Let's take a moment to breathe a sigh of relief that the Iraqi elections seem to have gone off without major violence, corruption, or the elevation of extremists (although the final results won't be known for a week). For those of us who want to see our occupation conclude and soon, it would be churlish not to recognize and appreciate the progress in Iraq today. It also seems that these elections are yet another good reason to begin the withdrawal of U.S. forces. But what about Max Boot?
The claims made by so many analysts not long ago that the U.S. war in Iraq was a huge win for Iran are not holding up. Likewise for the claims that an outside power could not possibly create a democracy in the Middle East. While Iraq's democracy remains fragile and imperfect, it is nevertheless impressive to see its people not only casting votes but apparently selecting fairly centrist, secular candidates who are, by all indications, committed to an alliance with the U.S.
To my mind, it's a little early to make a judgment on either of those two propositions. Our intervention in Iraq may not have been a "huge" win for Iran, but it does seem to be a net-plus as Iran has become the dominant hegemonic power in the Gulf without Iraq to check it and has been emboldened to act more aggressively on the world stage in recent years than it otherwise might have. Similarly, it's a little early to conclude that support for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will strengthen democracy, given the reporting that he has been working to set himself up a semi-autocracy. There are still many time bombs that could go off in Iraq, not the least of which are the various organized militias loosely allied to the U.S. and the government and now in the process of decommissioning. Low voter turn-out is another issue, due to procedural difficulties, curfews, and some voter apathy. But in any case, keep this in mind: each step forward for Iraqi democracy should be a step back for the United States.
-- Tim Fernholz
