If Democracy Fails in Iraq, the Next Step is Not a Pull-Out

Here is a theme to think of: Encouraging elections in the Middle East where Mohammedans are dominant backfired on America. Caroline Glick writes a perceptive article on how the Bush Administration had the correct motives but lack the correct understanding of hatred and violence that pervades Mohammedan culture.

This pervasive hatred will not work in a Democracy. Democratic elections in lands of hatred and violence will elect officials that perpetuate hatred and violence. The Palestine Authority elections are example of that. The Iraqi elections are an example of that.

Palestinians elected terrorists that wish to destroy Israel. Iraqis voted for their tribal/familial/religious-sect over stable unity. Thus many Sunnis and Shias are unified on one idea: listen to the Imam. If the Imam says America is an occupying force rather than a liberating force, then it must be so.

America should have found a strong man to support in Iraq that was dedicated to slowly transforming toward Democracy. That was unlikely to happen.

The Bush Administration is left with only one choice: To extricate as many insurgents and rebels from Iraq as possible then leave. Then wait and see where the chips may fall. If America gets lucky it will fall on an Iraqi leader that courts favor from America. I think the chips will fall into a tri-nation scenario that some believe will cause chaos. I do not necessarily believe that. America could ally with one or two of the tri-nation States. I suspect the Shi’ite region is simply to close to Iran. That leaves primarily the Kurds and potentially the Sunnis.