Civil War in Iraq? (21 cents)

The headlines say that Iraq is nearer than ever to civil war.

Where is the surprise?

I have just finished reading Paul Bremer's engaging memoir, "My Year in Iraq". Putting aside the arrogance that Bremer had, seeming to believe that, like Alexander Haig, "I am in charge", and that his direction had the best chance of bringing democracy to Iraq, it is perfectly clear that there was no plan to get from here to there.

But how could there be?

I don't think anything is different now than it was four years ago. You cannot take away the government of a country (whatever it may be) and expect another, to your liking, to rise in its place.

And this is particularly the case in Arab Moslem countries, or so it seems.

The essence of American democracy is that, first, the parties are built to encompass a number of views with no internal party discipline (such as you find in the U.K.), and second that if you use an election, you go on living and wait for the nex time.

Well, Iraq does not have parties, does not have large organizations where various views get heard, and certainly does not have the concept of giving up if you lose and waiting until next time.

Whether it is the religion, the heritage, or whatever, it appers to be the fact. If you are not on top, you believe that you will be shamed, belittled, and perhaps much worse. So you MUST wind up on top. If you don't get there, you must subvert those on top, in showings of strength and numbers.

This is just the way it is.

Divide the country up. Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. I don't think you need to worry about the Sunnis and the Kurds; but the Shiites are danger, as every Sunni knows all too well.

So, Iran (non-Arab) and Hezbollah are enormous threats and, at this time, are probably not good partners for compromise. The war has begun. Perhaps it is World War III; perhaps it is a clash of civilizations.

East is east, and west is west.....