June 28, 2004

5:10 PM
Talking Turkey

So much for George Bush and Jacques Chirac making nice. At Monday's NATO summit in Istanbul, the French prime minister bristled at Bush's suggestion that the European Union set a date to start discussing Turkey's possible entry into the EU, and gently suggested that the U.S. president mind his own business:

If President Bush really said that the way I read it, well, not only did he go too far but he went into a domain which is not his own. It is like me trying to tell the United States how it should manage its relations with Mexico.

It should be noted that Chirac supports Turkey eventually joining the EU, but not until it fulfills all the entry criteria. The government in Ankara has already started human-rights and political reforms in the hope of negotiations starting soon. Several European leaders are pleased with Turkey's progress, including Italy's Silvio Berlusconi:

I think there's a good possibility that Turkey's entry negotiations with the Union will start in the first few months of 2005. I have news that the Commission is heading for a positive view in this direction.

All indications show the negotiations will happen soon enough, and not because Bush is getting antsy.

- Jeff Fleischer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

2:15 PM
Meet the new bosses

While we're wishing Iraq a happy surprise birthday, let's take yet another look at the country's new leaders:

The defense minister, Hazim Shaalan, is a former banker who more recently worked as a real-estate agent in London. "After June 30," said Shaalan, "we will hit [the insurgents] and teach them a good lesson they won't forget. Americans and allied forces have certain restrictions we won't have." He declined to be more specific, except to say, "It's our country, it's our culture, and we have different laws than you do." (A few days later, after yet another suicide bombing, he was more blunt: "We will cut off their hands and behead them.")

Charming fellow, isn't he? As I've written before, the threat of nationwide martial law in Iraq is pretty worrisome. But what does the man or woman on the street think of the impending big crackdown? After conducting interviews throughout Baghdad, Christopher Albritton, a Time journalist stationed in Baghdad, concluded that most Iraqis would prefer martial law over democracy, if it meant improved security:

This is hard to write, but I've come to the conclusion that after a year of horror and insecurity, the average Iraqi doesn't want freedom. They want a set of laws that they can live with, do business under and raise their kids. If it takes a benign dictator to do that, then they're more than happy to have one…

"The security system must be solved," said Kais Yahya, 24, a recent graduate from Baghdad University's medical college. "It was supposed to be democracy, but instead it was chaos. They should have done some non-democratic things."

This general refrain pops up from time to time -- the idea that many people simply want security, not democracy. The New York Times runs monthly articles on the distaste for democracy in Latin America. A few months ago, in Foreign Affairs, Richard Pipes argued that Russians can't really handle freedom -- on account of their "authoritarian spirit" and all. But as Masha Gessen pointed out in a response to Pipes, attitudes towards freedom and democracy are usually more complex than can ever be captured in a survey.

The problem here is that most Iraqis -- like most Russians and most people in Latin America -- aren't political scientists. It's difficult for most people to see how liberty and stability can fit together, exactly, so the two values tend to get posited as simple tradeoffs. Likewise, it can be difficult to see how certain immediately gratifying policies or laws might eventually lead to long-term political problems. Hence, people tend to support whatever policies will solve the most tangible problems in front of them, without really worrying about the consequences. See also: "USA Patriot Act, 2001 signing of."

So this sourness towards democracy doesn't mean the U.S. should let Allawi and Shaalan freely impose martial law, simply because it has the support of the locals. As TNR's Spencer Ackerman is fond of pointing out, Syria has been in a "state of emergency" for 41 years. No doubt people once thought that was a good idea too. Assuredly, we've screwed up Iraq badly enough that a benign dictatorship may well end up being the most reasonable "option" left. But as with Russia, it's dangerous to suppose that that's what people "really want," and then walk away satisfied.

- Bradford Plumer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

1:15 PM
Travel restrictions

George W. Bush tends to get treated like royalty when he travels abroad. But in the process, he often manages to royally tick off many of the people who happen to live in his destinations. In the May/June 2004 issue of Mother Jones, we collected several examples of the overblown measures used to secure and seclude the famously travel-averse president, such as locking up the residents of Goree Island, Senegal, while he visited a nearby fortress notorious for its role in the Atlantic slave trade.

