# Lounsbury on Iraq & MENA: War, Politics, Economy & Related Questions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 26, 2003, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259 "2003-03-26T08:44:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![Azael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a8b319/32.png) [@Azael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Azael)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/321 "2003-04-01T00:57:47Z")
While you are at it **Eva Luna** there should be a requirement for real administrative experience as well. W was governor of Texas before he was elected, what isn’t immeadiately obvious is that the Lt. Governor actually runs things. ---
**Author:** ![istara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e79b87/32.png) [@istara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/istara)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/322 "2003-04-01T05:11:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by j.c. \* > **Collounsbury, if you have time for a minor question** , what do you look like? I ask because, among certain groups, I can move about unnoticed and overhear all kinds of interesting things. If you have blond hair and blue eyes, obviously, you’ll have a harder time eavesdropping. Now _that’s_ the billion dollar question!! My WAG is an older version of the guy at the start of Agatha Christie’s [_ **They Came To Baghdad** _](http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0002318539/qid=1049173898/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_0_3/202-9351777-2871852), the one who gets killed (but IMO should have ended up the love interest). 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/323 "2003-04-01T05:34:03Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by j.c._ > In earlier posts, you [Collounsbury] have used and accepted arguments that not only indicate that Arabs are incapable of democracy, but also that sounded a lot like the arguments sometimes given for why certain African-Americans are incapable of becoming physicists. That may not be what you meant to convey, but it came across that way to at least a half-dozen people. This seems to have been tempered somewhat, by you and others, since the third person agreed with Lib. I’ve been following the thread and I did not get that impression. On the contrary, I think Collounsbury has been talking straight on the matter, repeating several times that there are some elements of democracy across the Arab world but that (as he put it four or five times at least) they need to be nurtured carefully in order to develop further into meaningful institutions. He did not, as far as I can tell, state or imply that Arabs are incapable of democracy. Perhaps you and Lib misread the same comment? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/324 "2003-04-01T06:59:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by j.c. \* > In earlier posts, you have used and accepted arguments that not only indicate that Arabs are incapable of democracy, but also that sounded a lot like the arguments sometimes given for why certain African-Americans are incapable of becoming physicists. That may not be what you meant to convey, but it came across that way to at least a half-dozen people. This seems to have been tempered somewhat, by you and others, since the third person agreed with Lib. I certainly did not. I believe that I was continually explicit on, as Abe has pointed out, the possibilities in the Arab world, including the ‘roots’ of democratic developments. I **was** and **am** harshly critical of the uninformed notion that a Stalinist system laid over a fractured not-quite-nation is ready for democracy. Those are **specific comments** to a **specific situation** and I believe well based on emperical evidence in re democratic development in the developing world and generally. If you and others did not follow that, well I am sorry but I can’t control for readers’ lack of background etc. > [@](#): > > **Collounsbury, if you have time for a minor question** , what do you look like? I ask because, among certain groups, I can move about unnoticed and overhear all kinds of interesting things. If you have blond hair and blue eyes, obviously, you’ll have a harder time eavesdropping. I am a dark colored WASP, with a bit of gel to the hair, I pass quite nicely for a variety of things. It is my habit not to look foreign, for a variety of reasons, except perhaps for my excessive love of Italian suits. I do not believe saying more is particularly interesting. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/325 "2003-04-01T07:03:03Z")
Depends my dear fellow, depends. Currency value decline in a slow steady manner, yes, in and of itself. However there is this issue of desirability of US assets, including bonds, and ability to fund our chronic savings deficit. Given overseas US assets look less safe and attractive than in the past, there are some non-trivial issues that pose for a non-saving US. An argument, then, for fiscal good practices. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Spiritus Mundi \* > \*\*I am unqualified to give thorough comment upon most of the economic analysis in this thread. In regards to teh US situation, though, I think an important note needs to be made about currency devaluation. In foreign countries that have suffered greviously from currency falls, one of the major issues is that the governments owed debt in a foreign currency (specifically $US, for teh most part). If the United States suffers a marked currency decline, this is less of a hardship for ourselves and more of a hardship for the foreign debt holders (domestic holders of debt have their expected returns devalued at the same rate as local expenses, and thus are insulated.) \*\* ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/326 "2003-04-01T07:04:46Z")
