You can't have your cake and eat it too, goes the old saying. Apparently, America doesn't believe this about democracy, as support for staying in Iraq continues to fall. A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll shows that in less than a year, the percentage of Americans who favor withdrawing some or all of our troops in Iraq has increased from 39 percent to 63 percent. More disturbing is that nearly a third of Americans want a complete withdrawal of American troops. We suppose that if we invade a hostile country and occupy it with less than 150,000 troops for less than three years, it ought to end up as a perfect liberal democracy. If this situation does not occur, then it must be the fault of the president. Realistic expectations for Iraq simply cannot coexist with the American "what I want, when I want it" attitude. The patience, sacrifice and resolve needed to win in Iraq are alien to a country used to fast food and TiVo.
Americans expect that two and a half years of occupation should cure the diseases that thirty years of Saddam Hussein inflicted on Iraq. Our unrealistic expectations are caused by a lack of historical perspective. The only historical comparison with Iraq ever mentioned is Vietnam. There are lessons to be learned from Vietnam, but other American occupations should be examined as well, especially the ones following World War II.
After the war, American troops occupied the Axis powers and went to work on creating democracy in those countries. Japanese culture was just as different from Western democracy as Iraq's was three years ago. Japan, like Iraq, was a country that had known only emperors and dictators, and the state religion, Shinto, was as aggressive as the radical form of Islam that inspires terrorists in Iraq today.
The task of setting up a democracy in Japan was certainly not easy. It required seven years and 150,000 troops, but left behind a peaceful country that is now a key ally in East Asia. We need to have the same level of patience now if we expect the same results in Iraq. If America had become discouraged and given up on Japan after three years, as much of the country feels now about Iraq, it is very likely that Japan would have returned to an aggressive nationalism. All the lives lost in defeating Japan would have been wasted if we had not finished the job.
Likewise, the deaths of more than two thousand Americans in Iraq will have been in vain if we allow Saddam loyalists or terrorists to triumph. Americans must realize that our situation in Iraq is more difficult than it was in Japan because Iraq is simultaneously a war and an occupation. We were able to force the surrender of the Japanese before we occupied their country, whereas Iraq was invaded so easily that insurgents do not feel conquered. In Japanese terms, it is as if the emperor had never surrendered and had encouraged Japanese loyalists to continue to fight America. In Iraq, we are fighting the remaining opposition while planting the seeds for democracy.
Why then, considering the high stakes in Iraq, is America so frustrated with the war? American impatience with Iraq is exacerbated by the media's coverage. By putting every suicide bombing that kills three soldiers on the front page of The New York Times, the media has created an impression of Iraq that is solely one of chaos and violence. What about schools being constructed, democratic negotiations and Iraqis opposing the insurgency? These stories of slow progress just aren't as compelling as a picture of a car bomb exploding, so they're buried on page four. Don't write this off as another tired attack on media bias; this is not an allegation of a giant media conspiracy to distort the truth about Iraq and manipulate the American public. The effect, however, is exactly the same. The media's singular focus on violence in Iraq has created an incomplete and ultimately wrong picture about the war, intentionally or unintentionally.
So what is really going on? Why do we have reasons to be encouraged about the progress being made in Iraq? The key reason is that democracy is already beginning to function. In January, the majority of Iraqis defied the threats of the terrorists and insurgents to vote for a national government. The government of Iraq, while led by Islamic parties, is certainly no Iran. The majority of Iraqis want a democracy, and should we succeed in creating one, we will have made a major victory in the war on terror. We have already seen the shockwaves of Iraqi democracy affecting other countries in the Middle East. Worried about an American invasion, Libya agreed to end its nuclear weapons program in December of 2003. In March the Lebanese opposition forced Syria to end its occupation of their country. Last month Egypt held the first multi-candidate elections in its history.
Giving up on Iraq now, as democratic forces grow throughout the region, would be a terrible mistake. If we stay the course, we have a real chance of replacing the terrorists, dictators and theocracies that rule the Middle East with freedom and democracy.
Stephen Parsley is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint writer.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 3 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
