Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex
I think you may be forgetting the purple-finger election in which DROVES of non-butt-of-gun folks turned out to express their will.
We're dealing with an extremely violent minority here. They are large enough of a minority, true, that they could potentially destabilize the gov't were they left to their own vices. But the high turnout in every election Iraq has held so far sort of blows away the "imposition of values" argument.
|
My choice of the word "values" was poorly chosen. What I really meant is that I believe that it is nearly impossible to create the conditions necessary for a stable, democratic society through the military apparatus. And you are coorect in that the turnout for votes has been encouraging. But...
Holding a vote is probably the least important part of democracy. It is what comes after, when all parties show respect for the outcome of the vote, when people support parties based upon issues rather than identity, and when the rule of law follows from elections. Iraq is a nominal democracy, i.e. they hold votes. This is a positive first step.
But it is a small step when there is chaos going on in the streets. Furthermore, the rise of sectarian parties does not bode well for embracing of pluralist democracy or even for a workable power sharing arrangement. I hesitate to call the elections, mere window dressing, because I think it is disrepectful of the Iraqis. However, until the security situation improves dramatically, that is what they are.