The Utopian Dream of a Democratic Transplant in Iraq
It is easy for an individual, in a Washington?s beautiful morning, to wake up with the brilliant idea to
change the world by spreading democracy. The idea rests on the following assumption: anywhere in the
world, when a human being tastes freedom, rights and money, she would absolutely adopt them as
irreplaceable values. However it is even more difficult, if not impossible, to carry out such a dream
because, beneath other skies, people? imaginary is comprised of values more significant than the
Western democracy and capitalism.
"A liberated Iraq can show the power of freedom to transform that vital region, by bringing hope and
progress into the lives of millions", did Bush profess Wednesday 26/02 in his speech during a dinner at
the American Enterprise Institute. With regard to Palestine, the United States president added that
success in Iraq "could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress
towards a truly democratic Palestinian state".
When Bush evokes a "truly democratic" society within an Arab and Moslem Middle East, one may
wonder how people would receive such an idea there. Even if such a democratic transplant were
possible - which is doubtful ? the American democracy may be the least accepted manure. The greatest
barrier is the Islamic culture governing the Arab Community.
The Islamic culture is an almost perfect coding determining the life of the Moslem within the society, the
family and towards God. It is generally advanced that nothing was forgotten in Koran, and that all that
can disturb a man is well explained there and the solution given. For this reason, the Moslem thinks that
man must quite simply memorize all the Koran?s verses.
Islam develops three principal types of political theories: the religion and the law, the philosophy and the
"mirror of the princes". The political organization here avoids the unslung philosophical and intellectual
quarrels sapping any consensus, and consequently any social cohesion. Islam requires to admitting that
prophet Mahomet is the only legislator, the faithful having just to obey the laws. The Sharia is the
Islamic law, revealed to the Prophet via the Gabriel Archangel, for the "good order" of the World.
Philosophy is only for the participation in the intellectual knowledge?s world, reserved for some, of
whom Ossama bin Laden today claims he is part of.
Hierarchical order has to be maintained within the Islam, which must be protected by the State and
which is used as single base for the community?s ethos. The question of knowing who should rule the
city is only of little importance. Nevertheless, divisions were noticed: Sunnites support that a Caliph
must direct the Moslem community, whereas the Shiites find this is the Imam?s function. The Ayatolah
Khomeiny, as for him, had instituted an unorthodox position when he decided that the Shiite clergy is in
charge of God?s viceroyalty on Earth; because, for Islam, any sovereignty belongs to God. In majority
of the Arab countries, kings, princes and other individuals rule the community and people accept them
as holding the capacity by the will of God, without need of any other form of democracy.
On the other hand, the Western model rose from historical conflicts having led to some major
compromises such as the Western democracy, the individual freedom, the rights, etc. A passage by a
European history marked by wars of village vs. village, small kingdom vs. small kingdom, and finally of
nation vs. nation, State vs. State, with the Hitler?s dream being the most completed image, is
inseparable from the modern Western political thought. There is no assurance that this Western political
thought?s transplant would take roots in other cultures such as the Islamism.
Even if a UNO coalition were to impose the Western democracy in a post-Saddam Iraq, principal
resistance would especially be that of the Iraqis who would not forget that the American architects
made the political model thus imposed to them. Even if they had considered Saddam as a demon they
thought is doomed to be demolished, they would not like another demon?s assistance to do the job.
More especially, they would not like the American administration that had trained and armed the
Saddam monster when they had to fight the anti-American Iran - another war during which the
Moslems did not support the Americans.
The Americans remind them the women, the children, the elders and the other Iraqi massacred by
whole families in 1991, others having to be massacred same manner during the war Bush now requires.
In each slaughter Israelis execute against the Palestinians, they see the American hand. They will not
forget that the G W Bush administration used of all quibbles possible to justify the war to come, passing
in turn from Saddam Hussein who had tried to kill his father, of Iraq that belongs to "the axis of evil", of
Iraq that would be a threat for Israel and NATO and should be disarmed, of Iraq that would shelter
Al-Quaeda, of Iraq that would fund Palestinian suicide bombings, to end up with the urgency to free the
Iraqi people from the tyrannical Saddam regime and to democratize Iraq and the Middle East.
They would realize, with the strong American oil enterprises? presence that would take place in their
country, that Bush?s single objective was oil, and not at all any Iraqi people?s fulfillment. They will not
forget that in 2000 the ?true democracy?, the "world?s oldest democracy" model in which it was about
electoral frauds, was not different from the Third World democracies. They will not forget that G W
Bush was established president after such disputed elections, even though he collected fewer votes than
his political challenger Al Gore.
Consequently, resistance to the "truly democratic" model in Iraq, in Palestine and in the Middle East
would be savage and strong.
The Western democracy?s transplant has not been able to take hold in Africa. It would succeed even
less in strongly codified societies like the Middle East. What chances do we have to change the Middle
Eastern individual?s imaginary and to impose the American imaginary? To the duty of making alms that
govern their existence we would thus substitute and impose them the right of "living hidden to living
happy" - in fact our individualism perceived as the human?s right to be miserly and covetous. We would
make them accept the "F" words that have become the new American language. We would impose
them feminism and the dumb violence of the exacerbated defense of rights, them who are more
concerned of the "good order of the world" than of social conflicts. We would make them accept that
not only God gives the capacity. We would water them with our violence films that would impose them
social problems they are less prepared to confront.
Such a dream is nothing other than a Utopia, which unfortunately will cost us approximately $100
billion, will double our budget deficits up to $400 billion, will accentuate our economic difficulties in
which American Africans will pay the heaviest price, and will plunge into mourning many families of
young Americans having answered the current presidential call packed with patriotism. 03/03/203