If you haven't read about the Zogby poll of the Iraqi people, you should go way out of your way to check it out. Yes, you have to "register" with OpinionJournal, but that's just an email address and you can even make one up.
The results are incredibly positive, and leave me more optimistic than ever about our eventual success in that country. It's a picture of a people who've been through hell on Earth, are wary but cautiously optimistic, and can obviously be won over to being even more positive and optimistic. Less than six months after the invasion, and the people are already this upbeat and ready for a better future? Incredible.
The poll also quashes fears that Iraq is teetering on the edge of becoming an Islamist state, too. It's a very secular nation, and a strong majority of Iraqis support religious pluralism--most especially young people. As the Journal piece notes, we can scratch fears of "Khomeni II."
* Update * Howard Dean, call your office. You look like an idiot again.In fact, I have a prediction: Howard Dean's star begins to fall this week. He's finished.
I got another problem with Howard Dean, as detailed here.
Executive summary: Dean thinks we should be more of an "honest broker" in the Middle East, even going to so far as to try to grab the mantle supposedly left by Bill Clinton.
Joe Lieberman, to his credit, begs to differ with Gov. Dean.
This argument is important because Israel is on the front line of the same war on terror that the US is.
Any candidate (or current high administration official) that doesn't "get" this is suspect (in my mind) of being soft on terror.
And for the record: President Clinton trusted Arafat the same way that PM Rabin trusted Arafat. It was a high-stakes gamble, a calculated risk that Arafat could rein in the terrorists. But, in retrospect, we can see now that the trust was misplaced. Therefore, knowing what we know now, the US is being foolish in continuing to extend that trust to Arafat in any way whatsoever. Any candidate that doesn't get this is suspect in my mind of being soft on terror.
BTW, the poll is encouraging although there are some aspects of it that I'm not sure I'd call "cautiously optimistic":
Given the secular nature of so many Iraqis and the state they've lived under for so long, and the broad support for religious pluralism, and the opposition to an "Islamic Republic" by the majority, I would interpret the fact that half of Iraqis don't think democracy will work because they're pessimistic.
That almost half of them already think it will work, and that young people in particular think it will work, and all so soon after we've begun our efforts, I find this a very hopeful sign. Because it's not a "we don't want it" attitude the poll seems to be describing, but a "this place is such a mess it would never work" attitude.
If we continue to improve the lives of ordinary Iraqis, and civil war is averted, I'll bet more and more of them will start thinking it will work.
I rather suspect that if we'd polled America in 1776, a similar number would have expressed such pessimism and negativity. Loyalists to the crown were abundant, and people who didn't care much one way or the other, or who were deeply uncertain, were common.
Hell, the guy who wrote the first draft of the Constitution, including the Preamble, was convinced that democracy was probably doomed to fail in America. (Governeur Morris, a founder we often forget.)
Ara,
Did you catch that it was the minority Sunnis (you know, the folks who used to run the country, and suckled at the teat of Saddam) who are down on democracy 2-1; the Shiites were more evenly split. Hmmm, I wonder why? :) Note that the younger folks (the ones who will be building the new Iraq) are more optimistic.
I think you misinterpret the "who to model on" question; it's amazing that the US won out over Saudi Arabia by a 5/4 margin, considering that this is an Arab country. Also consider that the list was only 5 countries, and the US the only Western choice. Again, the Shiites prefer the US model to the Iran model 6-1, with the young folks leading the way.
Casey:
That's encouraging, about the stronger support for democracy from young punks. The traditional view is that the older Iraqis are the ones with more marketable/technical skills and have more to gain from democratic capitalism.
This is very encouraging indeed!
Jonathan
Another very interesting aspect is that it's the Sunnis who are most pessimistic about democracy. Well, they have the most to fear, since the Shi-ite majority might roll them over, or may want revenge since even though the Sunnis are a minority they have been the ruling class until very recently.
Which tells me that if the new Constitution works right, and Sunnis keep their rights and if it becomes clear that they will not become an oppressed minority, more of them are likely to be positive on the notion.
Although the Sunnis would also include most of the pro-Baathist remnant, I suspect most of them aren't pro-Baathist.
Dean,
I wouldn't count Dean out yet - it will be some months before its clear to very partisan Democrats (ie, primary voters) that Iraq is a success and the economy is turning around: lets say March as the time when everyone understands this.
By March, Dean will already have it wrapped up...unless one of the other Nine can get some traction with moderate Democrats in Iowa and NH to stop Dean there, then the Democrats will be shackled to the Dean Far Left albatross going into an election where the question is "how do you make the Bush economy and war policy even better?"