Let me point out once more that it is well known in the region that the USA backed the Baath party in its rise and in the much later war with IRan. The hypocrisy is clear – and mind you understandable at a level but let us not be surprised at the sceptical reaction or pretend that all are fighting us at the point of a gun. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cervaise \* > \*\*Regarding the confusion about why Joe Iraqi has such deep distrust of the Bush Administration’s motives, I wonder if [this](http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/rumsfeld.80s.jpg) might have something to do with it. Yes, that’s Rummy himself, in 1983. The ordinary Arab citizen remembers clearly what we in the West have either forgotten or never even knew. Looking at that, there’s no wonder the administration’s rhetoric rings hollow for the Arab in the street. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/327 "2003-04-01T07:07:23Z")
Cyber my old man Well, the warnings to Syria and Iran were quite understandable on one level, but again we fall into the area of how as opposed to should. The public warnings, their fairly arrogant and bullying tone, the timeing and placement by Powell, yes if you want to cite more needless own goals on the public diplomacy front, well here is more ammunition. Of course the Arab world saw this as yet more examples of the US clearly playing Israel’s game. Did not go down well. And could have been done differently. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CyberPundit \* > \*\*“By the way, I know I have neglected and lost track of some items, pls feel free to remind me.” > I was wondering about your thoughts on the warnings to Syria and Iran. Is it just tough talk? What happens if they ignore the warnings? Do you have any information about what Syria and Iran are up to anyway? > > Also how is it playing in the region? In particular I thought that a speech to AIPAC was maybe not the best occasion for Powell to warn an Arab country. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/328 "2003-04-01T07:08:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by vanilla \* > \*\*Wonderful! > May I use that as my sig? > 🙂 \*\* Well, if you want such a comment as your sig, feel free. It’s a bit banal. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/329 "2003-04-01T07:30:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Boo Boo Foo \* > This is where I sense a dash of confusion… you see… it’s my assertion that the globe’s most “stable” societies are also those societies which have made, and continue to make, a concerted commitment to (1) established property rights, (2) quality education, and (3) stamping out corruption and black market activities. 1. perhaps to an extent, corruption and black markets really in my opinion are not ‘stamped out’ but evolve out. Either the civil society accepts state rules, or … State rules lacking legitimacy are simply ignored. Point one, agian perhaps. Helpful for the economy and long term development, but for all that I think they are a good thing, in re stable societies, no they are not a requisite condition. Finally, again while education is valuable and useful, I again believe that it’s importance is overemphasized in terms of development. It is important at the primary level and the less so secondary level, but after that, I rather think it is a luxury, and generally inappropriate for large portions of the population who would be better served by other developments leading to stability. This of course is aimed at LDCs. No, in general while I agree on the importance of each of those items for getting to a democracy, for a stable society, I do not see them to be more than tangentially relevant. > [@](#): > > Accordingly, it matters not whether one or two countries (within the MENA countires) are bringing the overall “rates” down… where you lost me is that by your own words, access to quality education (in the MENA countires) is “often, even usually” quite poor - ergo, I can’t see how you can concurrently accuse myself of making a gross generalisation (regarding education therein) when you basically agree with my assertion? Well, I have lost the train of thought, I believe that I should distinguish between poor education and **illiteracy** – there are many very well educated people in the region with utterly useless educations. Overspending on prestige education, underspending on unglamorous education more useful to the stage of economic development extent. In general, I am more concerned about quality over quanitity in these comments, although I do view quality **and universal** primary and secondary schooling as sine qua non for development for middle tier nations. > [@](#): > > Again… you lost me just a little bit here. In my original post, I was really hoping that I had made it clear that I’m approaching this subject in terms of “trying to understand the human psyche” - not just the “Arab pysche” in isolation. I’m 100% certain **Coll** that I’ve got a VERY healthy handle on the fact that human nature is human nature, the world over - and that differences in any given culture are caused by the stimulii which exist WITHIN that culture. I conceded, from the very outset, that I understand INNATELY that different influences are at play in the MENA countries compared to the peace and tranquility which exists in