[From the diaries by susanhu.] “Shi’ite, Sunni and Kurdish negotiators all said there was accord on a bigger role for Islamic law than Iraq had before.
But a secular Kurdish politician said Kurds opposed making Islam “the” — not “a” — main source of law and subjecting all legislation to a religious test.
“We understand the Americans have sided with the Shi’ites,” he said. “It’s shocking. It doesn’t fit American values. They have spent so much blood and money here, only to back the creation of an Islamist state. … I can’t believe that’s what the Americans really want or what the American people want.”
U.S. diplomats, who have insisted the constitution must enshrine ideals of equal rights and democracy, declined comment. ” The Washington Times
Are we really going to accept a measure of responsibility for a constitution like that hinted at in the WashTimes story above?
Let us not kid ourselves, in a state which specifies in the constitution that laws must not “contradict” Islam, there will be profound change in the status of women, the status of non-Islamic religious groups, the status of what Americans think of as basic human rights. Iraq would be a profoundly different place under such a legal regime.
Why? MORE BELOW:
Why? It is because Islam is a religion which takes its form with regard to law on the basis of the collective opinion of Islamic jurists, not on any kind of fixed document like our “Bill of Rights.” The majoritarian balance of power in the new Iraq will evidently be that of the “Twelver” or “Imami” Shia. This is the form of Shiism shared by both Iraqi Shia and Iranian Shia. “Twelver” Shiism functions on the basis of the opinions of certified wise men called Ayatollahs. There is great collegiality among these men whether they are in Iraq or Iran. The legal opinions of senior clerics either on the bench or standing “behind” it in Iraq will be deeply affected by the legal opinions of their colleagues in Qom and other places in Iran. That consensus now includes severe restrictions on the activities and status of women and minorities.
It is reported that Khalilzad, our ambassador in Baghdad, has been willing to compromise the rights of Iraqis, in his zeal to “close” on a draft constitution by tomorrow (22 August, 2005). If this is true, then we need an ambassadorwho understands what America is about and for what purpose our soldiers have suffered death and mutilation.
I have known Khalilzad for a long time. He was an advocate of the later withdrawn “Defense Policy Guidance” of the early ’90s which advocated the pre-emptive use of American power around the world to “do good.”
To accept a regressive constitution which legitimizes discrimation before the law would hardly be “doing good.”
Democracy? If a constutution is adopted which makes the coming of an Islamic state in Iraq inevitable, then there will be no more “purple thumb” days unless they are approved by the “fatwa” of clerical consensus.
Pat Lang
This will no doubt go the way of the ‘constitution’ in Afghanistan..which also has religion trumping any real equality for women/minorities. And I think Khalizad has a hand in ‘helping’ Afghans also.
I’m sure no matter how regressive the constitution will be that our fearless leader will be trumpeting the constitution as another ‘victory’ he can claim in the advance of freedom,..etc etc etc.
As I see it, bush and co, now have set back the hands of time. It is so severe that there will be grave consequences for many in the future. I will wait with great anxiousness to find out if this adminstration gets axed for all they have done.
You are absolutely right Pat. Taking peoples rights away is “they’re” way of keeping the people down. Every right that is chipped away at will erode their freedom and democracy. Just look at what the Bush administration has been able to acheive in five years. Maybe they went to Iraq so they could practice changing/rewriting the consitution here?
that I can see is to pass a limited constitution that only spells out the structure of government, the seperation of powers, the relations of the provinces to the central government, and the schedule and rules of elections.
Any bill of rights must await the ratification of this constitution, the elections and the swearing in of the resulting government.
Let the politicians run on women’s rights or against them. We can let it quietly be known that we will be eager to work with moderate politcians, and we can play on suspicion of Iranian influence in most of the country.
Caving to the Shi’a at this point will cause some serious problems, and not just for us. The Saudis will feel the pain too.
Bush and Co. have been trying to advance the role of religion here in this country since the beginning of this administration. Besides, if they stop it, in the name of true democracy, the Osama’s of the world can say, see, America hates Islam. While the people forced to live in the theocracy will hate us because we didn’t stop it.
Damned if we do, damned if we don’t – because we should have never invaded Iraq in the first place.
Theocracy is on the march, at home and abroad.
that George Bush is in trouble.
It is clear that he and the rest of the bushies have no idea whatsoever how to fix this thing.
It is becoming clear that their current policy is to create something, anything that they can call a victory and get out.
It is clear that they do not, if they ever did, care about the results in Iraq.
This is the point at which the words “traitor” and “George Bush” come together in my mind. His political concerns are of far more importance to him then that of the good of the United States of America.