We should remember that the "far left Albatross" is concentrated on a few key areas. I doubt very much that they'll be a major factor in Iowa, or many of the southern states. Yes, they'll love him in California, and New York, and New Hampshire and such. But let us remember, Clinton lost New Hampshire and a few other places during the primaries.
It's too easy to look at the national polls, especially this early.
Y'all can read the op-ed here without WSJ registration:
http://www.aei.org/news/newsID.19153,filter./news_detail.asp
I am a conservative and a College Republican, so I would not be supporting Howard Dean. However, his campaign has drawn attention - and admiration - from diverse groups of people throughout our country.
I may be starting a feature of my commentary with memos to well-known people, or the public (like Jude Wanniski does). I recently wrote a memo which contains advice from principled conservatives to Howard Dean, about how he may be able to better his chances of winning the nomination, and perhaps the presidency, as well. My piece actually contains advice from conservative writers who are offering insightful ideas to Dr. Dean, which, if implemented, could help him garner the votes that he needs to win. The focus, though, is on the advice of one particular journalist, and I've enclosed in my article his recent piece dealing with a specific issue - one that could have an impact on the presidential campaign. If you're interested, take a look at my memo to Howard Dean - it is featured in my latest blog entry.
Find out which major issue could provide the key for unlocking the door to Dr. Dean's chances of winning the White House.
SHOULD BE REQUIRED READING
Liberals putting stock in the conservative WSJ??? Get the Zogby poll unfiltered, then make your assesments.. Dont take someone elses especially when they leave out parts of the poll. You got one part of this story, try the other.
Iraqis do not trust Americans, says poll
By Guy Dinmore in Washington
Published: September 10 2003 18:27 | Last Updated: September 10 2003 18:27
...
Asked whether in the next five years the US would "help" Iraq, 35.3 per cent said yes while 50 per cent said the US would "hurt" Iraq. Asked the same of the UN, the figures were almost reversed, with 50.2 per cent saying it would help and 18.5 per cent the opposite.
Reguarding US and British troops, some 31 per cent wanted them to leave in six months and a total of 65.5 per cent in a year. Some 25 per cent said they should stay two years or more.
...
From the Financial times
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1059479720102&p=1012571727162
Considering that the Iraqi people in this poll clearly (63%) picked other gov't forms as their preferred model -not American democracy- should we not begin to recognize and address The Real Root Cause underlying 9.11, the War on Terrorism in Afghan, Gulf War II in Iraq, and the Middle Eastern Jihad or religious war between the Islamic Arabs of Palestine and the Judaic Jews of Israel?
A new white paper or treatise soon to be published will address this matter clearly. In simple terms, it will be the definitive study of our 56 years of M.E. foreign policy failure and our 36 years of failure as a M.E. peace mediator or negotiator. It will be a study the average American will understand!
Stay tuned Mr. and Mrs. America as this hot-potato will be a real eye-opener that many feel should not be touched or addressed publicly.
The author is a life long conservative Republican, one-time aid to Presidents GRF, RWR, GHWB and former Mi Gov, the late GWR. His credentials include a career in International Law, a brief internship at the UN several decades ago... and several brief stints in academia as an adjunct college professor teaching assignments in Constitutional Law subjects and an assignment teaching International Law in a midwest Law School.
A patriotic 13th generation American who thinks we are foolishly ignoring the real root cause of our primary problems in the world today!
His strong teaching beliefs have caused him to now put together a talking paper that will wake up America and force the issue of addressing the real root causes underlying the problems America faces today... the causes and problems that Geo "Herbert Hoover" W(arhawk). Bush, the Republicans and the Democrats in Congress, are afraid to address and are pure poltroons on these matters... they are willfully failing to recognize or address these matters! And in several instances our leaders are likely pursuing a calculated clandestine or hidden agenda that plans to pursue a foreign national allegiance in adopting policies contrary to our national interests as their primary agenda… and intentionally avoiding the public discourse on the real root cause...
These actions now seem to be clearly contrary to the founding fathers eloquent words... about the best and only manner of governance in this democracy .... pursuing The Common Good must always be the goal of our elected leaders but it is not! Stay tuned.
Sincerely,
Dr. J. P. Fisher, III
Boca Raton, FL
FisherGP@aol.com
How the Poll Results on Iraq Were Manipulated
by James Zogby
Early in President Bush's recent public relations campaign to rebuild support for the US war effort in Iraq, Vice President Cheney appeared on "Meet the Press." Attempting to make the case that the US was winning in Iraq, Cheney made the following observations:
"There was a poll done, just random in the last week, first one I've seen carefully done; admittedly, it's a difficult area to poll in. Zogby International did it with American Enterprise magazine. But that's got very positive news in it in terms of the numbers it shows with respect to the attitudes to what Americans have done.