say, Southport, QLD. Australia - but nowhere in my original post did I imply that some sort of magical blueprint exists in the Western World which can be plonked down any where, any time, and that the “on switch” can automatically be turned on and everything will be fine overnight. Then perhaps I misread. I have now lost the train of thought. > [@](#): > > Not for a moment am I asserting that people in the Middle East think just like me - indeed, the exact opposite is abundantly obvious. My position is that the human beings of the Middle East, if in some sort of weird parallel universe were the human beings of the Western World and vice verse, I predict that if the same historic timelines had manifested themselves, then the same sort of reactions and behaviour would be evident. My goal remains thus… what stimulii are at play in the Middle East? And what can be done to remove those stimulii? Remove? I believe what you are saying is what can be done to reframe socio-economic and socio-political structures in the region. That’s not an easy question. Obviously promoting the development of balanced civil society and economic opportunities (hand in hand, allow talent to flourish and give access for the bottom to the upper tiers.). If and I say if, we mean this, that means not panicking when Islamists groups emerge and sanctioning repression w/o thinking carefully about whether they are truly dangerous, allowing in effect, some healthy regionally generated evolution. > [@](#): > > Hence, the amateur anthropologist in me argues thus - any society which consciously chooses to inspire every new generation to be even MORE well educated than the last, by extension, breeds an innate desire within those new generations for evolutionary change for the better. My assertion is this - there are more than a few vested interests in the MENA countries - in particular, those elites who are over 40 years of age who are still in positions of power - who would actively work against this philosophy if they could. And this is why I quoted the age demographic in Iran as being the exception to the rule you see. It appears that wittingly, or unwittingly, Iran has bred an entire generation of well educated youngsters who desire positive evolution from “within” Iranian society. See my comments above about “well” educated. I don’t agree in the least with the magic of education to transform the region. It is a myth. Education is but one tool, but being well educated will not mean the magical emergence of civil society, it can as well span the Baath party, al-Ikhouan etc. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/330 "2003-04-01T07:34:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Collounsbury \* > > ## quote: > > Originally posted by j.c. > In earlier posts, you have used and accepted arguments that not only indicate that Arabs are incapable of democracy, but also that sounded a lot like the arguments sometimes given for why certain African-Americans are incapable of becoming physicists. That may not be what you meant to convey, but it came across that way to at least a half-dozen people. This seems to have been tempered somewhat, by you and others, since the third person agreed with Lib. > > * * * > > \*\*I certainly did not. I believe that I was continually explicit on, as Abe has pointed out, the possibilities in the Arab world, including the ‘roots’ of democratic developments. > > I **was** and **am** harshly critical of the uninformed notion that a Stalinist system laid over a fractured not-quite-nation is ready for democracy. Those are **specific comments** to a **specific situation** and I believe well based on emperical evidence in re democratic development in the developing world and generally. > > If you and others did not follow that, well I am sorry but I can’t control for readers’ lack of background etc. > > \*\* A former State Department official familiar with Iraq made exactly the same point as **Collounsbury** when he was asked why he though democracy in Iraw would be a longshot now and for some time to come in view of previous successes in Germany and Japan. He pointed out that both Japan and Germany had relatively homogeneous populations with a common cultural heritage. He said Iraq, on the other hand, is a relatively heterogeneous collection of tribes and ethnicities and the Japan/Germany model simply wasn’t applicable. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/331 "2003-04-01T07:41:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eva Luna \* > \*\*Collounsbury, \*\* so if you could create your own fantasy Iraqi postwar administration, who would it include, and why? (I actually stated a thread on this subject in your absence, but only got half a dozen responses, mostly one-liners.) Feel free to name either specific individuals, or profiles of what kind of people you have in mind in terms of what kind of background and experiences you think could be most useful. I’ll think about this further and try to come up with something. It is hard since many figures will be excluded. > [@](#): > > And to anyone who cares to respond: what can individual Americans do (beyond demonstrating, which has been more than amply covered in dozens of threads) to show the rest of the world, but especially the Middle East, that not all Americans believe that Bush et. al. are doing the right thing? |Stopping war now would be an error. In for a penny in for a pound. Creating pressure to do things right, post war is helpful however. > [@](#): > > Of course, the failure of the educational and foreign policy administration to hire many area studies grads is just plain silly IMO, and could