Something Like a Functioning Democracy

Aside from the Downing St. Minutes and the Note to the Ministers, there are six other memos from the U.K. which are as interesting to me as both the Note and the DSM because they offer a cold look into the kind of thinking and planning that goes into a unjust war and hundreds of thousands shattered lives.  I used to think that the people running countries were, if not very bright, then at least shrewd or even clever.  I can cross that off my Things I Believe list.

The first of the six documents is a Options paper from 8 March 2002, which gives us a peak at a little bit of freedom-loving  post-war planning:

In considering the options for regime change below, we need to first consider what sort of Iraq we want?  There are two possibilities:  *A Sunni military strongman.  He would be likely to maintain Iraqi territorial integrity.  Assistance with reconstruction and political rehabilitation could be traded for assurances on abandoning WMD programmes and respecting human rights, particularly of ethnic minorities.  The US and other militaries could withdraw quickly.  However, there would then be a strong risk of the Iraqi system reverting to type.  Military coup could succeed coup until an autocratic, Sunni dictator emerged who protected Sunni interests.  With time he coudl acquire WMD;  or * a representative broadly democratic government.  This would be Sunni-led [were these people ever right about anything leading up BushCo's War?] but, within a federal structure, the Kurds would be guaranteed autonomy and the Shia fair access to government.  Such a regime would be less likely to develop WMD and threaten its neighbours.  However, to survivie it would require the US and others to commit to nation building for many years.  This would entail a substantial international security force and help with reconstruction.

Saddam-lite!  Or a representative broadly democratic government, led by a Sunni, of course.  Democracy is only good for so much.  And sure it takes time to build a federal government controlled by the minority in perpetuity.  It would take years and untold lives lost to keep that under control.  So many years and so many lives that the whole rotten plan is probably doomed to fail.   

I would love to see the series of memos that outlined exactly how both Sunni projects went off track.  What derailed the "freedom" train?  Was it Garner's calls for elections?  Was it Sistani's unexpected (apparently everything was unexpected to these war mongers) grip on power?  Maybe those documents will be the next to surface.

Take the time to read all six memos to see how completely outclassed the leaders of the UK were when it came to dealing with BushCo's push for his War in Iraq.  Whereas the US can't plan a war/foreign policy for beans, the UK seems to be able to see that the US leadership has gone mad but vastly overestimates their own power to manage - or as they say "moderate" it:

For instance, according to the memos, the UK insisted on three things:

• efforts had to be made to construct a coalition/shape public opinion  (ummm  prewar? ...no)
• the Israel-Palestinian conflict was quiescent (again...no - but, to be fair, there was no quiescent quiescent enough to satisfy this demand)
• the options for action to eliminate Iraq's WMD through the UN weapons inspectors had been exhausted  (and ... no again)

None of those demands was met.   Look at this bucket of hopeful thinking from a 14 March 2002 memo from David Manning to Blair:

YOUR VISIT TO THE RANCH
No doubt we need to keep a sense of perspective.  But my talks with Condi convinced me that Bush wants to hear you (sic) views on Iraq before taking decisions.  He also wants your support.  He is still smarting from the comments by other European leaders on his Iraq policy. [BushCo's feelings are hurt. -eR]

This gives you real influence: on the public relations strategy; on the UN and weapons inspections; and on US planning for any military campaign.  This could be critically important. I think there is a real risk that the Administration underestimates the difficulties.  They may agree that failure isn't an option, but this does not mean that they will avoid it. [just the kind of people you want to join in a war - eR]

Will the Sunni majority (sic?)  really respond to an uprising led by Kurds and Shias?  Will Americans relaly put in enough ground troops to do the job if the Kurdish/Shi'ite stratagem fails?  Even if they do will they be willing to take the sort of casualites tha the Republican Guard may inflict on them if it turns out to be an urban war, and Iraqi troops don't conveniently  collapse in a heap as Richard Perle and other confidently predict?  They need to answer these and other tough questions, in a more convincing way than they have so far before concluding tha they can do the business.

The talks at the ranch will also give you the chance to push Bush on the Middle East.  The Iraq factor means tha tthere may never be a better opportunity to get this Administration to give sustaine dattention to reviving the MEPP.

It's like reading the diary of a high school girl who has a crush on a psychopath:  Dear Diary,  After talking to his best friend, I think I have a real chance with Jason.  The rest of his friends have dropped him but I still love him..  If he promises to stop hitting me and to get professional help ...  And if I can make him see that dropping out of school to get married in Mexico isn't the best idea and if he promises and I mean really promises to get a real job ... I think since I'm pregnant now, there may never be a better opportunity to get him to straighten up and fly right.  I have some real influence.  Fingers crossed!