I thought that what they would end up doing was creating another Saddam, another strong man to control the country. Hideous but it seemed to me like their only, their typical way out. It did not occur to me that they would be so cowardly and… even as totally inept and incompetent as they have shown themselves to be… it did not occur to me that they would actively engage in setting up a fundamentalist Islamic state in Iraq. I can’t even ask “In what way does this make America safer” because the question is just plain stupid. The real question is just how much damage have these people really done to us and our safety as a nation?
I understood why Ford pardoned Nixon and could accept it.
When Bush is out of office he should be charged with crimes against the state… he and all of his cronies. Every investigation should be continued once they are out of the way and every crime should be prosecuted and everyone of them should be put away for a long, long time.
It’ll give us something to do with all those renovations at Guantanamo.
From Voices of Iraq:
Constitution draft ready in 24 hours -Baiyati
By Kawthar Abdul Amir
Baghdad, Aug 21, (VOI)
[edit]
“Technical committees in the charter panel are working on solving the technical snags and rephrasing the sentences to avoid double meaning on some issues,” he told a news conference in Baghdad.
On federalism, the main bone of contention on Iraq’s permanent constitution, Baiyati said it was agreed that the political system of Iraq should be a federal one yet applying that depends on three basic conditions.
“Those conditions state that the provincial council be consulted, a referendum should be held in any governorate that wants to turn into a provincial system and a law should be enacted on resources sharing between the centre and the province,” Baiyati added.
Concerning women’s rights in the constitution he said that 25% of the parliament seats would be reserved for women “without any time limit” while on personal status it was agreed that everyone is entitled to fall back to his religion and doctrine.
We -the US, broke it- and we will never own it- and like the typical bull in the china shop- what the owners want- is get the bull out.
The Bush administration — and its minions around the world, including Khalilzad — have no sincere interest in women’s rights, in human rights, in ideals and realities of democracy.
The “purple thumbs” will become as quaint as prohibitions against torture.
Bush et al. have bigger issues and goals on their brains.
All day, Peter Daou has has this quote up at Salon‘s Daou Report (subscription):
WaPo: ”I don’t see any difference between Saddam and the way the Kurds are running things here,” said Nahrain Toma, who heads a human rights organization, Betnahrain.”
Human rights are no more a priority of the U.S. than they were for Saddam. Oh sure, there’s rhetoric. But that is ALL it is.
I am disgusted. And heartsick about this mess. Particularly while pundits consume their time with debates on the left’s influence on Cindy Sheehan and the cable news channels obsess about the latest missing pretty white woman.
– Juan Cole (Emphasis mine.)
Since 1950, when has the U.S. ever overthrown a government and replaced it with a democracy?? Maybe we’re all forgetting how the Ayatollahs in Iran got there in the first place.
Why is everyone so surprised? Disappointed I understand but surprised?
Pax
You’re misreading our expressions here. We are not surprised. But we cannot help but express, again, our disgust.
It’s been clear for years now that Bush’s (and Laura’s) blather about women’s rights was just that … blather. They made no serious effort to ensure women’s rights.
I have read that there are a few improvements in Afghanistan .. more girls are going to school. But, Iraq is a different situation in that most women had significant secular rights under Saddam, a fact that probably most Americans do not know, but which the people at BooTrib most assuredly know.
At this point, having gone in there and wrecked the place, it’s either an Islamic constitution or civil war. Maybe an Islamic constitution with civil war for dessert.
This choice is so far out of the hands of everyone who isn’t a leading member of the Iraqi government, the head of an Iraqi militia or an Iranian Ayatollah that it’s pointless to talk anymore about what we want. It’s as useless as suggesting that the Bush administration offer up a liberal SCOTUS nominee, basically not going to happen.
The only thing that seems left for us to do is to talk about how we got here and who’s responsible. The only effect that’s going to have is on the next election in the US, but either way, the Iraqis are well past giving a damn what the ‘free’ world thinks. As much as this bugs me, I can’t say I entirely blame them for not caring whether or not anyone else approves.
Bush had a chance, he blew it, and there’s no way anyone can pick up the pieces now.
so really it is up to them what they put in it. I may not like it but I do respect their right to try and form their own constitution, which has to be accepted in a referendum too.
The lesson to be learned is that we should not go running around destroying countries to bring “freedom and democracy” only to find what we create the conditions for may be worse than what we destroyed.
The war in Iraq is over and Iran won — that is the situation right now. Islamic terrorists are operating with impunity in what is now a failed state.
I cannot understand why the people who implemented this are still in power.
-Jean