be the subject of several threads, probably in the Pit. Most of the people I went to grad school with, except for the couple of military officers who were in the program at any one time, didn’t even bother applying for jobs at the State Dept., military, CIA, etc., because they perceived the environment would be hostile to their viewpoint. I have the greatest respect for those career diplomats who honestly do their job and try to impart their reasoned perspectives to those who don’t even realize how badly they need them, but these days it must be a pretty thankless position, as evidenced by the recent resignations of a couple of career DOS employes. \*\* Given direct convos with people involved, it is clear to me that the Admin has not been listening to experts here on the ground. Hiring them and not listening to them is not terribly helpful. ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/332 "2003-04-01T07:52:25Z")
Are there any countries in the area that you can see getting involved in the conflict, on Iraq’s side? If so, how long do you think the war would have to go on before they get involved? Once again, thanks very much for this thread. ---
**Author:** ![CyberPundit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/76d3ee/32.png) [@CyberPundit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CyberPundit)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/333 "2003-04-01T07:53:41Z")
More disturbing stuff on the Iran/Syria front from the latest Seymour Hersh article. [http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030407fa\_fact1](http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030407fa_fact1) "In a press conference on Friday, Rumsfeld warned Iranian militants against interfering with American forces and accused Syria of sending military equipment to the Iraqis. A Middle East businessman who has long-standing ties in Jordan and Syria—and whose information I have always found reliable—told me that the religious government in Tehran “is now backing Iraq in the war. There isn’t any Arab fighting group on the ground in Iraq who is with the United States,” he said. There is also evidence that Turkey has been playing both sides. Turkey and Syria, who traditionally have not had close relations, recently agreed to strengthen their ties, the businessman told me, and early this year Syria sent Major General Ghazi Kanaan, its longtime strongman and power broker in Lebanon, to Turkey. The two nations have begun to share intelligence and to meet, along with Iranian officials, to discuss border issues, in case an independent Kurdistan emerges from the Iraq war. A former U.S. intelligence officer put it this way: “The Syrians are coördinating with the Turks to screw us in the north—to cause us problems.” He added, “Syria and the Iranians agreed that they could not let an American occupation of Iraq stand.” " I find it amazing that even Turkey is apparently working with Syria against the US. It shows how truly messed up the regional diplomacy has been. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/334 "2003-04-01T08:01:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MrVisible \* > Are there any countries in the area that you can see getting involved in the conflict, on Iraq’s side? If so, how long do you think the war would have to go on before they get involved? Personally, I can’t see any under any conditions. Not in a direct, conventional sense. Iraq has no allies and nobody really wants a piece of the U.S. military. Now countries like Syria would probably consider doing a little smuggling of arms and the like. Some of those borders are a little porous. And the longer it drags, there is alwways the possibility of some sort of non-governmental irregulars filtering in as well. But an actual government engaging the U.S. on behalf of Iraq? Nah. - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![edwino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@edwino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/edwino)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 8:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/335 "2003-04-01T08:03:13Z")
**Collounsbury** I fully agree with you on your points about democracy evolving in a fertile soil, which Iraq at present is not. America is gosh darn gonna build a democracy in Iraq, and of course it won’t get to a democracy immediately. It appears that they will transition from military rule into the tribal council paradigm developed for Afghanistan. I wonder if there is a better way, as the Iraqi “tribes” – Shiites, Kurds, Arab nationalists, Sunni Islamists, etc., seem incredibly fractitious. They seem much divided so than even post-Taliban Afghanistan, and that government is on certainly shaky legs. From this thread, as well as readings elsewhere, I maintain a high level of pessimism that this will work. I wonder if there is another way. Let us call this tribal council a “transition state” for true representative democracy. There are perhaps other “transition states” we can introduce, culled from both history and from the region. Americans seem fond of the monarchy idea, from what happened in Afghanistan and perhaps what is happening in Jordan. You have explained that this isn’t possible in Iraq. Military dictatorships have evolved into democracy, in many parts of Asia as well as perhaps what is happening in Pakistan. I think a true kick in the ass for the world would be a fourth option: theocracy. We have both mentioned Iran as an example of democracy taking roots in a liberalizing theocracy. Americans are very afraid of Islamic theocracies right now, but there is no rule set in stone that theocracies have to be anti-American. With nurturing, perhaps we can transition Iraq into a liberal Shiite/Sunni theocracy friendly to the West but still protective of Islamic values. While I suppose many of the aspects of Sharia are distasteful to Americans, it could very well act as a nice transition to stabilize Iraq and institute a government that would not be immediately rejected out of hand for being an American proxy. It would also serve American PR well – we are not prosecuting a war against all Islam, etc. Do you think something like this could be made to work? Do you think that the Iraqis would buy it? Do you think appropriate controls could be implemented that would liberalize the government within a decade of stability? I admit it is a pipe dream, I just want to know if you think it may work. