There are rituals for new beginnings. New notebooks for school. A "Down with Dubya" T-shirt for your first presidential election. John Kerry flip-flops for your first shower in the Quad.
Iraq is awaiting its beginning. By Jan. 31, 2005, when Iraqis head to the polls, the United States may have a new president. But Iraq will be on the road to a new constitution.
Our election rituals include everything from formal debate to name-calling. At the 2000 Republican National Convention in Philadelphia, you could buy a book about a family of elephants who tour the City of Brotherly Love. Or, you could go two tables down to where a woman was selling toilet paper with Bill Clinton's face on it. But pre-election violence has not been serious in recent years. It was really kind of fun, watching from City Hall as a line of mounted police rode slowly against a throng of protesters who were chanting rhythmically, "Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!" A cop on horseback opened the door to Sbarro's pizza for me from atop his horse.
In contrast, protest in Iraq has been explosive.
Using that violence as an excuse to give Iraq a new beginning, however, is a false out.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld explains how it all may work. He said, "Let's say you tried to have an election, and you could have it in three-quarters or four-fifths of the country. But in some places, you couldn't because the violence was too great."
"Well so be it," Rumsfeld added. "Nothing's perfect in life, so you have an election that's not quite perfect. Is it better than not having an election? You bet."
Just like it's better to have an election with pregnant chads than no election at all. I think.
But while the United States had over two hundred years of tradition to guide it through a peaceful transfer of power, despite its contested election in the fall of 2000, Iraq can look back on a century of occupations and tyranny. An excluded one-quarter or one-fifth of the electorate may turn to its past to redress its disenfranchisement. Resorting to that past may mean resorting to violence -- not waiting for the Supreme Court to rule.
The White House has leaked another bad idea: covertly backing pro-U.S. candidates in the Iraqi election. White House spokesman Allen Abney explained that leaders have "adopted a policy that we will not try to influence the outcome of the upcoming Iraqi election by covertly helping individual candidates for office." Don't believe it. Secretary of State Colin Powell told CNN that the United States does plan to openly support "capacity-building" in parties in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Wait 'til Iraq gets hit with campaign finance reform.
Powell offers us a recipe for disaster. Our foreign policy and intelligence establishments have a long and unfortunate history of interfering in the politics of other nations. Iran, Guatemala, Cuba, Chile, Hungary, Vietnam, Cambodia and Korea have all suffered as a result of American efforts to install friendly governments. As a matter of integrity and as a matter of honor for the over 1,000 Americans who died in battle, the elections in Iraq must be legitimate and free from foreign manipulation. It is illegal for American candidates and American political parties to accept foreign money. The reason for this law is so obvious that no explanation is needed. What's right for the United States is right for Iraq.
A new beginning is going to college and leaving your parents behind. Iraqis deserve that same measure of freedom in exploring their beginning. The United Nations should provide oversight in the Iraqi elections. Our troops should stay and stand by proudly when Iraqi citizens come to the polls. But the Iraqis are not children to be led by the hand into the voting booth. They know the issues.
Philadelphia is the birthplace of American democracy; Iraq is the birthplace of civilization. Our forces in Iraq should be like campus police, not parents. We should make it safe to vote, but not meddle in Iraqi politics.
"Not by might nor by power," teaches the prophet Zechariah. Using physical strength to dictate our political will in Iraq would be both wrong and ineffective. President Bush, who wears his religion on his sleeve, should appreciate the biblical quote.
Danielle Nagelberg is a junior International Relations major from Philadelphia. Schuylkill Punch appears on Tuesdays.
