La Opinion, September 4, 2005

George A. Lopez

Both Iraq and the United States are in political trouble. In Iraq the security situation continues to fluctuate between civil war and anarchy with little hope for improvement. Recently US military commanders told the Congress that under the best conditions our troops would likely remain in Iraq for another four years. Other military and security analysts have mentioned a seven to ten year timeline.

The failure of constitution framers in Iraq to find workable, inclusive solutions to critical issues regarding the Sunni minority, and the role of regions, religion and women ends the hope that a strong political framework would turn dissident bullets into ballot box politics. The elections planned to ratify this constitution and to elect a new government will not bring democracy to Iraq. They will produce a hybrid, techno-theocracy heavily dependent on US military presence for its survival.

The Bush Administration heard loud and immediate protests about the constitution from an alliance of strange bedfellows. Religious freedom advocates on the political right and women’s human rights groups of all political stripes have found more common cause with left leaning groups who call for US troop withdrawal. Each group correctly sees in the Iraqi constitution a significant shift to a ‘group rights’ approach and an enshrinement of Islamic sharia law as a determining factor in political disputes and court decisions. This will produce a legal and political system heavily biased toward Shi’ia males. Now all three US political factions conclude that if this draft constitution stands, the mission of democratizing Iraq has essentially failed.

Until this point, the Bush Administration has successfully managed many of the images, information and interpretation of what is happening in Iraq. But the discouraging constitutional outcome has combined with Cindy Sheehan’s stubborn protest at the Bush ranch over the past month to place the President’s ‘stay the course’ policy in Iraq in an especially vulnerable position.

Now fate has taken advantage of that vulnerability in the form of hurricane Katrina. What may turn out to be the worst natural disaster in US history is unfolding in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. The relationship between the devastation caused by Katrina and the devastating war in Iraq may seem distinct at the moment. But the convergence of these two conundrums will certainly define how history assesses the Bush presidency.

Unlike Lyndon Johnson, who had to manage the Vietnam war amidst continual national ferment of racial discontent and social change – including significant riots in various US cities – Mr. Bush has had a period of domestic calm while he declared and managed the wars on terror and Iraq. He has not had to manage or to understand the complex, nuanced relationship that confronts US politics when it finds itself wrenching from crises within and without.

The remainder of Mr. Bush’s presidency will now include a daily briefing with a substantial portion of time devoted to the domestic recovery of the deep south. How Bush can positively impact such recovery, from the ability to restore public order this week to the employment statistics of the months ahead, are directly tied to decisions already made, or about to be made. about Iraq policy. How have the guns come home to meet the butter?

First, numerous reports about broken levies and less than full disaster-response resources being available can be tied directly to budget and program cuts in flood prevention which the Administration has made over the past four years. Systems which might have stymied the full wrath of Katrina were weaker now than five years ago, in part due to the funding priorities in Washington shifting to overseas military ventures like Iraq.

Secondly, the challenge of halting looting brings to center stage the National Guard crisis brought on by the poor planning and military deployment system working in Iraq. With more than 7,000 Guardsmen in Iraq between them, Louisiana and Mississippi have only 60% of their Guard strength available to meet the key problem of keeping internal order. Maybe these troops will prove sufficient to the task this month. There are reports that other states will send their Guard contingents to make up for the shortfall. But in two or three months will these disaster weary citizen-soldiers begin a rotation in Baghdad?

And then there is the gas driven US economy. We know a variety of factors, some of which relate to Middle East instability and oil futures nurtured by the Iraq debacle, have led to steady increases in the price per barrel of crude oil. Americans have grumbled as their gasoline costs varied between the two to three dollar range. But few have tied this substantial change to failed foreign policy. And disgruntlement has not resulted in any serious protest.

Paying four dollars per gallon at the fuel pump, however, even if it may result from the refining crisis caused by Katrina, ultimately gets traced back to accelerating barrel prices in the Persian Gulf. These, in turn, will ripple through an American economy with serious consequences. Such price rises alone could spark a minor recession. But when combined with the task of resettling and re-employing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the hurricane states, the equation alters considerably.

Changes in the Persian Gulf and weather from the Gulf of Mexico have combined to create a new political moment of truth for the Bush Administration. The devastation wrecked by Katrina may be the catalyst for moving discussion about Iraq to a full scale national debate. To engage this dual dilemma of national and international crisis will require courage, a commitment to democratic dialogue, and a willingness to forego partisan politics. None of these have been manifest well or frequently in US politics since 9-11-01. And the President has been particularly weak on these style points regarding Iraq.

If the President is to rise to the leadership challenges which lie ahead, two institutions which have fallen short of their democratic responsibilities since 9-11 need to re-engage as well. First, the US Congress must awake from its slumber and re-assert the authority and responsibility vested in it by the Constitution regarding war-making and expenditures. Secondly, the media and the press need to tell more of the story of the diverse and deteriorating political landscape in Iraq. The time for truth and debate is upon us in new ways. It demands the very best of all of us, beginning with the President.
-------------

George A. Lopez is Senior Fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame.

Top of Page

Home > In the News > Commentaries > A Tale of Two Gulfs