The most curious thing about the split is that the local leaders favor a longer US involvement.
There were disagreements between returned exiles and those who had stayed to endure the regime's strictures. Most former exiles wanted a lesser US role, while those who had not left Iraq said they wanted more US supervision because they did not trust the returnees.
Clear differences emerged among the delegates on US involvement, with exiles generally seeking a diminished role for Washington and many locals wanting a stronger US role until elections can be held.
The exiles are seen by local leaders as potential carpetbaggers. The US government is seen as more fair relatively speaking.
At some stage in the process of creation of a new government in Iraq the US ought to consider negotiating a treaty to place the US in the position of having the legal right to intervene in Iraq to prevent any one faction from taking over and oppressing everyone else. Most of the local leaders and even many of the returned exiles must realize that the worst nightmare scenario is that they could wake up one day with a new dictatorship that is just as willing to lock up political opposition as the old regime was. Iraq needs some sort of mechanism to prevent the reestablishment of a dictatorship.
|Share |||By Randall Parker at 2003 April 29 10:42 AM Reconstruction and Reformation|