Redstate

By streiff Posted in Iranian meddling | Larry Kaplan | Moqtada al-Sadr | The New Republic | War — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

On the heels of the Kennedy meltdown appears a thoughtful piece by Larry Kaplan in the New Republic, The Tragic End to a Liberal Iraq in which he, probably correctly, predicts that those candidates representing Western liberal democratic values will be routed in this weekend’s elections.

According to Kaplan liberal, secular elements in the nation have been losing influence and power to the religiously dominated candidate slates such as that favored by Grand Ayatollah Sistani. Kaplan seems to believe that the fate awaiting Iraq is an Islamic theocracy:

The signature proposals of many candidates on the Sistani list span the entire spectrum of illiberalism, from rolling back women's rights to stipulating in the constitution that Iraq be an Islamic state.

Though a thoroughly democratized Iraq emerging from the smoldering ashes of the Saddam Hussein regime like Minerva from the brow of Zeus would be nice was that a reasonable expectation in the first place? And does the failure of such a state to emerge constitute a failure?

In fairness to Kaplan he obviously wrote this article before Moqtada al-Sadr withdrew from the elections. Without the presence of several members of Sadr’s party on the Sistani list much of his fear of a theocracy dissipates. Much evidence suggests that far from wishing to impose a theocracy, Sistani has seen how direct involvement in government has brought the clergy into disrepute in Iran. Reuel Marc Gerecht writes in the Atlantic Monthly

"I also met Sheikh Muhammad al-Haqqani--a highly respected teacher and senior cleric of Iranian origin, who is close to Sistani. At his religious school in Najaf, Haqqani invited me to join a group of Iraqi and Iranian clerics for a spread of lamb, chicken, and river fish. "We want a non-Islamic government that is respectful of Islam," he told me during lunch. "There is a serious discussion of the Islamic Republic and the idea of Islam in Iraq. After Saddam there is a strong desire to have more Islam here. We will not be Turkey. The Turkish Republic is offensive to the idea of Islam. However, very few people want to see an Islamic revolution and the velayat-e faqih [Iran's "rule of the jurisconsult"]. There is no strong desire here to copy the Islamic Republic."

The clerics I spoke with were aware of the stakes, at home and abroad. "We need the Americans, but the Americans need us," I was told by Sayyid Ali al-Waiz, a senior Shiite cleric at Baghdad's Kadhimein shrine, one of the holiest in Iraq. "Democracy in the Middle East will not be possible without us." Dressed in white, Waiz was bedridden and weak (if not dying) from twenty-three years of detention under Saddam. When I asked about the possibility that an anti-democratic Shiite militancy would gain the upper hand in Iraq, Waiz mildly reproved me: "We are all agents of Sistani, who is our marja ['source of emulation'--the highest rank for a Shiite cleric]. He is a rational religious scholar. He wants us to live religious lives, but not have religion dictate politics. We must have democracy, not revolution, in Iraq."

Much more evidence supports the idea that al-Sadr has withdrawn his party from the election because he knows there is no support for his vision of an Islamic Republic. While much is made of the money Iran is pumping into several Iraqi parties, resulting in Sistani’s list being referred to as the Iranian List by Defense Minister Hazem Shalaan there is a question of whether on not this money is buying very much. It is the age old conundrum faced by purveyors of bribes in dealing with erstwhile clients. Are they bought or are they rented? And if they are bought do they stay bought?

Kaplan does break new ground by complaining of US evenhandedness

And, while Teheran has funded the major Shia parties to the tune of $20 million, Washington has refused to play favorites, insisting instead on a strict policy of "evenhandedness." This may seem like evidence of high-mindedness. But the United States boasts a long history of favoring pro-U.S. political organizations abroad. The decision to do otherwise here reflects a broader logic of the U.S. mission: Democracy first; liberalism later.

If the quest for democracy first and liberalism later surprises Kaplan he should take a close look at President Bush’s Inaugural Address

Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.

But even if we can discount the election of a significant number of candidates sympathetic to a mullahocracy, will a dominant presence of religiously oriented parties signify a negative outcome?

My personal view is that it will not. I don’t subscribe to the idea that having a secular government is in and of itself a good outcome. I certainly don’t hold the idea of legal separation between a people and their religious heritage in talismanlike status as do many. The acknowledgement of the obvious fact that Iraq is an Islamic nation is no more a predictor of a theocracy that the fact that the Queen of England is also the head of the Church of England.
Neither does it a priori indicate religious intolerance. The outcome we are looking for is the rule of law.

Considering our experience with the Iranian version of an Islamic state we have ample reason to be cautious. And given our geostrategic rivalry with Iran as well as its nascent nuclear weapons program we have additional reason for concern.

But to expect a nation to cast off its traditions in favor of a coterie of Iraqi liberals, most of whom are no doubt well intentioned and passionate; who were largely expatriates during the Saddam era is unrealistic. And to establish their electoral success as an important indicator of an emerging civil society to Iraq strikes one as moving the goalposts.