14 Points

Editorial

Except for the most optimistic amongst us, it is all too easy to give up on the stabilization and pacification of an Iraqi democracy. For many, a civil war, or at least the prolongation of the current misery looks inevitable, with or without US and coalition forces. Yet, there are many reasons why this surge, which my might the last great effort of the war, is worth supporting. Few would disagree that constitutional democracy is in Iraq and the region’s long term interests, and few would deny that regional violence and the international terrorism that it spawns will diminish without more just institutions in the Middle East. Princeton economist Alan Krueger has researched the factors connected to the origins of foreign insurgents captured in Iraq, many of whom are committing the most heinous acts of ethnic cleansing. He finds that per capita income and economic inequality, in terms of the ome country of these foreign fighters, are statistically insignificant explanations for why some countries generate more of these fighters than others. National literacy rates likewise are insignificant at this level of analysis, but weak civil liberties or a lack of political rights predict the likelihood of a resident leaving his or her country to engage in terrorism in Iraq. More generally, Krueger and Laitin (in a 2003 paper entitled Kto Kogo?) find that civil liberties, political rights, and economic growth are associated with a reduced likelihood that a country will spawn terrorists. None of these positive deterrents to terror would have been possible under Saddam, nor will they develop if the Iraqi government collapses. Moreover, such a collapse would surely bring with it the aspirations of a generation of Arab liberals for political rights in the region.

Skeptics naturally want to see changes in the independent variables before they invest any further support in the dependent variable (the stabilization of Iraq). Many believe a withdrawal is the kind of change that could only help matters. I think this represents a misunderstanding of what American soldiers are really doing. They are peacekeeping, negotiating between hostile factions, maintaining order, purging corrupt officials and security forces, training Iraqi soldiers and police, as much as possible, to be professionals public servants, offering medical training, building hospitals and schools, protecting citizens, killing and imprisoning terrorists, disarming insurgents, and many other extremely important tasks that would falter if they were to leave.

New York Times reporter Sabrina Tavernise deserves a Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of Iraq. It is too rich and complex to be appropriated by a political party. It approaches literature in its depth but with unwavering commitment to reality. In her final piece on Iraq, published on January 28, 2007 and written in the more reflective pages of the Week in Review, she offered these coruscating thoughts:

For those eager to write off Iraq as lost, one fact bears remembering. A great many Shiites and Kurds, who together make up 80 percent of the population, will tell you that in spite of all the mistakes the Americans have made here, the single act of removing Saddam Hussein was worth it. And the new American plan, despite all the obstacles, may have a chance to work. With an Iraqi colleague, I have been studying a neighborhood in northern Baghdad that has become a dumping ground for bodies. There, after American troops conducted sweeps, the number of corpses dropped by a third in September. The new plan is built around that kind of tactic. But the odds are stacked against the corps of bright young officers charged with making the plan work, particularly because their Iraqi partner — the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki — seems to be on an entirely different page. When American officials were debating whether to send more troops in December, I went to see an Iraqi government official. The prospect of more troops infuriated him. More Americans would simply prolong the war, he said.

”If you don’t allow the minority to lose, you will carry on forever,” he said.

The remarks struck me as a powerful insight into the Shiites’ thinking. Abused under Mr. Hussein, they still act like an oppressed class. That means Iraqis are looking into a future of war, at least in the near term. As one young Shiite in Sadr City said to me: ”This just has to burn itself out.”