There’s a new addition to this list: the president’s trip to Istanbul over the weekend. This letter from a Turkish professor, received by Juan Cole, shows that the Bush traveling roadshow continues to win hearts and minds everywhere it goes:

So that [Bush] could get a private tour of Topkapi and the rest of Istanbul during this NATO summit, they have closed the following for THREE DAYS: coast road from the airport to Dolmabahce, Galata Bridge, Taksim Square, Besiktas stadium valley, Sirkeci ferry terminals, and the first Bosphorus bridge….They recommended before the summit that everyone just leave town, and yesterday everyone I tried to contact was on their way to their summer holiday on the beach. It was like Thanksgiving Wednesday in the U.S.

Anyone who knows Istanbul knows that such a closure literally turns the city into an open-air prison. There are snipers posted on the next building to our hotel, constant military helicopters buzzing around, and naval craft cruising offshore. If only for sacrificing three days of their life for Bush's secure comfort, people here are furious. The trend in the past couple of years has been to hold such summits in remote locations. What brainchild decided to hold this summit smack in the center of one of the world's largest cities, with hostility running so high?

- Dave Gilson

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

12:08 PM
Free at last

Later today, the White House will no doubt give us the dramatic account of how the early Iraq handover unfolded. For those who can't wait, the indispensable Wonkette gives us a sneak preview of some of the soon-to-be-released documents:

The White House will soon be releasing some documents related to the turnover of power in Iraq, including a photo release of the note that Rumsfeld handed to Bush this morning notifying him of the handover. The note was written by Condi Rice, handed to Rumsfeld and passed to Bush.

Here's what it said: "Mr. President, Iraq is sovereign. Letter was passed to Bremer at 10:26 a.m. Iraq time -- Condi."

That's the end of the note, but Bush wrote, "Let Freedom Reign!'' with a black sharpie across the bottom.

Isn't he adorable? Oh, and lest we be confused, Bush wasn't talking about Iraqi freedom. He was talking about his own. As Juan Cole notes, the White House is now looking forward to some well-earned R&R, away from all those badgering reporters asking about bombs and terrorists and all that other unpleasant stuff:

Gwen Ifill said on US television on Sunday that she had talked to Condoleeza Rice, and that her hope was that when something went wrong in Iraq, the journalists would now grill Allawi about it rather than the Bush administration…. Ifill seems to me to have given away the whole Bush show.

- Bradford Plumer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

11:45 AM
The sound and the Fuehrer

When Republicans ran ads in 2002 that juxtaposed Sen. Max Cleland with images of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, it appeared negative campaigning couldn't sink any lower. Until now, as a new Bush re-election ad has spliced in images of Adolf Hitler with Democrats like Al Gore, Howard Dean, and Dick Gephardt.

The ad is titled "The Faces of John Kerry's Democratic Party: The Coalition of the Wild-eyed" and features clips of angry speeches by Kerry supporters, as well as two snippets from an online video comparing Bush to Hitler. Bush spokesman Scott Stanzel told the Associated Press the campaign will not pull the spot:

We're using the video from MoveOn.org to show our supporters the type of vitriolic rhetoric being used by the president's opponents and John Kerry's surrogates.

But there is are a few problems with that analysis. Most importantly, it's misleading to say the Hitler video was from MoveOn.org. Instead, it was a contest entry for the activist group's "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest. More than 1,000 ads were submitted, and the public voted on which they wanted after viewing the entries on the site. Needless to say, the Hitler ad did not win. And as far back as January, MoveOn.org campaign director Eli Pariser explained the situation:

This ad was actually one of 1,000. And you know, we regret having it on the web site, but I'm actually surprised the media is giving it so much attention. This is sort of what happens in democratic decision making. You get genius and you get some nuts. And basically, what's happened here is the RNC has fixated on this ad, trying to distract people from the really powerful critiques that were made in the finalist.

Of course, RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie called the video "the worst kind of political hate speech" back then. This time around, the Bush campaign is blatantly using said "hate speech" to tar its political opposition, posting the ad on its web site and sending a link to Bush's e-mail list, which has about six million members.

The Kerry campaign responded with a statement denouncing the ad and urging Bush to pull the spot:

The fact that George Bush thinks it's appropriate to use images of Adolph Hitler in his campaign raises serious questions about his fitness to spend another four years in the White House. Adolph Hitler slaughtered millions of innocent people and has no place in a campaign that is supposed to be about the future and hope of this nation. The President's use of these images during a month that evoked the memory of World War II is remarkably insensitive to the sacrifices of the millions of people who lost their lives during Hitler's reign of terror.

- Jeff Fleischer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

10:45 AM
Less-than-perfect unions

Joining the "It's the (Iraqi) Economy, Stupid" Brigade is Nathan Newman, who asks: Hey! Where are all the Iraqi labor unions?

