Pajamas Media

Who Do Iraqis Want to Be U.S. President?

Iraqis know that their future may ride on who enters the White House in 2008. Still, in Baghdad, it's a long way to November.

March 27, 2008 - by Omar Fadhil

Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers

While common sense suggests that Iraq would be very interested in the U.S. presidential race — given the immense influence of U.S. decision-making on the situation in the country — we see that the local media in Iraq have largely been ignoring the developments of the Democratic and Republican primaries. Moreover, we have hardly heard any comments from the political class, and the average person on the street is not as interested about the American election as they were in 2004.

What could be the reasons for this?

The first, I believe, is that the clock in Baghdad ticks slower than the clock in Washington. It’s very likely that the media and politicians are not yet interested in the American election simply because there’s still plenty of time left until Americans get to make their final decision. Meanwhile, everyone in Iraq is busy living with immediate domestic challenges and issues of daily life.

There are, however, other likely reasons for the country’s lack of interest. The political class, for example, is perhaps reluctant to endorse or oppose any of the three candidates. This is a natural defense mechanism. They don’t want to throw in their lot with one candidate and then have to deal with a winner they opposed. That would be a great political risk to take for any Iraqi politician or party, especially since the Iraqi election is only 12 months after the American one. The media, being largely reflective of the viewpoints of the government or political parties outside the government, are expected then to exhibit the same kind of behavior in order not to undermine their political sponsors or affiliates.

While I expect the silence of the media and politicians to last through the coming months, the average Iraqi will begin to get more and more interested in the subject. From previous experience, I believe this will become visible once there are only two candidates competing for the presidency. That’s when the clock will — finally — start ticking in Baghdad.

No opinion polls have been conducted to see which of the three candidates (McCain, Clinton, Obama) is viewed most favorably by Iraqis. If I were to try to predict their feelings, I’d start by restating the fact that most Iraqis are concerned first and foremost about their living conditions — economy, security, water, electricity — and they care primarily about coming up with solutions to these problems. Iraqis have also come to realize that their problems are essentially domestic, arising from the struggle among political powers. These in turn are complicated by regional interference, which is most of the time permitted by those very same political powers.

Therefore, the solution has to come from within, and from within only. Yet we cannot ignore that this requires a foreign factor represented by the American presence. This presence is the only hope for creating the environment under which the solution from within can be reached. This is exactly the rationale for the surge, of which McCain has been one of the strongest proponents, if not its main architect.

While many Iraqis may be oblivious to that last fact, I believe there’s wide agreement that Iraq still needs America’s commitment to the democratic project in the country. Perhaps this belief is more prevalent among ordinary people than it is among politicians, particularly those who aren’t sincerely interested in the idea of a unified state. Those politicians, while still more or less silent, view the American presence as a restraint to their ambitions in the long run. They feel they have mustered the tools of power that would enable them to survive and prevail against their rivals — including the not-yet-strong central government in Baghdad — if they enter a struggle to realize their ambitions of walking away with a big enough chunk of the country; the SIIC of Hakim embodies this trend. There are also the Kurdish leaders who are growing more dissatisfied with the current administration’s “complicity” in Turkey’s operations in Kurdistan and are receiving American criticism for the undemocratic way in which they’ve been running their political parties and the Kurdish region so far.

In contrast with ordinary people — or at least with the predicted opinion of ordinary people — these two groups of politicians would rather see an administration that wants to walk away from the problem than one that wants to solve the problem.

This has encouraged Republican leaders, in particular John McCain, to visit Baghdad to negate the state of reluctance that accompanies the waiting for the American election results. This state of reluctance and the delay in passing laws are not good for the democratic process as a whole.

Visits like this, with the absence of similar visits from Democrats, have two dimensions: first, they push the political process in Iraq in order to achieve stability there, which would help the Republicans in the elections. Second, it makes Iraqi politicians and the public understand that a change in the administration does not necessarily mean abandoning Iraq and the immediate withdrawal of troops from the country. The Iraqi government has to work on these basics instead of standing by idly and wasting precious time.

Omar Fadhil is PJM Baghdad editor. His own blog is Iraq The Model.

11 Comments

vb:

Omar,
James McFarlane had an article on yesterday’s Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal. He described a Cairo meeting of Iraqi clerics in which they called for a resolution of sectarian differences. I would love to hear your take on this. Do you think these people are serious? Will their efforts have any resonance in the general population?

Thank you for providing us with so much insight into your country.

Mar 27, 2008 - 2:41 am DagneyT:

Omar, it doesn’t matter who the new president is, Iraq will not be abandoned…despite the rantings of the two Democrat candidates.

Hope all is well in your family, and that your studies are going well. We’ve missed you!

Mar 27, 2008 - 2:26 pm Robin Westin:

Dagney T, the only rantings come from President Bush who discovered the words Sunni and Shia only two months before “shock and awe”; and from neoconservative war-mongers who make sure they and their children aren’t the ones sent to die in Iraq.

