Conventional Wisdom:
Democracy and Islam are incompatible. There's no point in trying to establish a democratic state in the Middle East. They'll never accept it.
Facts
The leading Shiite cleric in Iraq, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, believes Islam and democracy are compatible.42 More than 70% of the mostly Muslim citizens of Iraq voted in their first elections, in January 2005, despite significant risk to life and limb, indicating that they believe they are compatible. Here's how they expressed their views in the new Iraqi constitution:
1st--Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation:
(a) No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam.
(b) No law can be passed that contradicts the principles of Democracy.
(c) No law can be passed that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms outlined in this Constitution.
Assessment
Those who think Islam and democracy are incompatible are at odds with some important stakeholders. These people are (a) Muslims, and (b) citizens of Iraq. We believe their opinions carry more weight than those of the American media elite or the public intellectuals. There are, in fact, many intellectuals who do recognize the importance of a winning strategy in that country.
Kenneth M. Pollack, a Middle East scholar at the liberal Brookings Institution in Washington, wrote in a 2005 editorial in the New York Times that, "critics of the president who make parallels between Iraq and Vietnam are equally wrong. Iraq is far more important. Because of its oil wealth, its location in the most politically fragile region of the world, and its importance in the eyes of Arab nations that wonder if democracy is possible for them too, Iraq is critical to American interests in a way that Vietnam never was."43
Pollack's criticism of the Defense Department strategy in Iraq was the lack of an effective counterinsurgency plan, a reality that was eventually resolved in 2007 with the military Surge directed by General David Petraeus. But the belief that democracy can survive and thrive in that ancient country is a gamble well worth taking.
Reality Check offers an assessment of whether Iraq really posed a threat to the U.S. and other countries, or whether things would probably have been OK if the world had simply continued to "manage" Saddam. The book reflects on the somewhat valid acusations that the plan to win the peace was inadequate, explains what had to be done to respond to situations on the ground, and offers suggestions for further reading on the subject. An assessment is offered of reasons for diminished popular support--globally--of the difficult endeavor in Iraq, and the likelihood that such a series of events could happen again. Also offered are some facts about whether the Iraqi people actually wanted an invasion and democracy, and an analysis of the effect of the war in Iraq on the credibility of the U.N. and the U.S.
Facts are given about the number of successful U.S. military actions that have taken place on foreign soil since WWII--without declarations of war--along with an assessment of the importance of stabilizing Iraq before withdrawing all troops.
Ed Finn, "Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Husaini Sistani: Why we'd better listen to Iraq's influential cleric," Slate.com, Feb. 4, 2004. [http://www.slate.com/id/ Kenneth M. Pollack, "Five Ways to Win Back Iraq," New York Times, July 1, 2005. [http://www.nytimes.com/2005/
Leave a comment