough for a future war in the name of human rights?
Post a Comment