Why has Iraq been reduced to a politics of ethnic and religious rivalry? This is a country with a rich history of secular politics, yet all we hear about are religious factions.

At least one reason is that classic non-religious institutions, specifically Iraqi labor unions, have been deliberately sidelined by the Bush administration. And the lack of jobs for Iraqis mean that classic economic interests are not undergirding politics. Instead, the mass of unemployed workers are organizing under the only banner likely to help them survive -- namely the primal support groups of tribe and religion.

Well, I'm not sure if labor solidarity would really cut through all of Iraq's religious tensions, but he has a point. Healthy employment can spruce up even the worst of situations. Unfortunately, according to a report on "The Iraq Jobs Crisis" (PDF), Iraq is nowhere near healthy employment. Over 70 percent of Iraqis worry about job security. Wages are dismal. Foreign workers are hogging all those lucrative reconstruction contracts.

The report lays out a series of smart recommendations, many of them aimed at the international community:

Create jobs now: Give contracting jobs to Iraqi companies, not foreign ones. Stabilize existing employment, create new jobs for Iraqis, and postpone layoffs.

Build civil society: Foster the creation of associations, civic groups, political parties, and trade unions in all sectors of society.

Assist Iraqi trade unions: Aid to Iraq's fledgling union movement from international organizations, governments and coordinated with the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).

Promote human and labor rights: International economic assistance to Iraq should prioritize human and labor rights, in consultation with the International Labor Organization (ILO)

Alas, good luck getting any of those things accomplished. Before he hopped off his proconsul's chair and hightailed it out of Baghdad, Paul Bremer declined to repeal Saddam Hussein's 1987 ban on labor strikes -- though he did set a policy of low taxes. I can't imagine who gave him all those very interesting ideas.

- Bradford Plumer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this

9:40 AM
Meet the insurgents

With the hand-over hurriedly out of the way, it's time to ask: What, exactly, is the new Iraqi government up against? Saturday's Los Angeles Times led with a thorough -- and thoroughly disheartening -- overview of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq. Now that Moqtada al-Sadr has agreed to muzzle his Mahdi Army and become a politician, the Sunni insurgents -- many backed by ex-Baathists -- pose the most immediate threat to Iraq's stability, along with foreign jihadis such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who may or may not enjoy broad Iraqi support. (In a positive recent development, local Sunni and Shiite leaders publicly repudiated Zarqawi.)

Note that the presence of U.S. troops isn't the only problem here. Unlike the Shiite militias, the Sunni insurgents have more in mind than simply killing and expelling Americans -- the Sunnis are genuinely worried about the prospects of an elected government favoring the majority Shia. For their part, many Shiite leaders are ready to declare war on the Sunni insurgents in Fallujah. And to top it off, the foreign fighters want to transform Iraq into a new Afghanistan -- a failed, anarchic state where terrorist camps can operate freely. Marines or no Marines, a full-scale battle is brewing, and all of these groups need to be dealt with separately.

With regards to the Sunnis, the interim government is in a tight spot. PM Iyad Allawi can't simply denounce the U.S. occupation and hope for Sunni support. A full-fledged security crackdown probably won't work either; the insurgents are too shadowy, too loosely organized. Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert, said it well: "They pick up their weapons and join the fight and then go back to their homes and farms. It makes it so fluid." In Friday's Senate hearings, Richard Armitage said it better: "I don't think anyone in this administration can tell with a great deal of accuracy who they are and how many they are."

Another option is shrewd political maneuvering -- namely, trying to co-opt the Sunni clerics who have been inciting the insurgency. But that has its own problems, as the Times piece explains:

On the political front, the new Iraqi government appears to be looking for ways to co-opt the Sunni hard-liners with talk of amnesty and reconciliation, but to date there are few takers. The Fallouja solution -- in which Marines retreated from a bloody siege, essentially turning the town back over to Baathist elements and their insurgent allies - has reduced clashes, but has also created a guerrilla redoubt…

Such prospective accords with the Sunni bloc risk alienating Shiites and the ethnic Kurds, the nation's other major population group.

What does that leave? An economic solution? Ah, an economic solution.... It's a common theme around these parts, I know, but nearly every article on Iraq drops some quote or hint that poverty really does explain a lot. The Times is no exception:

"Since the fall of the regime, not a single penny was allocated to this town," said Awf Abdul Rida Ahmad, the mayor of Buhriz, an agricultural suburb and insurgent stronghold of 40,000 southeast of Baqubah.

Something for the new government to keep in mind.

- Bradford Plumer

Link this     E-mail this     Print this