On March 18 there's this pathetically confident memo from Christopher Myer to Manning on his meeting with Wolfowitz:

On Iraq I opened by sticking very closely to the script that you used with Condi Rice last week.  We backed regime change, but the plan had to be clever and failure was not an option.  It would be tough sell for us domestically, and probably tougher elsewhere in Europe. 

He thinks he's finessing Wolfowitz.  I mean there's delusional and then there's delusional.  Good news though on the Sunni Strongman front:

Wolfowitz was pretty dismissive of the desirablity of a miltary coup and of the defector generals in the wings.  The latter had blood on their hands.  The important thing was to try to have Saddam replaced by something like a functioning democracy.  Though imperfect, the Kurdish model was not bad.  How to acheive this, I asked?  Only through a coalition of all the parties was the answer (we did not get into military planning). 

Well, Myers is an ambassador so I'm not surprised they didn't talk bombs in the sky.  I wonder what other models Wolfowitz had in mind for his  "something like a functioning democracy."  He may have been thinking of what we have here. 

Then comes more hopeful exuberence in a 22 March memo from Peter Ricketts, Political Director, to Colin Powell.

By sharing Bush's broad objective the Prime Minister can help shape how it is defined, and the approach to achieving it.  In the process, he can bring home to Bush some of the realities which will be less evident from Washington.  He can help Bush make good decisions by telling him things his own machine probably isn't.

Dear Diary: If I agree to go to Mexico with Jason, at least I'll be there with him to be sure he doesn't do anything stupid.  He's taking Mike and they always get in trouble when they're together.  This way I'll be able to help him make good decisions by telling him things that Mike probably isn't. 

The memo goes on to lay out all the pitfalls of the grand plan for war including that "regime change" sounds like a grudge between Bush and Saddam:

Much better, as you have suggested, to make the objective ending the threat to the international community from Iraqi WMD before Saddam uses it or gives it to terrorists. 

If you watched Powell on the Daily Show, you heard him continue to beat that particular dead horse. It goes on:

As with the fight against UBL, Bush would do well to depersonalise the objective focus on elimination of WMD, and show that he is serious about UN Inspectors as the first choice means of achieving that (it is win/win for him: either Saddam against all the odds allows Inspectors to operate freelyk (sic) in which case we can further hobble his WMD programmes, or he blocks/hinders, and we are on stronger ground for switching to other methods).

Dear Diary, Today in the bar across the street from the hotel we're sleeping behind I waited for Mike to get more beer and then I told Jason that when we get back home, he should take that job at UPS to prove to his father that he can hold a job.  It's win/win for him because if he does well then we can save the money he makes to move out.  If he hates it because like the boss is a jerk to him, then that proves that he should be his own boss.  His father would have to agree and we are on stronger ground for borrowing that money to start the business with Mike.

The last memo, dated 25 March 2002, is from Jack Straw.  It's a crib sheet of talking points that crystallize all the information in the previous memos (Sunni Strongman strategy absent, having fallen by the boards in favor of something like a functioning democracy.)  Apparently it was put together for Blair in preparation of a visit with  BushCo in Crawford, where, as Straw puts it, the risks are high and the rewards will be few.  And that was the first sensible thing I've read any of them write.

Related note: Bionic Octopus blogged about Putin's demands for backing Blair on Africa and climate change at the G8.  It looks like Pooty Poot wants to have some back-up in his fight to protect  his buffer states  from US meddling.   Knowing what we know about how badly the UK botched their dealings with the US, what odds do you give Blair in a one-on-one with Putin? 

Dear Diary: I'm scared.

Comments

[Riggsveda]

Completely OT---

Woman! Did you hear the news? The Coalition of Immokalee Workers kicked Taco Bell's ass! Yum Foods caved:

"Taco Bell will stop buying from the growers involved unless abuses are corrected. Farm workers will also be allowed to inspect the company's confidential business records to ensure that Yum is adhering to the terms of the deal."

There is a God after all.

[Rob]

How odd. I'm listening to the NPR story on that right now.

eR: Thanks for making such a painful issue really funny. The fake diary was a stroke of genius.

I was just telling a friend the other day that, taking after gov't (esp. Bush), next time I screw up or get caught with my hand in the cookie jar, I'll form a committee run by a friend who owes me a favor. Then, when I discover that I've disappointed people, I'll promote myself.

[Rob]

Forgot to mention the important part: The plans for Iraq and its oil that Greg Palast unearthed a while back. Totally unreported in the US nat'l media, and given these memos it makes even more sense than it did at first.

[Helga Fremlin]

Brilliant post Robin! Thanks for saying all that needs to be said!