Western Democracy vs. Islamic Democracy: Iraq politics

The U.S. western concept of democracy is not the same as the Middle Eastern Islamic concept of democracy. This misperception is causing prolonged conflicts in Iraq and other Muslim nations.

But this is not the only error that is causing international confusion. The majority of Americans have a totally wrong idea of why the U.S. invaded Iraq and has continued for five years to occupy that war-torn nation.

The only interest that the U.S. and U.K. have had in the Middle East since the first World War, has been economical. The U.S. has continuously supported any type of government (dictatorship, sheikdom, monarchy, theocracy or democracy) as long as they cooperated economically with U.S. corporations. In the Middle East, economical interest strictly means oil production. (Bush, Cheney and Rice are all former oil company executives: from Harken Energy, Halliburton and Chevron.) The 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran ended U.K. control over Iranian oil. This was a great economic loss to U.K. The seizure and American control of Iraqi oil has been the only "Mission" that Bush and Cheney have ever had in the Middle East.

History often repeats itself. One of the fundamental flaws in the U.S. strategy in the Vietnam War (1959-1975), was the "domino theory" (developed by President Eisenhower). This theory concluded that if Vietnam developed a communistic government, one by one all of the other Asian nations would fall to communism (like falling dominoes). This simplistic theory turned out to be false. The real world is far more complex. Communism has failed and continues to fail primarily because it´s bureaucratic centralized planning is not as efficient and productive as the non-centralized western capitalistic economic system. Local owners of businesses make better decisions based on local knowledge of "supply and demand" than centralized government bureaucracies. This does not mean that there should not be any government control or regulation. Capitalism still functions best when it has limited government regulations to prevent abuse.

Now the U.S. seems to have developed the same type of "domino theory" in the Middle East. When the Iranian revolution (1979), led by Ayatollah Khomeini, overthrew the pro-American monarchy of Shah Reza Pahlazi and established an Islamic Republic (which was opposed to western control of Iranian oil) the U.S. became worried that this revolution might spread to other neighboring nations like Iraq which also had a Shiite majority. If more of the Middle Eastern nations fell (like dominoes) the west might loose it´s critical and essential supply of oil (or at least loose their billions in corporate profits). This "domino theory" also applies to the proclaimed agenda of the Christian fundamentalists who are a significant coalition segment of the Bush administration. These Christian fundamentalists fear that the establishment of any more Islamic Republics in the Middle East could threaten their own evangelical crusade to establish Christian world domination.

This (political-economical-religious) situation required (or so the theory predicted) that the U.S. invade Iraq and establish a pro-American government (as the U.S. had done in South Vietnam). Apparently the U.S. had learned nothing from the Vietnam failure because they repeated the same mistakes in Iraq (based on the same false domino theory). Saddam Hussein´s fatal mistake was not awarding a significant number of oil contracts to the U.S., especially since the Reagan administration had been friendly and supportive of Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war from 1980 to 1988. (Few Americans today are aware of the complete military, financial and technical support that Reagan gave to Hussein, including U.S. manufactured chemical weapons and delivery systems. However even with U.S. assistance, Hussein was unable to defeat Iran. Reagan and Hussein both wanted to prevent the establishment of another Islamic Republic in Iraq, like the one in Iran. Such an Islamic Brotherhood between Iraq and Iran could further destabilize the entire Middle East. If Hussein had been smarter and cooperated with the U.S. economically, he would still be in power and the U.S. would never have invaded Iraq. Hussein´s lack of cooperation with the U.S. on the oil issue, eventually lead the U.S. to oppose Iraq and eventually invade.

This is the truthful explanation of why the U.S. invaded Iraq in March 2003. Never before in U.S. history has an American administration been so determined to establish a U.S. oil monopoly and a U.S. political monarchy. Both of these threaten the continued survival of U.S. democracy.

However, since the determined Bush administration could not start a war without provocation, they used endless fallacies to convince the shocked and stunned American people and the gullible U.S. Congress that Hussein was connected to 9/11. (President Johnson had done the same thing when he used the Gulf of Tonkin incident on Aug 4, 1964, as a provocation to start (or escalate) a war with Vietnam. Many people still question the truthfulness of that incident.) Every excuse that the Bush administration used (there were about a dozen - before and after the invasion) turned out to be unsubstantiated or unfounded. The only reason for the 2003 invasion that has consistently remained, is the U.S. desire to control Iraqi oil.