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/336 "2003-04-01T08:13:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CyberPundit \* > There is also evidence that Turkey has been playing both sides. Turkey and Syria, who traditionally have not had close relations, recently agreed to strengthen their ties, the businessman told me, and early this year Syria sent Major General Ghazi Kanaan, its longtime strongman and power broker in Lebanon, to Turkey. The two nations have begun to share intelligence and to meet, along with Iranian officials, to discuss border issues, in case an independent Kurdistan emerges from the Iraq war. A former U.S. intelligence officer put it this way: “The Syrians are coördinating with the Turks to screw us in the north—to cause us problems.” He added, “Syria and the Iranians agreed that they could not let an American occupation of Iraq stand.” " > > I find it amazing that even Turkey is apparently working with Syria against the US. It shows how truly messed up the regional diplomacy has been. Can’t speak to Turkish motivations ( other than noting again that they are notoriously paranoid about there internal security situation vis-vis the Kurds and may be feeling a bit frustrated at the moment ). But as I mentioned in another thread Syria deals with _everyone_, only excluding, _possibly_, Israel. They’re clever, even machiavellian little connivers. It’s one of the reasons the Assad’s have lasted as long as they have. They’ll happily make any deal that looks to be to their advantage, even with what are seemingly natural enemies - their complex history of interaction with Hezbollah in Lebanon being a case in point. If they see a way to stymie the U.S. without getting drawn into a fight, they will. It’s entirely likely they’re the ones that funneled the AT-14 Kornet missiles to Iraq. Plus I imagine their current status as one of the most vociferous opponents of the war can only help them in terms of street popularity ( though maybe the Arab street is too cynical for that - what do you think **Coll**? ). - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/337 "2003-04-01T08:25:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by edwino \* > > With nurturing, perhaps we can transition Iraq into a liberal Shiite/Sunni theocracy friendly to the West but still protective of Islamic values. I’m thinking a Shi’ite/Sunni theocracy imight be a bit of a contradiction in terms. I’m not sure if such a hybrid is possible, especially as theocrats naturally tend to incline towards the uncompromising on such matters. Nadir Shah tried to bring about such a rapproachment of sorts in the 18th century and failed, the ulema fighting him every step of the way. The most likely scenario given demographic realities would be a Shi’ite theocracy and frankly I can’t but imagine that resistance to that might be intense among other groups, especially in the north. It might be more a prescription for partition. Though I could be wrong. - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/338 "2003-04-01T08:54:41Z")
**Edwino** , my first objection (even though I wasn’t asked) to the theocracy argument is the case of Iran, which you described as “an example of democracy taking roots in a liberalizing theocracy”. I think the roots of democracy began forming _in spite of_ the theocracy, not because of it. Frankly I think that had it not been for popular culture (not just Western but also importantly from the ME region, particularly some of those gorgous pop starlets with sexy clothes and heavy make-up that are coming out of Egypt, Lebanon, etc.) Iran would have made no progress at all with liberalization of political thought or personal freedom. It’s the Baywatch effect. I don’t see how a theocracy today (of ANY Judeo-Christian variation, not just Islam) wouldn’t quickly spiral out of control and breed fundamentalism galore, with all its attendant niceties. In Iraq the Sunni-Shi’ite split would probably manifest itself politically sooner or later, bringing more problems and conflict between the two. Let me also add that radical measures like Sharia do not exactly breed understanding, tolerance, and the other qualities you would want to see develop in order to have a regime AND a people friendly to the USA. “Egypt II - The Nile on the Euphrates” would still be preferrable to an Iraqi theocracy that unites the major religious groups in their resentment of anyone who doesn’t think like them. Even assuming this could be possible in Iraq. IMHO the discussion on what would and wouldn’t work in a landscape that is not even clear yet hinges on too many factors to discuss it here. If you can come up with a set of specific goals for the future Iraq (e.g., reduce tribalistic responses, increase tolerance, facilitate cross-cultural communication) it