Middle-Eastern Problems Require Middle-Eastern Solutions
Whym Rhymer
November 23, 2006
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was interviewed on British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) television Sunday morning and when asked about the possibility of a "military victory" in Iraq, he dismissed the possibility . . . at least in any "acceptable" timeframe. He said, "If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi Government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible."
Kissinger also warned against the "rapid withdrawal of troops from Iraq saying that pulling out too quickly could lead to "disastrous consequences" that would eventually destabilize the entire region and would, "one way or the other," result in our eventual return to the region as peacekeepers.
If we can't win by staying and we loose by going what are we then to do?
Kissinger's solution is the same as the one that, by all indications, will be promoted by the Baker Commission (the Iraq Study Group) when it delivers it's final report: get all of Iraq's neighbors (including Iran and Syria), as well as the member nations of the UN Security council, involved in an international conference to attempt to work out a solution.
The Kissinger/Baker Commission solution, at least on the surface, seems unworkable . . . unless, that is, we redefine our preconceived notions of what the Middle-East will "look like" in ten, twenty or some undetermined number of years.
It's quite natural that every country in the world will have the view that every other country should be modeled after theirs. We are all, in our own minds, close to perfection. We in the west, in particular, seem to have that view because ours IS the most successful form of government that this earth has ever seen.
We should, of course, embrace our hard-earned successes and enjoy our hard-won freedoms but, at the same time, we need to take a 'reality pill'. Every region of the world has its own ideas and ideals -- we cannot expect those ideas to be changed because we will it to be so or force it to happen because we feel that their change will make the world, at least by our standards, "a better place." Our concept of a "Democracy" in Iraq is not working out and will not work out because it is OUR concept.
Essentially, an international conference will only work if the Western and European powers (the US, UK, Spain, France, etc.) are NOT directly involved in decision making or in reshaping the region. This is a Middle-Eastern problem and it needs a Middle-Eastern solution. If that solution does not resemble anything we like or have seen before or expected, so be it! The ultimate solution must center around an end to global conflict and stability; the Middle-east will never get there using Western or European standards.
Kissinger also warned against the "rapid withdrawal of troops from Iraq saying that pulling out too quickly could lead to "disastrous consequences" that would eventually destabilize the entire region and would, "one way or the other," result in our eventual return to the region as peacekeepers.
If we can't win by staying and we loose by going what are we then to do?
Kissinger's solution is the same as the one that, by all indications, will be promoted by the Baker Commission (the Iraq Study Group) when it delivers it's final report: get all of Iraq's neighbors (including Iran and Syria), as well as the member nations of the UN Security council, involved in an international conference to attempt to work out a solution.
The Kissinger/Baker Commission solution, at least on the surface, seems unworkable . . . unless, that is, we redefine our preconceived notions of what the Middle-East will "look like" in ten, twenty or some undetermined number of years.
It's quite natural that every country in the world will have the view that every other country should be modeled after theirs. We are all, in our own minds, close to perfection. We in the west, in particular, seem to have that view because ours IS the most successful form of government that this earth has ever seen.
We should, of course, embrace our hard-earned successes and enjoy our hard-won freedoms but, at the same time, we need to take a 'reality pill'. Every region of the world has its own ideas and ideals -- we cannot expect those ideas to be changed because we will it to be so or force it to happen because we feel that their change will make the world, at least by our standards, "a better place." Our concept of a "Democracy" in Iraq is not working out and will not work out because it is OUR concept.
Essentially, an international conference will only work if the Western and European powers (the US, UK, Spain, France, etc.) are NOT directly involved in decision making or in reshaping the region. This is a Middle-Eastern problem and it needs a Middle-Eastern solution. If that solution does not resemble anything we like or have seen before or expected, so be it! The ultimate solution must center around an end to global conflict and stability; the Middle-east will never get there using Western or European standards.
Print
Email
