2004 Year in Review

Is this what Americans are fighting for?

President Bush hailed a poll that showed that Iraqis are more positive about their future than Americans are. This may sound like good news, but a closer look at the poll shows that the vast majority of Iraqis want to establish an Islamic Republic. Maybe democracy isn't all its cracked up to be?

Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan, the leading Arab specialist, shows that there is more to the poll than President Bush let on:

President George W. Bush cited a poll done in June and July to argue that Iraqis are more optimistic about their future than Americans are about theirs. First of all, even if this were true, it is not good news for Bush.

Second of all, that poll was done before the US assault on Najaf, and the significant deterioration of the security situation in August and September. Many Iraqis had at that time been willing to give Allawi a chance, hoping security would improve. I am sure those numbers would be much lower now.

Moreover, the same poll found that more than 80 percent of Iraqis want an Islamic Republic with Islamic canon law or shariah as the law of the land. So if they are optimistic, it is because they think they can achieve such a goal over US objections. Again, this is not actually good news for Bush.

President Bush says that the United States is fighting for democracy in Iraq, the right for Iraqis to vote for the type of government they want. But, it seems that what they want is an Islamic Republic based on "Islamic canon".

Americans, used to the separation of Church and State, and a constitution based on the principles of human rights can easily confuse the concept of democracy with human rights. People can choose democratically to form a state which does not hold dear the principles of human rights that Americans take for granted. Human rights and democracy are two distinct and, possibly, contradictory principles.

Under Islamic law, women, for example, would lose many rights that they had under Saddam Hussein. Would freedom of speech and the rights of a free press be protected under Islamic canon? Would non-muslims have the ability to profess their faiths in a democratically elected Islamic state. I think it's unlikely that either would be true in an Islamic Iraq.

This is not to say that there was a great deal of respect for human rights under the Saddam Hussein reign of terror, but women did have more equality and independence in Iraq than most Islamic countries.

It makes you think. If you had to choose between democracy and human rights, which would you choose? Which value is more important?

Is it worth American blood and treasure to secure the right of Iraqis to choose a form of government that would deny them human rights?

by John Legler, Guest Columnist
September 25, 2004