Comment on this story

It’s not about medals, physicals or forged documents

Since both presidential campaigns and the major media outlets seem to be obsessed with a war that ended more than 30 years ago, we did not want to miss the opportunity to put in our own two cents on the subject. Not because we care about whether John Kerry’s purple hearts were received for flesh wounds, or whether President Bush missed his National Guard physical in Alabama, or even about the controversy over CBS’s peddling of potentially forged documents in support of a real or perceived liberal bias. No, because, frankly, such anachronistic fodder only serves as a distraction from the milieu of real issues presently facing this country.

At the top of those real issues is the war we are currently waging in Iraq. And, no, we are not, as Sen. Ted Kennedy has trumpeted, going to draw a direct parallel to the loss of life we suffered in Vietnam. In that war, more than 58,000 American servicemen and women lost their lives. In Iraq, the death toll currently stands at just over 1,000. Also, it should be noted that Iraq is far more strategically significant to the security and interests of the United States than Vietnam ever was.

So what parallels can be drawn between Iraq and Vietnam? One, in particular, seems rather obvious. Graham Greene prophesied the bloody quagmire the United States would stumble into in Vietnam in his great novel, The Quiet American. Set in 1952 at the end of the French Colonial rule, The Quiet American is essentially a morality tale, contrasting the world-weary cynicism of veteran British journalist Thomas Fowler with the idealistic, seemingly naïve, views of Alden Pyle, a U.S. economic aid missionary. As the tale unfolds, however, Greene exposes Pyle as a zealous CIA operative, bent on remaking Vietnam in America’s image at any cost. Toward the end of the book, Fowler and Pyle argue heatedly:

Fowler–“You and your like are trying to make a war with the help of people who just aren’t interested.

Pyle–“They don’t want communism.”

Fowler–“They want enough rice. They don’t want to be shot at. They want one day to be much the same as another. They don’t want our white skins around telling them what they want.”

But Pyle is resolute–seeing Fowler’s pragmatism as prevarication, he argues that the end (democracy) justifies the means (war).

Outraged, Fowler seethes–“Isms and ocracies. Give me the facts.... It’s not as simple as that. Give people democracy and they vote in the communists. Don’t you see?”

Hence, the parallel to the current war in Iraq.

While isms and ocracies make for good sound bites, the fact of the matter is that democracy is not a panacea to cure the ills of Iraq or, for that matter, the Middle East. Theoretically, democracy is the most desired form of government or, at least as Winston Churchill once observed, “the worst form of government save for all others.” But let us not deceive ourselves that democracy is a synonym for freedom and western values.

Sixty percent of Iraq’s population are Shia Muslims. Any truly democratically elected government in Iraq will contain a Shia majority. Such a government would no doubt be closely aligned with Iran, institute sharia (Holy Islamic) law, and be no friend to the United States.

This obvious reality betrays a fundamental flaw in the neoconservative agenda of transforming Iraq into a showplace of democracy and Western-style consumerism that will spread throughout the Middle East and the rest of the Islamic world. What it fails to comprehend is that the innate power of nationalism, coupled with the suspicion and hostility the Islamic world currently holds for America and the West promises a quagmire even deeper, and ultimately deadlier, than the one we faced in Indochina.

At the risk of shedding our idealism, it is time we recognize that Western-style democracy—while certainly an idea worth extolling to the world—cannot be exported at the end of a gun barrel. And in some parts of the world it is not yet even desirable.

For instance, in Saudi Arabia, 60 percent of the population is under the age of 21, which means that a huge portion of that country has been indoctrinated with the anti-American teachings of the extremist wahhabi madrassas. Thus, should democracy replace the Saudi monarchy in the near future, it could only be disastrous for the United States and its allies.

A much more realistic approach to the region and to Islamic radicalism—and one which could ultimately lead toward democracy—is to place continuous pressure on existing governments to reform both the curriculum within their madrassas and the messages espoused in their mosques and by their government-sponsored media so that they do not continue to spread virulent hatred of the United States. Instead of clumsily and disastrously continuing to believe that we can transform the Middle East overnight, it is time that we recognize a superficial understanding of its culture and history can only proliferate the bloodlust and heartache on both sides.

To date, it is unfortunate that neither Sen. Kerry nor President Bush seem willing or able to articulate a clear, concise strategy for the region. Either Bush recognizes the fallacy of a precipitous push toward democracy and is just not leveling with us or, worse, he is a true believer in our ability to perform the impossible. And John Kerry’s stated objective of a complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq before the end of his first term ignores the horrendous destabilization that would almost certainly accompany an American withdrawal from the region.

As fraught with error as Bush’s post-war policies in Iraq have been, the threat of Islamic radicalism cannot be ignored and must not go unchecked; and the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria must respect our military might—particularly when stationed next door. Short of waging war against these nations, which would only make things worse for everyone, we must keep the diplomatic and economic pressure on their respective governments (bolstered by a continuing military presence in the region), making it in their interest to reform. Democracy, at least for now, has little to do with it.

September 23, 2004 • Vol. 14, No. 39 © 2004 Metro Pulse