The headlong rush to faulty elections in Iraq is bringing that country closer to civil war, although civil war may result no matter what, now that we’ve bungled Iraq so badly. As readers of this space know, I’ve been hammering for weeks now to postpone or cancel the elections scheduled for 18 days from now. Finally, the New York Times weighs in, and not a moment too soon.
Of course, President Bush doesn’t read the Times.
Still, in a nearly full-column editorial, “Facing Facts About Iraq’s Election,” the Times says that civil war in Iraq has always been the “one thing to be avoided at all costs,” but “the coming elections … are looking more and more like the beginning of that worst-case scenario.”
It adds: “It's time to talk about postponing the elections.”
The Times acknowledges the reality that civil war might be inevitable anyway, which is a stunning indictment of what we’ve done to Iraq. Says the Times :
Others argue that civil war is probably inevitable one way or another, and that we may as well get the voting over with. That kind of pessimism may be warranted. But given the horrific possibilities, we should make every effort to avoid that end. A delay in the voting seems to offer at least a ray of hope, and it pushes Iraq in the direction it desperately needs to go: toward a democracy in which all religious and ethnic groups have a stake.
It’s a very thin ray of hope. What the Time s doesn’t say is that the Iraqi “government” must make a deal with the resistance—not just with the Sunni politicians calling for a delay in the vote, such as Adnan Pachachi—but with the resistance itself. That doesn’t mean making a deal with the Al Qaeda types, but it does mean an accord with the Baath Party, the officials in the Sunni triangle, in Syria, in Jordan and elsewhere who are organizing the attacks against American forces.
The Times , at least, recognizes that it’s up to Bush, not the government of Iraqistan.
Mr. Bush does not need to call for a postponement of elections himself. He simply needs to take the pressure off the Iraqi authorities, and let them know they have the power to make whatever decision is best for their country. Some members of the interim government, including people close to Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, have shown some interest in putting off the voting if there is a chance of winning more Sunni participation, and others are said to be leaning that way in private.
Of course, it’s still unlikely any of this will happen. It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck. Hold your ears.
