New fast track for Iraqi self-rule doesn't address pressing issues

By Howard LaFranchi
The Christian Science Monitor

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

BAGHDAD, Iraq — No longer a distant promise, the scheduled Analysis arrival of independence for Iraq — from both the hated former regime and the chafing occupying authority — has been moved up and is now set for next summer.

Under a decision that represents a full reversal of Bush administration policy for postwar Iraq, the United States has agreed to creation of a provisional government that will assume full sovereignty by July 1, 2004. A provisional national assembly would name a delegation of 15 members to write a constitution, and full national elections would be held by the end of 2005.

The new plan — arrived at quickly over the weekend after a week of mounting U.S. and coalition casualties — meets the rising Iraqi demand for a faster transfer of power. It also addresses the Bush administration's newfound sense of pressure to devise an exit strategy in time for the presidential campaign season.

Some American military forces would remain in Iraq "at the invitation" of the new government.

"We don't want the withdrawal of coalition forces to be abrupt," said Ebrahim al-Jafiri, who represents the Shiite Dawa Party in the 24-member, U.S.-appointed Governing Council. "It would leave a vacuum."

But questions remain about how the plan for a provisional government — which only days ago was still rejected by administration officials as a path to instability and political chaos — will address some of Iraq's most pressing problems. Among key challenges will be security, economic recovery and legitimacy for the new government.

Council member Mahmoud Othman, a Sunni Kurd, said that if allowed, Iraqis will do a better job of policing themselves because they know their country and their people.

"Most Iraqis see the Americans as a guarantor," he said, "but not for searching this or that house or attacking this or that place. That must be left to Iraqis."

Some Iraqis see the creation of a national assembly as a way of quelling unrest. "A large segment of the population not represented (by the Governing Council) now has an opportunity to be fully represented. This should undermine arguments of those violently opposed to the (current) government," said Ali Allawi, Iraqi minister of trade.

One thorn that will irritate the process is the question of the Kurdish north's right to some form of autonomy under a federal system. Another is the question of exactly who will write Iraq's constitution and whether the Shiite majority will feel fully represented in that process — and accept the final results.

Al-Jafiri maintained that creating a legitimate Iraqi government will satisfy most Iraqis, but he warns that progress toward a new, more representative government could also infuriate those forces set on destabilizing Iraq — and thus lead to more attacks in the short term.

If all goes well, the political process should help consolidate the security situation, he said, noting that crime is already down in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq.

Attacks by resistance forces, on the other hand, may well increase as Iraqis show success at taking on their own affairs. "The more politically successful we are, the more violent the acts of sabotage get," he said.

On the economic front, some leaders worry that the new plans put a question mark over recently reactivated ministries and could stall investment and international donations — and thus slow a recovery in a country with more than 60 percent unemployment.

"All the institutions in operation are — as of (Saturday) — lame ducks," Allawi said. "The transition period is too long. ... It creates a hiatus we cannot afford."

The fact remains that it will be the same Governing Council — which Bush administration officials only last week were calling inept and more interested in international travel than running their own country — taking on more responsibility for setting the country's course toward independence. But even some members who agree with the U.S. criticisms say they expect a change. A council with real authority to shape Iraq's future will act differently from one that had a subordinate role, they say.

"We have been unable to solve problems because the authority lies with (L. Paul Bremer)," Othman said. "We have met with our ministries every week. But when we haven't the authority to solve our problems, (some members) may prefer not to go (to the meetings)."

Some U.S. officials in Baghdad said things had to change. "The president is putting himself on the line here," said one. "We're spending $87 billion — that the president personally fought for — and our casualties are rising. It's time the Iraqis on the council stepped up to the plate."

Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company