"One of the questions it asked is: 'If you could have any model for the kind of government you'd like to have' - and they were given five choices - 'which would it be?' The US wins hands down. If you want to ask them do they want an Islamic government established, by 2: 1margins they say no, including the Shiite population. If you ask how long they want Americans to stay, over 60 percent of the people polled said they want the US to stay for at least another year. So admittedly there are problems, especially in that area where Saddam Hussein was from, where people have benefited most from his regime and who've got the most to lose if we're successful in our enterprise, and continuing attacks from terror. But to suggest somehow that that's representative of the country at large or the Iraqi people are opposed to what we've done in Iraq or are actively and aggressively trying to undermine it, I just think that's not true."
In fact, Zogby International (ZI) in Iraq had conducted the poll, and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) did publish their interpretation of the findings. But the AEI's "spin" and the vice president's use of their "spin" created a faulty impression of the poll's results and, therefore, of the attitudes of the Iraqi people.
For example, while Cheney noted that when asked what kind of government they would like, Iraqis chose "the US... hands down," in fact, the results of the poll are actually quite different. Twenty-three percent of Iraqis say that they would like to model their new government after the US; 17 .5 percent would like their model to be Saudi Arabia; 12 percent say Syria, 7 percent say Egypt and 37 percent say "none of the above." That's hardly "winning hands down."
When given the choice as to whether they "would like to see the American and British forces leave Iraq in six months, one year, or two years," 31.5 percent of Iraqis say these forces should leave in six months; 34 percent say a year, and only 25 percent say two or more years.
So while technically Cheney might say that "over 60 percent (actually it's 59 percent) ... want the US to stay at least another year," an equally correct observation would be that 65.5 percent want the US and Britain to leave in one year or less.
Other numbers found in the poll go further to dampen the vice president's and the AEI's rosy interpretations. For example, when asked if "democracy can work well in Iraq," 51 percent said "no; it is a Western way of doing things and will not work here."
And attitudes toward the US were not positive. When asked whether over the next five years, they felt that the "US would help or hurt Iraq,"50 percent said that the US would hurt Iraq, while only 35.5 percent felt the US would help the country. On the other hand, 61 percent of Iraqis felt that Saudi Arabia would help Iraq in the next five years, as opposed to only 7.5 percent, who felt Saudi Arabia would hurt their country. Some 50. 5 percent felt that the United Nations would help Iraq, while 18.5 percent felt it would hurt. Iran's rating was very close to the US', with 53. 5 percent of Iraqis saying Iran would hurt them in the next five years, while only 21. 5 percent felt that Iran might help them.
It is disturbing that the AEI and the vice president could get it so wrong. Their misuse of the polling numbers to make the point that they wanted to make, resembles the way critics have noted that the administration used "intelligence data" to make their case to justify the war.
The danger, of course, is that painting a rosy picture that doesn't exist is a recipe for a failed policy. Wishing something to be can't make it so. At some point, reality intervenes. It's a hard lesson to learn, but it is dangerous to ignore its importance.
For the administration to continue to tell itself and the American people that "all is well," only means that needed changes in policy will not be made.
Consider some of the other poll findings:
Over 55 percent give a negative rating to "how the US military is dealing with Iraqi civilians." Only 20 percent gave the US military a positive rating.
By a margin of 57 percent to 38 . 5 percent, Iraqis indicate that they would support "Arab forces" providing security in their country.
When asked how they would describe the attacks on the US military, 49 percent described them as "resistance operations." Only 29 percent saw them as attacks by "Ba'ath loyalists."
When asked whom they preferred to "provide security and restore order in their country," only 6 . 5 percent said the US. Twenty-seven percent said the US and the UN together, 14 . 5 percent preferred only the UN. And the largest group, 45 percent, said they would prefer the "Iraqi military" to do the job alone.
There are important lessons in all of this. Lessons policy makers ought to heed if they are to help Iraq move forward. What the Iraqi people appear to be telling us is that they have hope for the future, but they want the help of their neighbors more than that of the US.
That may not be what Washington wants to hear, but it ought to listen nevertheless. Because if policy makers continue to bend the data to meet their desired policy, then this hole they are digging will only get deeper.
What gives one country the right to interfere in the affairs of another? US amassador took it upon himself to directly get involved in Canada's affairs, yet most Americans consider it wrong for other nations to infere in their country's internal affairs. Talking about double standards. It is the theme of US foreign policy. Do not take it upon yourseves to dictate to Canada or any other country, the world is not your playground.