Democracy in Iraq

L.A. Times:

Senior U.S. officials have begun to question a key presumption of American strategy in Iraq: that establishing democracy there can erode and ultimately eradicate the insurgency gripping the country.

The expectation that political progress would bring stability has been fundamental to the Bush administration's approach to rebuilding Iraq as well as a central theme of White House rhetoric to convince the American public that its policy in Iraq remains on course.

But within the last two months, U.S. analysts with access to classified intelligence data have started to challenge this precept, noting a "significant and disturbing disconnect" between apparent advances on the political front and any progress in reducing insurgent attacks.

Now, with next Saturday's constitutional referendum appearing more likely to divide than unify the country, some within the Bush administration have concluded that the quest for democracy in Iraq, at least in its current form, could actually strengthen the guerrillas.

It does seem a bit naive now to think that bringing democracy to an entire country would limit the influence of the less desirable elements in it. There's no reason to think that those who would blow themselves and other up for their cause would suddenly unstrap the vest and find comfort in a voting booth.

It's a beautiful idea- that Democray would change them - but one that is proving less and less practical on a larger front. Those disenchanted with the new Iraq are getting shut out. The Sunnis, and especially the violent opposition don't seem willing to turn back just because they lose a vote. They seem to have something else in mind.

The potential outcomes are a scary mess that keeps us in Iraq longer than anyone imagined (well, anyone's been imagining lately). But hopefully this is a worst case scenario, and things on the ground will unfold in a more positive way. It seems the only policy we have left to cling to in Iraq: hope.