Mar 27, 2008 - 3:31 pm Kafir:

Gee, Robin, are you stuck in the ’60s or what? There’s no draft to get a deferment from. The way to keep your children from being sent to war is to keep them from enlisting. Also, let’s say that two hundred thousand soldiers have been rotated in and out of Iraq over the years. Of that number, 4,000 have died there. That means soldiers going to Iraq have only a 2% chance of dieing there, and that’s over five years. The odds during a 12 or 15 month deployment are even less. If we’re sending people to die, this is a lousy way of getting it done.

Mar 27, 2008 - 4:53 pm Carole Winder:

I am so sick of all the free publicity BO seems to be enjoying on every talk show, news show, media outlet, including this one by insertions of his picture, his sayings, his comments, etc.etc.etc. This man is not at all truthful or capable of being our President. He refuses to salute our flag which so many Americans of all races have died for throughout our history as a nation; he refuses to wear a flag pin as a US Congressman; he seems to want to stir up racial hatred in order to overtake our presidency by default based on faulty reasoning and his own self hatred as a person of mixed race which he is most delighted to “transfer” to those Americans who for whatever reason carry guilty consciences either for good or for ill.

I, for one, am weary of all this muddled thinking engendered by him which only causes further confusion, sadness, differences, and the like. I am exceedingly offended by his claim and that of others that we all have heard things from the pulpit which are offensive. I all my years I have never heard any pastor of any truly Christian persuasion spouting hatred, division, malice w/foresight of thought, and blasphemy w/regard to the Real Jesus Christ by claims that these are His thoughts and ways; further, since he and his pastor dared to claim knowledge of Jesus Christ, they might be reminded that Jesus suffered all injustices for the sake of all in silence without murmuring against his persecutors to demonstrate how we are to act in similar circumstances - not w/hatred and anger and malice toward others but w/openness and loving kindness to all - even those who despise us.

Christ himself tells us who the father of liars is - and that anyone who lies intent on deception belongs to this father and not the Father of Jesus Christ, and our Father, God. How long are we going to be deceived by this deception? As to the “good” that BO claims his pastor has done - Jesus also responds: “If you love those who love you, what good is there in that? Even pagans do the same. But I say to you Love you enemies, do good to those that hate you, and then you will be children of the Father.”

I am very fearful for this nation of Christian-Judeao roots that is so bewitched by a man such a BO who so blatantly displays his scorn for the Bible, for our history as a nation, and for our patriots who died so that he might live in this land of freedom, albeit imperfect, but better than anywhere else on this planet.

W/regard to rehashing the slavery issue and the civil rights issue - let me remind people who talk of reparation to the blacks for their enslavement; and of their “rights” as citizens of this nation for equal opportunity. Visit Gettysburg and you will find all the “blood reparation” paid by Americans of both white and black race to gain the black people their freedom even at the peril of other white people who refused to let them live in freedom. This is the greatest reparation they can ever receive from their fellow citizens who lost not just their own lives, but impacted forever the lives of their families, friends and neighbors w/the loss of fathers, sons, brothers, nephews, cousins, husbands, etc.etc.etc.

And due to the profuse spilling of this blood that cried to heaven at the injustice of slavery in this nation, and the white President who lead the charge to his own death, let no one even forget that terrible price paid, larger than any other which has engaged this nation. The price was paid in full, in blood and sorrow.

W/regard to their civil rights, I quite agree w/Sen. Clinton, that w/o the engagement of a white President, LBJ and a primarily white congress, MLK speech would never had produced the outcome which was obtained in the 60’s. And even w/his speech it impelled many white people from throughout this nation to also join MLK in his march and protest, even to some loss of lives, so again it was not gained by “black power” alone.
However beyond that time in history, this nation has indeed progressed while the majority of the black people have not - not because white people have kept them down - but due to their own lack of initiative.
Those blacks who have been driven to succeed,have done so even from the depths of deprivation, poverty, neglect, abuse and grief, ie. Oprah; Denziel Washington;Bill Cosby; George Carver Washington; Colin Powell; Condie Rice; Jesse Jackson; Gov. Patterson of NY. and others in every walk of life just like their white counterparts. NO one is handed anything. Everyone must work to succeed in life for the goal they themselves set regardless of race. But admittedly in other countries w/o our civil right freedoms people often cannot reach their potential due to the absence of even the merest pretense of human rights.

