Iraqis have learned little from the past
Iraq-USA, Editorial, 8/26/2005

With the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein's regime, it is hard to see how a new constitution, no matter how bad it is, that it would not be an improvement over the past. But the question should be: is this the best that Iraqis can do, at what could be a most defining moment in their history?

The US which in effect single handedly destroyed almost every aspect of Iraqis' life, from an economic siege and military attacks that lasted for some 14 years. The US sponsored UN sanctions had destroyed the economy and cultural life of Iraqis, and the daily and yearly military attacks on Iraq's infrastructure (electricity, bridges, communication utilities, etc.) destroyed other portions of the economy. The little that was left operational in Iraq was destroyed in a final invasion, which as of yet, we have not seen the end of its consequences in the uncounted numbers of daily civilian Iraqi death that averages about 30 Iraqis every single day being killed (not counting the wounded, or the economic harms) according to a conservative study. 30 civilians killed per day for an Iraqi population of 26 million, is the equivalent of about 300 Iraqi civilians having or are being killed every day if the Iraqi population was the same size as that of the United States (US is more than 10 times the population size of Iraq). The US has made a historic and major mistake against Iraq. Iraq, is not just a name, it is 27 million individuals, father, mothers, sons, daughters and babies, who have been greatly injured by what the US and those who have promoted the war had done to them. Therefore, the US has major moral and material obligation to every Iraqi citizen, whether they like these obligations or not.

The Iraqis are now trying to draft a constitution. The US, being the longest constitutional democracy in history, knows a thing or two about constitutions, and what works and what does not work after more than 200 years of experience. It has some of the finest legal minds about these issues. The question is, if the US owes its success, prosperity, and liberty, to its constitution, as many would claim, then why is the US not having in Iraq along with the billions of dollars spent on military and security forces, a couple of million dollars to have these brilliant constitutional legal minds in Iraq to help them draft this constitution? Many of these people, I am sure, would be glad to volunteer their efforts just for being given the chance to help.

Is the US afraid that it would be seen as interfering in Iraqi affairs? Yes, that can be a concern. But at this point, it is a moot point. The US is fully deployed, involved and engaged, and playing political hide and seek is of little concern to those who want to see results achieved at this critical juncture.

The US had in the past wanted simple majority votes by the Iraqi parliament for treaties so that it can have military treaty rights with Iraq. That was wrong. The US ambassador in Iraq this week said the draft Iraqi constitution "contains the most far-reaching democratic and human rights commitments that exist in any constitution in this part of the world." That is wrong. What exactly does that mean: to have a good constitution for this part of the world? Is this standard that the US seeks? Since when have the Arab states been a standard for world constitutions?

The Iraqi constitution now wants to ban Baathists, and terrorist organizations and organizations that promote racism. What happened to the freedom of speech? Do the Kurds know that they were classified as "terrorists" by Saddam Hussein's regime? Do the Shiites and Sunnis know that anyone can be labeled a terrorist or a racist and be put in jail in a dictatorship? It is a matter of who happened to be in charge. If the Shiites are in charge they can declare Arabs Sunnis or Kurds as racists. It is a matter of definition, and that is why these articles of the Iraqi constitution are an open door for future oppression and to circumvent other more important rights, and dissent. While it sounds good to have a law that says we want to ban terrorism and racism, it is a very wrong idea. When someone is calling a Kurd a terrorist, then that Kurd should have the right to speak back and organize and do what ever he wants to do peacefully, to be able to speak out their opinions no matter how unpopular these opinions are. The same goes for Shiites and Sunnis, and the Christians and Chaldeans and the Assyrians etc.

The Islamists want religion in the state. Which Islamic country in the world gives you rights to speak and practice your religious values and way of life? The more religion in these countries' laws, the less you have in rights. Look around you. Where do you find you can practice your religion in freedom and to speak your mind about religion? Is it in the Arab states or in the West? Then why do you not see that adding religion to the constitution, and laws, takes away from your rights, rather than adds to it. Even if you cannot understand these concepts, you should at least look around you to see the results.

Also, what kind of future do Iraqis want? A culture of forgiveness and moving beyond the past, or forever be attached to it. Baathists are people like any other Iraqis. It is an ideology. But the system was the problem and not Baathism. It was dictatorship. You can a have a Baathist, a communist, a fascist, or other kinds of dictatorships. The problem is not Baathism, but dictatorship. That is why Baathists, who are for the most part as good of people as any other Iraqis, were a victim of a bad system, even if it was of their own creation. If Iraqis do not built a good system now, they will be vulnerable to the same problems in the future. I do not know, if in total, Saddam Hussein's regime killed more Iraqi people then the US has. I do not know if Saddam Hussein's regime did more economic and cultural damage to Iraq than the US has. Motives can be of little value if the results are the same.

Vengeance breeds vengeance. What is needed is forgiveness for all. Everyone has their hands full of blood. And enough of that. Forgiveness has much value in it. Forgiveness to each other from the problems of the past and to set their sites on the future. The Iraqis are a vibrant people with incredible resources: intellectual, civilizational, and economic. Are Iraqis going to join together in a well-built system so that they can cooperate together and built a strong democratic and prosperous nation, or fall pray to tribalism, ethnic and religious division that infects the region?

The US is an overseer of Iraq. The US shot the victim, and needs to attend to it. This victim needs hospitalization, and saying we are giving him good medical treatment relative to treatment available in the Arab states, will not do. The US has moral obligation to give this victim the best medical treatment available anywhere in the world, that it needs, and to make it strong, and watch over it like it was it's own life was at stake.

The US has many motives and is under many conflicting pressures. But, the US has intentionally and severely injured a nation, and it needs to live up to its responsibility.

By,
Jamil Talaat Kazoun

Previous Stories:
  Religion injected into Iraqi draft constitution   (8/25/2005)
  Religion injected into Iraqi draft constitution   (8/25/2005)
  Articles from the draft Iraqi constitution; simple majority to change Iraq's province structures   (8/25/2005)
  US views on the Iraqi constitution draft process   (8/24/2005)
  Bush optimistic on Iraqi constitution   (8/24/2005)
  A constitution for Iraq   (7/2/2005)

Please add a link on your webiste pointing to ArabicNews.com and bookmark ArabicNews.com & subscribe to our daily email news bulletin.

Search