may be interesting to open a thread dedicated to it. Depending on the requirements and goals set it may be possible to discuss possible solutions… ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/339 "2003-04-01T12:57:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MrVisible \* > \*\*Are there any countries in the area that you can see getting involved in the conflict, on Iraq’s side? If so, how long do you think the war would have to go on before they get involved? > > Once again, thanks very much for this thread. \*\* You’re welcome, although a brief overview of the nonesense being spouted in other threads gives me the sinking sensation that the ‘True Believers’ – I do not need to name them I suppose-- are completely closed to actual information. That aside, given the current situation I believe that you can count on the following: Syria and Iran feeding low level support to Baghdad, in the knowledge that (i) it is in their interest to see the US forces have problems to discourage wild talk of remaking the region (ii) the US has offered no carrots to go with the stick (threats) and Iraq has left the impression that the US is likely to ‘go after’ them regardless of what they do, so might as well make it more difficult (iii) it is in their national interests, regardless of past hostilities and ideological matters, not to see the ‘New Imperial Power’ have to easy of a time. Further to this, it is in no regional country’s interest in the short term to see the US have a free hand in Iraq. Not Syria, not Turkey, not Saudi Arabia – well actualy Kuwait, greedy short sighted bitches that they are [see recent reports in re them trying to keep reparations post conflict] , not Iran. Reasons of pure self interest, the manner in which this has happened - unilateral and clearly contemptous of local views, reinforce reasons to also “interfere” post-“war”. My greatest concern all along and continuing to present is the post-War solutions. The war, although going badly(\*) will be won in a purely military sense. However, military victories are themselves utterly meaningless if they do not achieve real political objectives. The frequently cited rubbish about ‘could have won in Vietnam’ is an example of such myopic pseudo-realism. Among the issues I identified with the Bush Administration when I first started critiquing them way back was a sort of day-trader mentality in regards to international relations. This actually, in my mind, characterizes the Neo-Con pseudo-realism, the view of any given situation as a one-off transaction without looking at the continuous stream of relations, the issues of opportunity costs in a framework of not one transaction but a series of repeated and related transactions. I argued in the past, and this in my mind is clearly vindicated by the **utter fiasco** that has been the diplomatic efforts on this war that the unilteral one-offs such as rudely breaking Kyoto, childishly trying to remove our signature from the ICC (for no legal reason at all), our rather undiplomatic contempt for the ICC and in general multilateral institutions, while perhaps gains for that “transaction” led to escalating costs of “doing business” with other countries. Quite clearly the Bush Administration has achieved an image of not being willing to abide by the framework of cooperation, which leads to distrust and a desire to lock in any gains immediately when dealing with the Adminsitration, for fear that they will blow the deal up if their interests vary (in short term) in any manner. Clearly this kind of situation creates incentives, especially in the current situation and given none of the neighboring actors trust or support the US in any meaningful way, to play both ends against the Middle. This is not a healthy situation, and on a business end I am seriously concerned about the damage to American interests over all terms, for short termism and stupid American jingoistic nationalism in the ‘post-war’ period interfering with a stable reconstruction. Now, of course, there will be a honeymoon. Say 3-7 months, however as in the Afghan situation, much of it will be more apparent than real, and it will be very, very fragile. What should be clear by now is a sort of negative, anti-outsider nationalism is very real in the area (and hardly in this area alone, look at the childish reaction to French opposition in the United States.). Given many local actors, both at the State and on the sub-state or even para-statal levels have real interests in disrupting, and given the fractured nature of Iraqi politics and society, I see non-trivial challenges, including a very real possibility of an emergent guerrilla war with quasi-Baathist and Islamist elements. Can this be avoided? I hope so, if only for my own personal interests, however anyone who is sanguine about the situation is ignorant and/or a fool. Very well, I have issues to attend to. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2003, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/340 "2003-04-01T12:59:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by istara \* > \*\*Now _that’s_ the billion dollar question!! > > My WAG is an older version of the guy at the start of Agatha Christie’s [_ **They Came To Baghdad** _](http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0002318539/qid=1049173898/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_0_3/202-9351777-2871852), the one who gets killed (but IMO should have ended up the love interest). 😉 \*\* Puzzling, but don’t jinx me with comparisions with people who get killed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259.md?page=18)