People are tried of hearing the claimants of people either black or white who refuse to help themselves. One of the first rules one learns of maturity is take responsibility for your actions and watch your expectations - unrealistic expectations can really maim one. This brings to mind the sub-prime crisis and educational opportunities. People knowingly purchased what they could not afford in many cases, hoping somehow for a rescue somewhere along the line. Granted the real estate industry is rife w/dishonest realtors, brokers, loan sharks, etc. and has long been so thereby producing an unsustainable housing bubble. Our Government is not BIG DADDY who rushes in to SAVE irresponsible people from their own doing. Remember WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE GOVERNMENT and therefore WE THE PEOPLE pay the price whenever government is called upon to rescue “victims” of their own follies.

Michelle O. complains about “Having to pay back their student loans - hers and BO - which they acquired by attending some of the most expensive universities in this nation; despite the fact that both of them earn 6 figure salaries or above and are well educated due to the generosity of taxpayers of this nations most of whom are white and black middle class working people. And w/their expensive educations one would suppose that they would understand that a “LOAN” is precisely that - “A LOAN” indicating that when one procures of any amount for any reason, IT MUST BE REPAID and IT IS THE RESPONSIBLE THING TO DO. Also, I would add IT IS A SIGN OF DEEP GRATITUDE TO THE LENDER. The money is in rightfully theirs so if they resent repayment of the LOAN, they demonstrate a tremendous show of INJUSTICE themselves - the very thing of which they so LOUDLY and PITIFULLY COMPLAIN.

We need a President who reminds us of CHRIST who says “I CAME SERVE; NOT TO BE SERVED”

Most assuredly we have such people in this nation who have proved their sincerity w/actions. “WORDS ARE MEANT TO COMMUNICATE TRUTH; OTHERWISE THEY ARE EMPTY BOMBAST SIGNIFYING NOTHING.”

Mar 27, 2008 - 5:07 pm Ron:

It seems most liberals are a little confused. They seem to think it is the 60’s and we are drafting men to send to Nam. Sorry to inform them that everyone serving in the military volunteered for duty. In spite of fiery rhetoric to the contrary, there are many sons of conservatives serving. Facts don’t seem to be that important to the liberal brain. Everyone should make a point to see the short documentary about Islamic forces in the Netherlands. It is terrifying to say the least.

Mar 27, 2008 - 5:50 pm Brian H:

Carole;
When I read a Christian holding forth on politics and how it relates to their religion, I have come to expect to see the tract go off the rails into some form of special pleading and proselytization partway through. Your post eschews and avoids this admirably. A fine, fine contribution to the debate. Thank you.

Mar 27, 2008 - 10:08 pm Shields Green:

Neither Clinton nor McCain will abandon the Iraqi people. Both will dis-engage only when the Iraqis can fully step in, and only when Al Qaida in Iraq has been marginalized. Unfortunately Clinton is pandering to the part of her base that could care less about the Iraqi people and think that our policy should be to abandon them and expose them to an ensuing power vacuum that would result in potentially catastrophic loss of live, a period of complete anarchy and then a return to dictatorship. All this would be fine with them as long as we left… Clinton is not stupid. She will “betray” this part of her base once in office and will do the right thing, although she will present herself, incorrectly, as being in the position of cleaning up her predecessor’s “mess” in order to save political face. But, she will not hastily abandon the Iraqi people. She understands the broader dynamics and the stakes involved.

Obama, I believe, sincerely thinks that the best policy would be to surrender and withraw as soon as possible. He lacks an understanding of the broader dynamics of the problem and threat of Islamic Extremism, and he grossly under-estimates its threat to the wellbeing of the U.S. and the West. He seems to think that if we just took out Osama, the problem would go away. In the public eye, Obama is like the opposite of George Bush. Bush is more savvy and intelligent than he comes across through his speech. People underestimate him and his intelligence because he is not a great speaker. Obama, on the other hand, will almost certainly be highly over-estimated by his followers. His charisma overshadows his lack of experience and naive points of view. His followers believe he is the answer to everything, and unfortunately, many of them secretly applaud the anti-American undertones of his behavior and his associations. His followers see him as a new and refreshing face. Those of us who see through him see a man who brings nothing but criticism of his country from one side of his mouth and meaningless soaring emotional rhetoric of generic “change” from the other with no real substance.

McCain is the only straightforward candidate who has shown his willingness to put his political future at risk by taking, at times, unpopular positions that he knew were the right positions. His boldness in confronting, not just the left, but the right as well, with solutions that are actually solutions rather than political pandering, is refreshing. His handling of the NY Times’ poor attempt at a smear campaign was spot on and something that GW could learn from. McCain, in my view, is the only true leader of the three candidates.

Mar 28, 2008 - 11:15 am Andrea:

Obama feels we must withdraw from Iraq to gain credibility with nations who opposed the war there. Then, when those nations see our genuine “goodwill”, they will miraculously agree to help us fight in Afghanistan.

In other words, Obama wants to appease our critics to get them to agree to help us.

Can’t you just see the Europeans lining up to volunteer forces after we’ve left Iraq? Neither can I.

Mar 29, 2008 - 11:05 am