The one Bush fallacy that has continued to resonate with the American people is the proclaimed moralistic goal of establishing democracy in Iraq, and hopefully (like dominoes) spread to other Middle East nations. Just like the flaw in the "domino theory" this "democracy theory" also has a fatal flaw. Just like they had done during the Vietnam War, the U.S. government applied a simple minded idea to a very complicated historical situation.

This "democracy theory" fails because the western (Bush administration) concept of democracy is not the same as the Islamic concept of democracy. The Bush administration apparently never bothered to learn anything about Iraqi religion, politics, history, traditions, customs, beliefs or moral values. The Bush administration has always totally rejected any facts or opinions that criticize their ideology or economic and religious goals. Freedom of speech and freedom of information has been silenced by this administration.

Americans generally have one concept of democracy. This western concept is based on a secular U.S. Constitution (the law of the land) and a Bill of Rights in which government and religion are separated. In American democracy, political parties are not religious parties (even though this separation has been somewhat blurred by the present U.S. administration. Bush and his evangelical advisors have attempted to establish a "Christian Republican" party.) The U.S. political system does not have one party for Catholics, another party for Jews, another party for Muslims, another party for Baptists, another party for agnostics and so on. However this kind of religious sectarianism is exactly what Iraq does have. In an Islamic nation there is no separation of government and religion. The Shiites are one political-religious party and the Sunnis are another political-religious party. The northern Kurds are also a third political-religious party. These religious sects are also further divided into local groups and tribes. Bush has spent the last five years trying in vain to get Iraq to accept a secular constitution. In an Islamic nation that does not want to separate religion and government, this is not possible. Every Iraqi citizen insists that Islamic law and the Koran be the law of the land. In a Muslim nation, Islamic law must be superior to any secular constitution. This is a religious moral choice that the Iraqi people have made and they should not be forced to do otherwise. The Bush administration cannot and should not try to force a secular government on a nation that wants a religious government. This is nothing but an arrogant colonial attitude by the U.S. government. Bush is not the Decider on Iraqi religious issues. The Iraqi people are the legitimate Deciders.

The definition of Islamic democracy (contrary to western democracy) is simply that the government is essentially Islamic and it is controlled by whichever sect, tribe or group has the majority of members. This is always the essence of democracy: rule by the majority. In Iraq and Iran the majority groups are the Shiites. Therefore the only possible type of democratic government in Iraq and Iran is a Shiite Islamic Republic. The majority (i.e. Shiites) of Iraqis want democracy, but they want Islamic democracy not the American style of secular democracy. Whenever Bush uses the word democracy, he means western secular democracy. Whenever the Iraqi people use the word democracy, they mean Islamic democracy. The difference between these two concepts is crystal clear to anyone who takes the time to think about it. Unfortunately, thinking is rare in the Bush administration.

When the U.S. military overthrew the secular (Sunni dominated) military dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and arranged for nationwide general elections, they essentially gave the Iraqi government to the Shiites for decades or centuries to come. In a nation that is 60% Shiite (20% Sunni and 20% Kurd), it is not possible for any political-religious person to be elected to any position in the government unless they are Shiite Islamic. As completely expected and predicted, in the 2005 Iraq elections, the Shiites won all of the elected positions. Iraq now has a Shiite Islamic Republican government, with only a token few Sunni and Kurd politicians (to give Washington the impression that the Iraqi government is nationally representative.)

Ironically, the Carter administration, the Reagan administration, the G.H.W. Bush administration and the Clinton administration had all tried for decades to prevent the establishment of an Islamic Republic in Iraq. Even Bush senior said it would be a tragic mistake to invade Iraq and remove Hussein.

George W. Bush rashly succeeded in doing just the opposite. The Shiite Islamic Republic of Iran and Osama bin Laden were both strongly opposed to Saddam Hussein. They both wanted to overthrow Hussein. Bush gave them exactly what they wanted. (Bush and bin Laden were both impatient to start a war.) By removing the military government of Hussein, Bush opened the Iraqi door to chaos, terrorists, insurgents, and civil war. By removing Hussein´s army and police, Bush instantly created 300,000 armed anti-American insurgents. Since the 2005 general election, all of the Iraqi political-religious sectarian parties and their well-armed militias have been fighting each other to seize control of the government in addition to ousting the foreign occupiers. Because the Shiites are the largest and best armed (by the U.S.), so far they have succeeded in retaining control over part of the country (primarily the city of Baghdad). But the future of the nation is unwritten and unpredictable. Every religion or sect (no matter how small) absolutely believes that they are the true religion and that they cannot stop until their sectarian victory is nationally achieved.

