It is two years almost to the day since Saddam was yanked from his rabbit hole. It is
less than 1,000 days since the official Iraq conflict began. The polls have now closed and of the 6300 polling
places, just 14 had violent episodes. The total Iraqi vote count may wind up as two-thirds or even more of all
registered voters. By any reasonable measure, the election of a four-year Iraqi Parliament is a resounding success.
The Canadian pundit who spoke up first is Toronto Star columnist Richard Gwyn. As quoted by Duncan Currie
in the Weekly Standard, Gwyn writes "It is time to set down in type the most difficult sentence in
the English language. That sentence is short and simple. It is this: Bush was right."
Articles and editorials in the New York Times, Germany's Der Spiegel, France's La Monde and
London's Independent all made the same point. George Bush pursued the idea that the Muslim people have the
right to freedom, to democracy, to prosperity. America has yet to miss a single deadline in managing Iraq's post-Saddam
transition. The Arab world is getting the idea that democracy can work and is not just for the West.
A recently embedded reporter in Mosul writes "I'm a journalist. I read the news every day from several sources
… I read every tidbit I could on Iraq and the war before coming."
"Everything I thought I knew was wrong."
No particular friend of America, Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt asked "What if U.S. intervention did
create 'a new Arab world'? And what if it saved untold American - 
and Arab -lives from far deadlier wars in the future?"
Of course, the answer to these questions may not be known for years, even decades. What we do know in the short
run is that the citizens of Iraq - with American, British and others help - are transforming their nation into
the freest and most progressive democracy the Arab world has ever known. They now have a taste of freedom. They
sense what liberty means and they will not willingly settle for less, despite Brent Scowcroft.
As the Left hastens to throw their soggy wet blankets, the Iraqi citizen seems to have come to feel that democracy
is inevitable, that daring deeds produce progress and that its time to jump on board or be left behind. Peace,
the rule of law, transparent government, honest leaders; these are the things that Iraq needs and has never had.
What it already has is water, agriculture, oil to provide capital and a population with a healthy work ethic. Combining
these things can make Iraq one of the wealthiest countries in the region with the prosperity shared by its citizens.
To the timid, fear-mongered and excessively tame, one message may now become clear. As Jonathan Carson notes, "We
are at war, and we would be at war even if on 9/12 we had stayed in bed and pulled the covers over our head. We
do not face a choice between war and peace: we must choose among various strategies for conducting war."
Retreat activists have a strategy for a larger war not so very long from now. Surrender activists have a strategy
for becoming dhimmi to the caliphate. (See Jews under Nazi rule for a proximate description. Christians
currently living in Sudan would do as well.)
In 1975, a Democrat-dominated Congress defunded South Vietnam. The U.S. forces had departed in 1973. North Vietnam
was receiving about one billion dollars a year from the Soviets. The American Congress refused South Vietnam $297
million. Then, as now, the isolationist Left frowned on spending money abroad when there were votes to buy right
here at home through the Great Society programs.
As a result of Congressional efforts, South Vietnam disintegrated. Two million refugees were driven out of the
country, 65,000 citizens were executed and some 250,000 were sent to "re-education" camps. It was this
final disgraceful episode that convinced the Arab world that America would not fight and would not stand by its
allies. The U.S, they told themselves, was both cowardly and unreliable.
What the Left called "peace" in 1975 brought an unending asymmetrical war instead.
It is the thesis of Edward Wong, writing for the international section of the New York Times, that with
a successful Iraqi vote, the MSM can do longer simply portray Iraq as in irretrievable shambles. The facts on the
ground powerfully contradict the defeatist template. Of course, without the daily support of the propagandist media,
the Left loses its "proof" for its egregious defeatist assertions.
It will soon become obvious to all, Wong concludes, that a free Iraq exists. It will also become painfully obvious
that the primary reason a free Iraq exists is that George W. Bush steadfastly refused to listen to the defeat activists.
The war may have turned the corner on Election Day in the only place it could be lost - right here in America.
We shall see. The vote count over the next two weeks will likely produce a Parliament that is 40 percent Shia (divided
into two camps - Iranian theocrats and Iraqi Quietists who believe in the separation of mosque and state); 20 percent
Sunni (divided into two camps on the use of violence); 20 percent Kurds (divided into wanting autonomy and wanting
a united Iraq that guarantees their access to oil); 15 percent secular Shia looking to be the swing vote and scattered
minority parties. Under the Iraqi Constitution, a two-thirds vote is required on major issues, so coalitions must
be formed.
12/16/05
