| |
|
Taking as a fait accompli the American conquest and occupation of Iraq, if you were suddenly and inexplicably put in charge of "nation-(re)building" a war-torn country, what would be your guiding principles for assembling a stable nation (or nations) out of the wreckage that will be Iraq?
In another thread, nutella23 has linked to an article detailing the c.v. of a man who is apparently America's choice (tm) to head up a post-Hussein government. General Nizar Al-Khazraji seems a singularly bad choice because, as the article alleges, he was involved in gassing Iraq's Kurdish population as well as the grand guignol crime of kicking a Kurdish child to death.
As the rebels in Kurdish controlled northern Iraq would likely be America's number one ally on the ground, it stands to reason they'd want a certain recompense for their sacrifices. Namely, a Kurdish state. However, America's ally Turkey wouldn't stand for the creation of an independent Kurdish state, as they have "problems" with their Kurdish minority population as well.
Add to this mess the Shiite minority in Iraq, doubtless Iranian and Saudi meddling, "al qaeda", what's a nation planner to do?
How does one balance the interests of differing national groups, while forming a western-style democracy (presumably, that would be the plan)? Is it better to cut up the country on ethnic lines into autonomous states, or force everyone to "play nice" even though they might've kicked each other's children to death. Do we want a government that "looks like Iraq"? Or seperate-but-equal governments? What is a nation anyway, when borders in this part of the world are so permerable (more so in Central Asia than in the middle east, I guess, but still permeable)
The apposite examples would be the former parts of Yugoslavia and our nearly year-old experiment in Afghanistan. Before offering my own thoughts one how and why nations should be composed, I want to do a little more reading on both situations (though Yugoslavia I could be reading about for years).
Naturally such a project smacks of colonialism; however, with your imaginary selection as grand puba of Iraqi reconstruction, you can try to undo the damage done by colonialism in the first place, being benevolent dictators I know you are. In any case, if the idea of slicing up Iraq is distasteful to you, I invite you to discuss the larger issue of "what is a nation?" ,how nationalism and seperatism play out across the globe, and how one can balance the ideals of self-determinism and multiculturalism within a geographic area. |
|
|