The Bush administration has been so successful in censoring almost all important information about this war and sanitizing what little information that the news media is permitted to use, that it is no wonder that a significant number of Americans don´t even know that the war is still going on or that over 4000 American soldiers have died and over 30,000 have been injured and traumatized. This kind of media censorship by the U.S. government was unheard of during World War II or during the Vietnam War, when every newspaper headline and half of every front page was devoted strictly to war coverage and personal stories about U.S. soldiers. The free (?) press has failed the American people. An uninformed or misinformed public can never make good decisions. A deceived public and a misguided nation will steadily march in the wrong direction until they are given truthful information. This is the responsibility and function of the fourth branch of government (the free press).

Ever since the invention of television in the 1950´s, American democracy has been increasingly threatened by the growing monopolies and ownership of the national media (press and broadcasting) by fewer and fewer wealthy conservative individuals. When this concentration of one of the most important elements of democracy is united with a "Unitary Executive" and used selfishly to restrict the public´s access to information and accurate news reporting, democracy is essentially silenced.

This is identical to what happened in the 1920´s with the invention of the radio. Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini all used the governmental control of radio to control public opinion and broadcast only propaganda that promoted their imperialistic agenda. Hitler´s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels stated that their rise to world power would not have been possible without the radio.

The Bush administration has successfully used media propaganda and mass psychology to easily convince 70% of the American public that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the tragedy of 9/11. This was a complete fallacy created and used to justify the invasion of Iraq for the sole economic purpose of seizing control of Iraqi oil. The majority of people in other nations have known this for the past five years. The American public is only just now beginning to realize this well-documented truth.

It is critically important for Americans to acknowledge two historical facts. The first is that the only reason the U.S. invaded Iraq was to gain control over Iraqi oil. The war never had anything to do with anything else except oil. The only so-called benchmark that the Bush administration has ever been concerned with, is the oil sharing benchmark. This essentially "privatizes" the Iraqi oil industry and opens the door to U.S. oil company monopolies. The U.S. bitterly opposes nationalizing Iraqi oil, which is what happened in Iran in 1979. The Bush administration is continually pressuring Iraq to change it´s present constitution, which states that the Iraqi oil belongs to the Iraqi people and not to foreign oil companies.

The second historical fact is that the type of government that Iraq now has and will have for decades to come, is a Shiite Islamic Republic. This government is strictly an Islamic democracy and not an American secular democracy. This cannot be changed no matter how long the U.S. military continues occupying the besieged nation. By unwisely remaining in Iraq, the U.S. military is only helping the Shiites strengthen and dominate the Islamic government. By establishing Islamic democracy in Iraq, the U.S. has made it virtually impossible for anyone except Shiites to control the government.

The Iraqi Islamic Republic has no intention of ever establishing a secular government or giving the U.S. control of it´s only resource - oil, as Bush has been insisting that they do for the past five years. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the U.S. to continue wasting $440 million dollars a day (of U.S. taxpayers money), or sacrificing more U.S. soldiers lives (4052 as of April 2008) by remaining in Iraq any longer than it takes to safely redeploy. In addition to bringing the U.S. troops home safely, they should be given better health care and rehabilitation services when they return. Over 30,000 American soldiers have been wounded and thousands have been traumatized. It is estimated that there are currently over 336,000 homeless American veterans in the U.S. These are patriotic Americans who have faithfully served our nation and are now being forgotten.

This Iraqi War is the most expensive war in the history of the world. It is draining the U.S. treasury and economy, causing an international recession, driving up the price of oil ($120 per barrel) and driving up the price of food worldwide, creating trillions of dollars of national debt, killing thousands of Iraqis and Americans and is achieving absolutely nothing. The only thing that this war has achieved is to change Iraq into another Islamic Republic like Iran. What effect this change will have on the Middle East and the rest of the world cannot be predicted.

The Iraqi war is not reducing terrorism, it is creating terrorism exponentially. Every day that an Iraqi citizen; man, woman or child, is killed by an American soldier or an American bomb, there is instantly created dozens of angry grieving relatives or friends who swear revenge for what they perceive to be senseless murder. This is an endless cycle of killings and revenge which only produces more killings and more revenge. Bush´s so-called war against terror is in reality a war against peace and simultaneously a greedy war for oil.

The U.S. Congress has always had, and still has, total authority and control over all U.S. foreign policies. Congress is the final Decider, not the executive or judicial branches of our government. Congress has total authority to declare war and total authority to decide when to end any war. It´s time for the U.S. Congress to reassert it´s constitutional authority and to end this war before this war ends us.