Democracy in Iraq?

attempt to define democracy itself, however, there is probably no single word with more meanings than democracy. In the twentieth century, the word has been misused by dictators to persuade subjects that they lived in a just system. The Soviet Union used to claim it was the most democratic system in the world, and the government of mainland China still calls itself the "People's Republic". Democracy does not always equal freedom. Parties and elections can be used to bring dictatorial regimes into power. Democracy needs thoughtful citizens, limits on power, rule of law, and human and civil rights. Not every country that calls itself a democracy is one. Democracy is more than just the way in which a government is made up, and perhaps counter-intuitively it is not even the ability to elect representatives. While those things may be necessary for democracy, their mere presence does not mean that a state will be a true democracy. Democracy is built upon the bedrock of civil society and civic virtue. A country such as Iraq that is split into two fracticious bodies will quickly fly apart if everyone has an equal say. There are three major religious factions in Iraq: the Shiites, the Sunnis, and the Kurds. Each of these represents a large majority of the reason that a democracy is unforeseeable in the future of the country. The Shiites have years of distrust of the Sunnis, and the Kurds do not trust either the Sunnis or the Shiites. None of the three have any desire to work with the other at this point. All three of these, I would estimate, make up about 85-900f those likely to vote, and a three way split would leave two-thirds of the county very unhappy. As Lincoln so astutely pointed out, `a house divided cannot stand'. Iraq is a house deeply divided. Regardless of which of these religious groups are most influenced by Saddam Hussein today, they each represent some degree of religious dictatorship. This is not democracy. These people, in addition to having no sense of what democracy is composed of, have never experienced political freedom. They have lived in a society where they are forced to vote for one contender. They have never had a voice. Despite all other aspects, attempting to form a democracy of those who have no conception of what political freedom is in itself, an enormous endeavor. The true task of creating democracy is instilling values of mutual cooperation and civil society. This is something that cannot be instilled by decree or treaty, but must be taught. Such a process will take years and years in Iraq. I certainly do not see this as a plausible notion in my lifetime. In the meantime, our interests are in a safe and free Iraq dictate that we cannot expect to institute full democracy overnight. If we do, everything we fought for will be quickly lost. Our only option is to ensure stability while the slow process of laying the foundation for democracy is created. Critics of American foreign policy often say we prefer quick and shoddy solutions over doing the difficult work of actually instituting real democratic reform. Those are criticisms that have a lot of merit to them, and the true test of our resolve to support democratization may be in learning when a nation can support it.